ANCESTORS of WILLIAM SPENCER OF MONTGOMERY CO, NC SPENCER. Henry W. Rigby

Transcription

1 ANCESTORS of WILLIAM SPENCER OF MONTGOMERY CO, NC SPENCER Henry W. Rigby

2 INTRODUCTION Henry W. Rigby's Ancestors of William Spencer This is one of four books written by Henry W. Rigby, who initially began his research into Southern Spencers because his wife, Frances A. Rigby, is from North Carolina. The first of his works concerned her earliest known ancestor and was entitled "Descendants of William Spencer of Montgomery County, N. C." in 1977, with a subsequent "Supplement #1 to "Descendants", (plus a descendancy chart by Herb Spencer, 1990), followed by "Early Spencers of South Carolina" in 1979, then "Ancestors of William Spencer of Montgomery County, N. C." in 1982, and finally "Early Spencers of Virginia" in At the time of his death in 1988, his work involved the Spencers of Maryland, which has been taken over by a member of the Spencer Historical and Genealogical Society and should be completed in the near future. The Spencer Historical and Genealogical Society is grateful to Mrs. Rigby, 2301 Sharon Lane, Charlotte, N. C , for permission to make these volumes available for research in the Southern Spencer families. Rowena Spencer, M.D.

3 Published by Spencer Historical & Genealogical Society, Inc. Copyright 1983 Additional copies of this work may be obtained from: SHGS Library 6421 BentworthWay Indianapolis, IN

4 ANCESTORS OF WILLIAM SPENCER OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, N.C. Compiled by Henry W. Rigby 2301 Sharon Lane Charlotte, N.C September 1983

5 «111 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Foreword, 1-2 II. Montgomery County, N. C. 3-4 III. The Little River Spencers A. William Spencer. 6-8 B. John Spencer C. Joseph Spencer IV. William and John Spencer of Craven County (nov Jones County) North Carolina V. John Spencer of Johnston County, and William Spencer of Rowan County VI. Richard Spencer of the Trent River, and his Jerman (Jermain, Jarman) Neighbors A. The French Huguenots. 30 B. The Jermans VII. "Family Information" A. Benjamin Franklin Spencer's Story B. William Richmond Spencer's Story. 37 C. The Randolph County Study D. Statements by Descendants of John Spencer, William's Presumed Brother. 38 E. The "Tradition" of a Connection with 38 the Washington Family. F. History of Alabama, by Thomas M Owen VIII. The Early Spencers of South Carolina IX. Some Other North Carolina Spencers A. Descendants of Benjamin S. Spencer of 51 Randolph County. N. C. B. Judge Samuel Spencer of Anson County, N. C C. The Spencers of Hyde County, N. C D. Early Spencers of Western North Carolina Family of Zachariah Spencer Family of the Reverend William Spen cer and Benjamin Spencer of Burke Co., N. C. (i)

6 iv Page 3. Joseph Spencer of Burke Co., N.C William Spencer of Ireland 59 E. The Spencers of Caswell and Rockingham 59 Counties F. Some Spencers of Surry Co., N.C X. Nicholas Spencer of Virginia 60 XI. Some Spencers of Maryland XII. Conclusions Appendices Appendix AA. The Jermans of Craven Co., N.C. and 82 Queen Anne's County MD Appendix A. The Spencers of Hyde Ct., N.C. 89 * Table of Contents Appendix A 92 Appendix B. Early Spencers of Western North 307 Carolina * Table of Contents Appendix B. 309 Appendix B. Supplement 403 Appendix C. The Spencers of Caswell and Rocking- 411 ham Counties Appendix D. Some Spencers of Surry County N.C. 417 * Table of Contents Appendix D. 417 Appendix E. Nicholas Spencer of Virginia 445 * The Tables of Content of the Appendices refer to the original page number at the bottom of the page, not the handwritten number of the S.F.A. edition.

7 I I. Foreword. In December 1977 the writer published privately a book entitled "Descendants of William Spencer of Montgomery County, N. C." (cited hereinafter as DOWS), That book dealt with a William Spencer who first appeared of record in what is nov Montgomery County, N. C. in a deed to him dated 1 October It undertook to summarize the facts then known about him and his immediate offspring, as well as many of his more remote descendants. Considerable additional information on the same subject has since beer, published privately by the writer in a "Supplement No. 1" to DOWS dated 10 September 1982 (cited hereinafter as Supp.). To conserve space, facts documented in those two publications will not be documented again herein. This book is an effort to present all currently known evidence that might help in identifying William's forebears. We are not sure of his date or place of birth. As will appear, hovever, he probably came to the Montgomery County location from elsewhere in 1763, or at most a little earlier. It seems likely that he married either shortly before or shortly after his arrival (he and his wife Hannah apparently started having children in ); and there is reason to guess that in 1763 he was well into his twenties, say 27 or so, i. e., born around 1736 or a little earlier. There is fairly persuasive evidence that in 1757 William was on the headwaters of the Trent River in present-day Jones County (then a part of Craven County), N. C, in the southeastern portion of the Province; that he moved westward from there at the end of that year or soon after, possibly to or through Johnston County, N. Ci and that by 1761 he was in Rowan County, N. C. in a part that is now Randolph County, just north of Montgomery. (For orientation, see map of present North Carolina counties reproduced on the following page.) The foregoing sequence of events is considered quite probable, although not certain. Where William or his parents came from before 1757 is considerably hazier. Some straws in the wind suggest Maryland. Others, perhaps less tangible, indicate possible origins in the French Santee area of South Carolina. Finally, in our present state of knowledge, it would be unwise to exclude totally either Virginia or England. The facts follow, accompanied by some suggestions of probabilities and possibilities by the writer. The reader is invited to form his or her own judgments. (1)

8

9 II. Montgomery County, N. C. The area where William Spencer appeared in 1763 was at that time in Anson County, N. C, which then comprised the presentday counties of Richmond, Scotland* Montgomery and Stanly, as well today's Anson and part of Union County. Montgomery was formed in 1779 out of Anson, bordered on the south by Richmond (formed in the same year); on the east by a portion of Cumberland County that became Moore in 1784; on the north by Randolph (also formed in 1779 out of Guilford) and a portion of Rowan that became Davidson in 1822; and on the west by Mecklenburg. Montgomery's western border was pulled in when Stanly vas formed out of Montgomery in 1841, leaving Montgomery bounded on the west by the Yadkin River, which becomes the Pee Dee River as it flows south, heading ultimately for South Carolina. The principal water-course within Montgomery County is the Little River, which rises to the north in Randolph County, enters Montgomery some 2 1/2 miles from its eastern boundary, and, after a short run southeast, heads south and somewhat west, passing about 2 miles to the east of Troy, the county seat, continuing south and a little west, and finally exiting into Richmond County, where it joins the Pee Dee some 4 1/2 miles below the Montgomery line. To the west of the Little River proper, running south and a little east, is the West Fork of the Little River, which joins the main stream a bit over 2 miles northeast of Troy. About 9 miles further up the River, a mile or so north of a place called Allreds, a reasonable size tributary comes in from the northwest. This tributary came to be known as Sugg's Creek. The surrounding area was called Little River Township. Farther down river, about 2 1/2 miles south of the of the West Fork and 2 miles east of Troy, another tributary into the Little River from the northwest, known as Denson's < page. For a sketch of the foregoing streams, see the next (3)

10

11 III. The Little River Spencers In 1763 a Tax List was drawn up for Anson County, N. C, including the area which is now Montgomery County. It purported to name all residents who were taxable, i. e., property owners. No one named Spencer was listed. Between 1 October 1763 and 20 August 1766, 3 men named Spencer appeared in the northeast section of what is now Montgomery County, taking up land on the waters of the Litt?.«i River. They were the William Spencer discussed above, a John Spencer and a Joseph Spencer. For reasons that will appear below, it is believed that William and John Spencer were closely related, in all probability brothers (John being the older), and that Joseph was either an uncle, a cousin, or another brother. The facts known about each, derived from records dated in and after 1763, will be summarized in this Section III. As an introduction to that discussion, however, a few words need to be said about a family named Sugg (sometimes rendered Suggs) who arrived in the northeastern Montgomery area before the Spencers. On 1 July 1758 Thomas Sugg, Sr. was granted 400 acres of land "on a branch of Pee Dee called little river". (Grant Book 2, p. 206). From later deeds we know that Thomas, Sr. developed a "plantation" on this property, where he lived, at least for a time. On 9 April 1763 a second tract of land, this one for 640 acres, was surveyed for Thomas Sugg, Sr.. It was "on the Middle fork of Little River of Pee Dee called Gouldsbe's fork or Bumpuses fork, Beginning at a poplar at a place called Piney Springs runing up said fork ". The chain bearers were John Harburd Sugg and Thomas Sugg, Junior. The 640 acre grant issued on 22 April (Grant No. 159, Book 15, p. 497). The location of the first grant of 400 acres was described only as being on the Little River. It may fairly be presumed, however, that it was near the second grant. The writer has not positively identified "the Middle fork of Little River", or "Gouldsbe's fork" or "Bumpuses fork", but from subsequent developments it seems entirely possible that that stream vas the one later knovn as Sugg's Creek. The 1763 Tax List for Anson County shoved a Thomas Sugg, a Thomas Sugg, Jr. (apparently living in the same house), a Kasha Sugg and a George Sugg. The 1787 State Census for Montgomery County listed a Kasha Sugg (2 males 20-60, 1 male under 20 or over 60, and 3 females)} a George Sugg (1 male 20-60, 2 males under 20 or over 60, and 5 females)j a Thomas Sugg, and partially legible names that could have been John Sugg(?) and another George Sugg (?). The 1790 census (using the name "Suggs" throughout) shoved a Jesse, Harbert, John, George, John Henry, William and 2 Thomases. By 1800 ve have Thomas, Harbert,Aquilia, John, William, John H. and Timothy Suggs, and a William Sugg. s (5)

12 <* This Sugg family quite clearly came from Norfolk County, Va., where quite a few Suggs with the same given names appeared between 1730 and 1736, and a George Sugg was granted land on the Elizabeth River on 14 July 1718 and 17 August (Norfolk Co., Va. Tithables , by Klizabeth/Bruce Wingo; Cavaliers & Pioneers, Va. Land Grants , Vol. 3.) Mrs. W. D. Sugg, Route 2, New Bern, N. C , who -has studied the Sugg genealogy for many years, advises that Thomas Sugg, Sr. of the Montgomery County area was a son of George Sugg of Norfolk Co., Va. who made his will in 1734; that Thomas, Sr. was of age, or very nearly so, when that will was made; and that, while Suggs were plentiful in Norfolk County, she has found no Spencers there. In coming from Norfolk County, Va. to their northeastern Montgomery County location, the Suggs may have stopped for a time an Johnston County, N. C. A cross-index of Johnston County deeds (The North Carolinian, Vol. 1-2) shows the following: (1) From Thomas Suggs to Thomas Attmore, dated about 1750 (P. 5). (2) From Theophilus Hunter to Moses Suggs dated about 1752 (p. 86). (3) From John Suggs to Absolem Suggs dated about 1757 (p. 431). We are now ready to discuss the three Spencer gentlemen who settled on the Little River. A. William Spencer. William's first three known land acquisitions on the Little River were from members of the Sugg family, all out of Thomas, Sr.'s first grant: (1) 1 October 1763, 100 acres from Thomas Suggs, Jr., for i>12. Land was on the west side of Little River, adjoining Thomas; Sr.'s plantation.* Witnesses were James Attaway, Jno. Jeffery and Jas. Jeffery. (2) 4 November 1763, 100 acres from Thomas Suggs, Sr. and wife Mary, for L35. Land was on the east side of Little River, adjoining Thos. Randal.** Witnesses were James Attaway and Rosha Suggs. Purchase included the "Thomas Sugg improvement". (3) 24 October 1767, 100 acres from George Sugg and wife Saray "of Roanne County", for fc>25. Land was on each side of L i t- le River. Witnesses were Jno. Jeffery, Jos. J. Henry and Thos. Ward. After the foregoing transactions, William went on to acquire substantial additional acreage over the years, a good deal by grants. One grant, surveyed on 8 June 1772, was "at the mouth of a Small * This land had been conveyed by Thomas Suggs, Sr. to Thomas Franklin, and by Franklin to Thomas Suggs, Jr.. ** On 30 January 1761 Thomas Sugg, for fell, 10 shillings, had sold Thomas "Randolph" 100 acres on each side of Little River, out of his first grant. Witnesses were Thos. Sugg, Joseph Attaway and Thos. Franklin. x Sold by Thomas Sugg, Sr. to George Sugg "of Anson County" on 2 Feb for fclo. Witnesses were Thomas Franklin and James Attaway. (6)

13 Branch near Sugg's Creek". Another, surveyed 28 August 1773, was "on the So. Wt. Side of Sugg's Creek". A third, adjoining the previous grant, also surveyed on 28 August 1773, was "at the head of a branch Just above Thomas Ward's line". After a number of others, William's final known acquisition was a grant surveyed 31 March 1802 on the west side of Little River, adjoining land he already owned, running "up Said River to the Mouth of Sugg's Creek", then continuing above Sugg's Creek, then turning west and then south, evidently crossing the Creek, and returning east to the beginning point below Sugg's Creek. The fact that much of William's land, presumably near Thomas Sugg, Sr.'s two grants, was on or near Sugg's Creek, is one of the main reasons for thinking that "Middle fork", "Gouldsbe's fork" and "Bumpuses fork" were other names for Sugg's Creek. Supporting this notion is the fact that existing maps show no stream coming into Little River above the West Fork that could logically be called "Middle fork", other than Sugg's Creek. Among William's acquisitions was a 360 acre tract purchased from John Spencer, his presumed brother, described in more detail below, and two tracts totalling 150 acres over the line in Randolph County, but still on the Little River. Adding all William's known land acquisitions, we come to a total of 1710 acres. Turning now to William's immediate family, he had a wife Hannah, whose name we first learn from a deed dated 2 October 1772; four sons, named Johnston (or Johnson), born , Elijah, born c. 1774, Elias, born 11 April 1778, and Seymour, probably born ; and at least two and probably five daughters. Hannah seems to have been born between 1740 and 1750, the more likely range being , and survived William by many years, making her last appearance in the 1840 census for Montgomery County, where she was listed as a lone head of household, age Her maiden name is not known. She might have been a Sugg, although other possibilities include Johnston and Clark.* One of William's daughters * Favoring the Sugg theory: (1) William settled on Sugg land in 1763, buying his first tract at an apparently favorable price, followed by the birth of his oldest son in (2) The Sugg family used Harbert (or Harburd), Elijah and William as given names; William named a son Elijah, and Elijah named a son Harbert. (3) William's son Seymour named a daughter Elizabeth Suggs Spencer. (4)One of William's daughters, and one of his grandsons, married Suggs. The only support for the Johnston theory is that William's oldest son was named Johnston. It has been pointed out that the prominent Samuel Johnston, brother of N. C. Governor Gabriel Johnston, had a daughter Hannah, and owned land in Craven County (now Jones County) where William is thought to have been in There are several reasons why that lead is highly dubious, but the clincher is that Samuel's daughter Hannah married someone else entirely, namely, James Iredell. (See Gwynn, Records of Jones County, N. C , p. 171). The Clark theory is suggested because William's sons Johnston and Elijah each named a son Clark; Elijah's daughter Hannah, vho married Jesse Cox Smitherman, called herself Hannah C. Smitherman; and a John Spencer, who may have been William's nephew (son of William's presumed brother John), named a son Clark. 1 (7)

14 was named Terah, born in 1766 (probably the oldest girl), and married Thomas Sugg, son of George Sugg, in about October Another was named Mary, born c. 1782, and married a Charles Hope who was born in Guilford County, N. C. 3 December 1778 and died in Davidson County, N. C. on 10 July There were probably three other daughters, since William's 1790 household included 5 females (two of them presumably Hannah and Mary, while Terah, married, was living elsewhere). Of these three, one may have been a Sarah who married a William Latham, and another a Deborah who married a Kenith Vuncannon (see DOWS, pp. 21-2). Family information, fairly well supported by one document, states that William served with the colonial forces during the Revolutionary War. William died between 10 June and 6 July He left a will, but unfortunately no copy has been found. B. John Spencer. Our first records of John Spencer in what is now Montgomery County concern real estate transactions: (1) On 10 August 1765 John Spencer, of Anson County, N. C, bought 200 acres of land from Joseph Attaway and his wife Goolspring Attaway, also of Anson County. The land was on Bumposes Fork, a branch of the Little River, and had been granted to William Stone on 26 May 1757.* The witnesses were William Spencer, undoubtedly the William discussed above, plus John Jeffery and Joseph J. Persons. (Anson Deed Book 3, p. 318). The location on Bumposes Fork, and the names Joseph Attaway, John Jeffery and Joseph J. Persons, make it clear that John Spencer's purchase was near William Spencer's property, on Sugg's Creek if we are right in thinking that was another name for Bumposes Fork. (2) On 3 June 1769 John Spencer and his wife Susannah, of Anson County, sold 200 acres of land on Little River to William Harvey, of Rowan County. The witnesses were Thomas T. Ward (who owned land adjoining one of William Spencer's acquisitions) and James Presnall (a Randolph County resident who later sold land in Randolph County to William Spencer). (Anson Deed Book 1, p. 221). This land was in all probability the 200 acres John Spencer had bought from Joseph Attaway, par. (1) above. (3) In or before 1771, probably around the time John Spencer sold the 200 acres to William Harvey, John bought 360 acres of land from David Dumas. (Deed described generally in a 1771 Court Order recorded in Vol. 1 of Anson County Court Orders, p. 59). (4) On 8 January 1774 John Spencer and his wife "Susana", of Anson County, for fcloo, sold to William Spencer of Anson County, 360 acres in Anson County "begining at a dogwood on the Bank of a Creek that runs into Lettel River of Pee Dee on the West side then So. 10 Et 240 poles to a pine then So. 80 Wt 240 poles to a red oak then No. 10 Wt 240 poles to a white oak then to the first sta- *On lo November 1763 James Goolsbe of Anson County had sold 100 acres of land to Joseph Attaway. That 100 acres had been granted to William Stone on 26 May 1757, and subsequently sold by Stone to Goolsbe. (Holcomb, Anson C. N. C. Deed Abstracts ). (8)

15 tion". The land had been granted to Benjamin Dumas on 10 April 1753, and txtle had descended to his son David Dumas as heir at law, making it clear that this tract was the one John Spencer had purchased from David uatas, par. (3) above. The witnesses vere David Boling and Thomas Ward. The deed vas acknowledged in the October term of Court (Anson Deed Book K, p. 253). We have no further records of John Spencer in vhat is nov the northeastern section of Montgomery County. Hovever, at some time in or before 1771 he had become interested in some land farther to the southwest in Anson County, located on Rocky River. That River vas the vestern part of Montgomery County's southern boundary vhen it vas formed in 1779, and nov is the southern boundary of Stanly County, vhich vas carved out of vestern Montgomery in Rocky River runs more or less from vest to east, emptying into the Pee Dee at the present Stanly-Montgomery line. The particular Rocky River land that caught John Spencer's eye vas a 264 acre tract originally granted to Andrev Presslar. Sr. on, 4 October Of. the total grant, 64 acres lay on the north side of Rocky River, and the remaining 200, later divided into tvo 100 acre parcels, lay on the south side of the River. In or before 1771 John bought the 64 acres from John McLeayeal, and one of the 100 acre parcels from Thomas Presslar. On 7 October 1774 John bought the second 100 acre parcel from Andrev Presslar, Jr. Witnesses to the latter deed vere Andrev Presslar, Sr. and "Jessey" Spencer, the latter being John's oldest son Jesse, (see Anson County Court Orders, Vol. 1, p. 52j Anson County Deed Book K, p. 274). On 17 March 1774 John spencer sold to William Culpepper the 64 acres on the north side of the River. Witnesses vere John Mcllvail /"evidently the John "McLeaveal" mentioned above_/, David Culpepper and Archibald Little. (Anson Deed Book K, p. 310). Hovever, on 4 March 1775 John Spencer received a grant of 80 acres on the south side of Rocky River. (Grant Book 25, p. 301, duplicated in Book 27, p. 130). At this stage, then, John ovned 280 acres on the south side of Rocky River. With one very important exception* that concludes our records of John Spencer's real estate transactions. On 4 April 1775 he died intestate. The inventory of his estate vas returned on 1 July 1775 bearing the headingt "Inventory of the Estate of John Spencer, deceased April 4, 1775." (Anson County Court Orders, Vol. 1, p. 159; Anson County Will Book, Vol. I, p. 194). On 11 July 1775 Susannah Spencer vas appointed administratrix of John's estate. (Anson County Court Orders, Vol. 1, p. 158). John's death vas probably unexpected. He failed to make a viil, he had only recently bought the 3rd parcel of the Pre slar land on 7 October 1774), and he had taken down his 80 acre grant as late as 4 March John was also probably comparatively young vhen he died. His oldest surviving son Jesse was born 28 September 1759, and his youngest daughter Mary (Polly) vas apparently born in 1775, the year of her father's death. As to John's immediate.family, from.a document described belov we know that his wife Susannah inherited one-

16 eighth of his personal estate, showing that he had 7 surviving children (in 1775 a widow of an intestate received a child's portion of his personal property). An extended study of John's family, particularly of his son Jesse, was made some years ago by Mr. William M. Spencer, Suite 2000, First National-Southern Natural Bldg., 1900 Fifth Ave. North, Birmingham, Ala Mr. Spencer wrote on 17 April 1973: "From family records, it appears that John and Susannah were the parents of the following childrem 1. Jesse Spencer 2. Benjamin Spencer 3. Polly Spencer, who married a Mr. Posey, of South Carolina 4. John Spencer 5. Samuel Spencer 6. Annie Spencer, who married a Mr. McKenryi of Kentucky 7. Rachael Spencer, who married a Mr. Ford, of South Carolina".* We have the following records of Susannah, Jesse and Benjamin after John Spencer's deatht (1) On 12 June 1777, Susanna Spencer signed a document, referred to above, readingt "To all people to whom these presents shall come, I Susannah Spencer of the County of Anson for and in consideration of the Love good will & affection which 1 have and do bare towards my lovson Jesse Spencer of the same Countyt do freely give & Grant unto the said Jesse Spenser All & Singular my Estate which Belongs to me or my part of the Estate of which I now possess which is the Eighth part of the Whole the Land only Excepted: of which before the Signing of these presents I have delivered him the said Jesse Spencer an Inventory signed with my own hand and bearing even date without any Manner of Condition; only that he is to keep my three youngest children & Raise them as well as he can ". Susanna signed by mark (as she did the other documents signed by her). The witnesses were Jno. Mclnvaile and Griffen Hogan. (2) A Revolutionary Voucher signed by a Commissioner for Montgomery County, N. C. on 16 December 1781 certified that "I have purchased from Jessey Spencer Eighteen hundred and fifty five Weight of Beaf at the prices asertaind in Spanish Milled dollars bv a Resolve of Congress dated the 25th of February 1780 Amounting ir/ the hole to onehundred and two dollars ".(Revolutionary Vouchers, N. C. Department of Archives,Jesse Spenser, voucher ^12, Montgomery *Mr. Spencer had selected the most likely candidates as the 7 children. There seems no doubt about Jesse and Benjamin. One family source, who failed to name 7 children, said that Jesse had only on; brother, Benjamin, and two sisters: Jane, who married a Cunningham, and Nancy, who married a Woodford, both of whom lived and died in Spartanburg or Union, S. C. (10)

17 County, 1781 for claims). (3) On 11 January 1785 Jesse Spencer & Susannah Spencer of Anson County, N. C, for L350, sold to Peter Winfield of Anson County 280 acres of land in Anson County "on the so. side of Rocky River Beginning at a White oak thence No. 51(?) Et. to the Riverto an ash then up the sd River to Walnut corner of a survey of Land surveyed for John Spencer Patent Bearing Date 1775 then so. 19 wt. 82 poles to a hickory on the River then so. 32 Et. 200 poles to a Red oak then so. 74 Et. 80 poles to a hickory then No. 10 Et. 50 poles thence to Preslars line thence Down Preslars line to the Beginning wt. oak Being all the land containing in Andrew Preslars Patent Bearing date 1751 that is on the so. side Rocky River and also Eighty acres in John Spencers survey Patent bearing Date 1775 ". The witnesses were Benjamin Spencer (undoubtedly John and Susannah's son), plus James Marshall and Edward Winfield. The deed was proved in the July term of court 1785 by James Marshall. (Anson Deed Book 4, pp ). Jesse appeared as a grantor because he was the oldest surviving son and heir at law, and Susannah to convey her dower rights. At some time between the sale of John Spencer's Rocky River land and 1790 Jesse and Benjamin Spencer moved to Spartanburg District, S. C. What happened to Susannah is not known. Proof of the presence of Jesse and Benjamin in Spartanburg District includes the following: (1) The 1790 census for Spartanburg District showed Jesse Spenser, with 2 males 16 and over and 2 females (Mr. William M. Spencer of Birmingham quite logically interprets this as meaning Jesse had with him Susannah's "three youngest children", a boy and 2 girls); and a Benjamin Spenser with 2 males 16 and over, 2 males under 16, and 2 females.* (2) The deed of gift from Susannah to Jesse dated 12 June 1777, wherein she asked him to take care of the three youngest children, was recorded with the Register of Mesne Conveyances for Spartanburg County, S. C. on 24 May (Book B, p. 431). (3) Probably in 1791 Jesse Spencer married Elizabeth Otts, and they later moved to Union District, S. C. c. 1807, then to Pickens County, Ala. c (in a part which became Green Co.). They had 5 children, William, John M., Annie, Samuel otts, and Elizabeth. (Deeds and census records cited by Mr. Spencer). (4) Jesse Spencer died 19 November. 1836, and is buried in Beulah Churchyard in Greene Co., Ala.. His headstone says *In support of his conclusion that John Spencer's daughter Annie married a McHenry, and daughter Rachael married a Ford, Mr. Spencer points out that the 1790 census for Spartanburg listed, in consecutive order, John Ford, Sr., Jesse Spenser, and James Mc Henry. John Ford's first wife Rachael died before He had a son Jesse Ford, said to have been named for an uncle. John Ford, who married three times, moved to Shelby Co., Ky., whence he sent back a power of attorney to his son Jesse, dated 17 Oct. 1796, empowering him to sell his Spartanburg land. (Deed Book D, p. 206). Mary (Polly) Spencer apparently married Thomas Posey (Spartanburg will dated 25 July 1845, probated 17 April 1848). Mary in 1850 census for Spartanburg, age 75. (11)

18 la he was "a native of North Carolina", and that he was 77 years, 1 month and 21 days old when he died. His wife Elizabeth, buried beside him, died 6 October 18 53, age "about 84 years". The foregoing concludes our story of John Spencer, except for one highly important record, which furnishes one of our most significant clues to the ancestry of the Little River Spencers. By. lease and release dated 20 and 21 October 1771, John Spencer and his wife Susannah, both of Anson County, N. C., for I>350 current money of the Province of South Carolina, sold to John Winn, of the Parish of St. Mark, S. C, 400 acres of land in South Carolina. (Underscoring supplied). The land was described as a tract granted to Richard Spencer on 13 December 1752 "situated on one of the Branches of Broad river called Little river bounded on all sides /at the time of the grant_/ by vacant Land". John Spencer sighed Tn his own writing, and Susannah by mark. The witnesses were John "Mcilvaille'' and Benjamin Ellis (the. latter signed by mark). On 22 October Benjamin Ellis appeared before a Justice of the Peace for the then very large Craven County, 5. C. and swore to the signatures. The documents were registered in Craven County on 10 July Meanwhile, on 5 February 1773 the purchaser John Winn had filed his "Memorial of Title" to the land, as required to maintain the grant in force. The Memorial added no further information except to specify that the land was in what was then Craven County. (Lease and Release recorded with Register of Mesne Conveyances, Charleston, S. C, Book H5, p. 75; Memorial on record with S. C. Archives in Columbia, Memorials, Vol. 12, p. 97). As to the location of the Richard Spencer land, it was most probably in present-day Fairfield County, S. C. (formed in 1785). The Broad River enters South Carolina from North Carolina east of Spartr anburg, running south and then somewhat southeast until it joins the Saluda River coming in from the northwest at Columbia, S. C. There the combined streams become the Congarees River, which continues southeast until it is joined by the Wateree River (called the Catawba River farther north) entering from the north. The combined stream then becomes the Santee River, which flows east and a little south to the sea, emptying into the ocean below Georgetown, S.C. The Little River (not to be confused with the one in North Carolina) runs more or less from north to south, largely in what is now Fairfield County, exiting into Richland County where it joins the Broad a short distance below the county line, perhaps 15 miles above Columbia. A sketch approximating the location of Columbia, Fairfield County, and the flow of the foregoing streams appears on page 13. Wc know that the Richard Spencer land was on or near the Lick Branch of the Little River. John Winn, to whom John Spencer - sold the Richard.Spencer'land, was one 1 of the Winn-family who founded Winnsboro, the county seat of Fairfield County. On 14 June 1775 John Winn purchased from William Sanders 500 acres of land on Lick Branch of Little River (evidently in Fairfield County). The tract was bounded southeast by Thomas Parrott, northeast by Edmund Munion and Robert Neal, northwest "on Richard Spencer and SamuelMoberly", and on other sides by vacant land. (Richard Spencer's name used in the description even though John Winn had already bought the land from John Spencer.) On 5 March 1804, John Winn of Fairfield District sold to (12)

19 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ SOUTH CAKULINA

20

21 Thomas Starke of the same District 900 acres of land. Of the total acreage, 400 had been granted originally to Richard Spencer and 500 to William Sanders. The prop-arty was on Lick Branch of Little River, bounded by Thomas Parrott, Robert Neil, Samuel Moberly and vacant land. The foregoing information in this paragraph comes from "The Winns of Fairfield County", by Buford S. Chappell, M. D. (pp. 17, 45). Dr. Chappell tells us that the "east prong" of the Little River ran through the land sold to Starke. A map of Fairfield District (corresponding to today's Fairfield County) appears in Mills' Atlas of It gives us a good picture of the flow of the Little River. Unfortunately it does not identify Lick's Branch, but it does show an "East Fork" of Little River, which would seem to be the "east prong" referred to by Dr. Chappell. A very crude attempt to duplicate this portion of the Mills Atlas map, done free hand and hastily, appears on the preceding page 14. So much for the whereabouts of Richard Spencer's land. What about the man himself? The reader will have noticed that the lease and release from John Spencer did not identify him, or say how the land had come into John's ownership. A thorough search has been made of South Carolina records looking for a will or deed which might have transferred title to John. No such instrument has been found. While one can never be absolutely positive without direct documentation, the South Carolina records of both land transfers and wills are quite complete, and the absence of a conveyance or devise to John Spencer makes it almost certain, in the writer's opinion, that John inherited the land from Richard by intestate succession. In all probability, this would mean that Richard was the father or brother, or possibly the uncle, of John; and that if John had one or more brothers living at Richard's death, John was the oldest. In any event, a search has been made for all possible information about Hiehard Spencer of Craven or Fairfield County, S. C. No Estate Papers have been found. However, we know the following: (11 At least as early as 20 October 1749, Richard was planning to settle on the Little River. On that date a precept (order to make a survey) issued to John Pearson, Deputy Surveyor, to lay out for Richard Spencer the 400 acre tract in question "or. Little River on the North Side of Broad River". John Pearson was one of the prominent early land developers in the area around Saxe Gotha Township (on the Congarees River, a little below present-day Columbia). On 20 November 1749, John Pearson certified that he had laid out the 400 acres for Richard Spencer, stating that the land bounded on all sides on land not laid out. The accompanying plat, reproduced on the next page, showed the tract to be a square, each side 63 chains, 24 links long. The Little River ran through the property, this particular segment apparently flowing southward and a little eastward, with a tributary coming in from the east (Lick Branch?). (S. C. Archives, Colonial Plats, Vol. 5, p. 303). (15)

22 No. Oons*o Plat for Richard Spencer 400 A. - Little River Nov. 20, 1749

23 (2) Richard Spencer did not take down his grant of the 400 acres on Little River until 13 December (S. C. Archives, Royal Grants, Vol. 5, p. 78). Well before that date, however, he had bought another tract of land with a house on it from John Pearson. That land was located farther south on or near the Congarees River, into which the Broad and Saluda Rivers flow, and was opposite the lower part of Saxe Gotha Township, in a neighborhood known as Raiford's Creek, below present-day Columbia. The land had been laid out originally for John Pearson, and we can tell that Richard bought it sometime between 27 April and 24 December 1750, since a surveyor's certificate dated 27 April showed it as belonging to John Pearson (Plat for Jacob Geiger, Colonial Plats, Vol. 5, p. 132), and another dated 24 December showed it as belonging to Richard Spencer (Plat for Richard Jones, Colonial Plats, Vol. 6, p. 184). Richard's land and the surrounding tracts are shown in a map reproduced in Robert L. Merriwetherr "The Expansion of South Carolina ". Mr. Merriwether discusses the development of the Saxe-Gotha area, and the somewhat later settlement along the Broad and Little Rivers, and with respect to the Little River commentsj " to this river there came during the fifties Solomon McGrav, Richard Spencer and James Leslie, former settlers on Raiford's Creek", (p. 148). What happened to Richard's Congarees River property is not known. Perhaps he sold it when he moved to Little River* or perhaps it was sold to satisfy creditors after his death. (3) We have several surveyor's certificates for landowners adjoining, or possibly adjoining, Richard Spencer's Little "River tract i (a) Christopher Murch. Precept 7 September 1749, certificate 20 November 1749 (same day as Richard's certificate). 50 acres "on a branch of Broad river called Little river bounding to the Sward part on Land laid out to Richard Spencer & part on vacant land and to the Westward, Northward and Eastvard on Land not laid out ". Little River shown as entering property from north, running southeastward and exiting eastvard above the southern property line. Must have turned southward again to enter Richard's property. In view of information belov in this paragraph (3), Kurch may not have taken out his grant, or may have abandoned the land. (S. C. Archives computer code: ). (b) Hans Jun Grole. Precept 20 October 1752, certificate 5 April acres "on the North side of Broad River on a branch thereof Called Little river bounding to the Southvard part by Land Surveyed for Henry (Sneltree?) & part by vacant Land to the Westward part by Land Surveyed for Richard Spencer and part by vacant Land to the Northwestward and Northeastward by vacant Land". Little River shown as entering from north neax western property line, flowing south roughly paralleling western line and exiting across southern property line. Not clear how River as shovn tied in vith its course through Richard's land. (S. C.-Archives computer code: ). (cl Henry Halle. Precept 7 December 1762, certificate (17)

24 18 21 December 1762w 50 acres "on the North side of Broad River on a Branch of L i t t l e River called Spencers Branch Bounded to the Westward on Land belonging to the Estate of Arthur Howell Deceased and on all other Sides by Vacant Land". Plat, by John Pearson, appeared a8 followsi In ERF* Note that a stream labelled simply "Branch" flows from the north almost to the southern property line, where it turns vest, and is joined by a stream coming from the southeast labelled "Spencers branch". The combined stream then exits at the southwest corner, where it is again labelled "Spencers branch". The puzzling point is that another stream seems to exit -westward, at about mid-point in the vestern property line, labelled "branch of Little River". Perhaps the latter finally joins vith Spencers branch, making "Lick Creek" (?). This tract is catalogued as. an unrecorded plat for land not granted. (S. C. Archives, computer codei (d) John Waggoner. Warrant dated 6 February 1771, certificate 4 March acres "on Little River bounding North on wiinam Alls land South on land surveyed for Rich. Spencer and on the other tvo sides vacant land". Southern line is shovn as running North 80 degrees. East 26 chains and 50 links, about 2/5ths the length of Richard's northern line. Little River shovn as entering from north and floving southeast, exiting at eastern property line somevhat (18)

25 above the southeastern corner. Presumably this tract.ras positioned -.o the north of the western part of Richard's land. Difficult to reconcile this with the Murch tract mentioned "above. (S. C. Archives, Colonial Plats, Vol. 21, p. 250). (e) Edward Loundes. Precept 14 March 1775, certificate 19 April acres "on the branches Of Sandy River and Rocky Creek bounding W on vacant lane, and part on Spencer N. E. on vacant land and on James McClusrs Easterly on land not known, the other side vacant." Branch of Sandy River shown flowing along the easterly side of the property. Survey was by John Winn, Deputy Surveyor. (S. C. Archives, Colonial Plats, Vol. 12, p. 81). It is far from clear that "Spencer" was Richard Spencer, but if not, the writer can't think who it could have been.* The foregoing certificates tell us little about Richard Spencer except for the names of a few men who seem to have been in the neighborhood during or shortly after his death. One point should, however, be mentioned. The certificate for John Waggoner, dated 4 March 1771, refers to the land north of Richard as "William Alls land", and the tract to the south as "land surveyed for Rich. Spencer". Since Richard had taken out his grant as far back as 1752, why was his land not called "Richard Spencer's land", as was the tract owned by William All? I t is possible that by 4 March 1771 Richard had died, and while the surveyor knew of the change in ownership, and perhaps the identity of the new owner (John Spencer), there had not been a new survey, so the convenient reference was to "land surveyed for Rich. Spencer". No other records of a Richard Spencer, or for that matter of any other Spencer, have been found in what is now Fairfield County, S. C. during the 18th century. C. Joseph Spencer. Our first record of a Joseph Spencer in the Montgomery County area is a deed dated 20 August 1766, whereby Joseph Spencer of Anson County bought 100 acres of land from Benjamin Vines and his wife Elizabeth. The land was described as "Beginning at a Read /_Red_7 Oak on the west side of Little River on a Branch about a mile from the mouth thence West 180 poles to a stake thence south 89 poles to a Black Oake thence East 190 poles to hickory thence North to the first station". It had been granted originally to James Denson on 15 November The daed to Joseph was witnessed by John Spencer (undoubtedly the John Spencer discussed above) and John Jeffery (undoubtedly the one who had witnessed John Spencer's first land acquisition from Joseph Attaway). (Anson Deed *This tract one of many 500 acre tracts laid out in about 1775, out of a acre Barony created for Thomas Loundes of St. Margaret's, Westminster, on 25 October The Barony was in Camden District (a court district) out of which Fairfield District was formed in Fairfield boundary began "at the mouth of Cedar Creek, thence up Broad River to the mouth of sandy River, thence in a strait line to the mouth of Rocky creek, thence down the Wateree river to the corner of Richland county line." (Act No. 1263, 12 March 1785). Perhaps branches of the Sandy River extended far enough south to be near Richard's property. (19)

26 ao Book HI, p. 157). The file on the original grant to James Denson tells us some additional facts: (1) James Denson vas actually James Denson, Jr.. (2) He obtained his varrant for the grant on 4 October (3) The varrant called for 200 acres, not 100. (4) The varrant described the land as "beginning at a fork of Little River_of Pee Dee that crosses the vaggonroad just beyond the lease /jsicj/ pine on both sides of said Creek for the Complement". When the grant issued on 15 November 1753, hovever, it covered only 100 acres, and the description was the same as in the deed from Vines to Joseph Spencer. Some time before 13 April 1768 Joseph Spencer seems to have obtained a varrant for an additional 100 acres of land, perhaps to make up for the second 100 acres originally contemplated by the 1751 varrant to James Denson, Jr. The second 100 acres vas surveyed for Joseph on 13 April 1768, and a grant issued to him on 29 April 1768 covering "100 Acres Anson on Densons Fork of Little river Beginning at a Turkey oak on the Western bank of said Fork said to be Densons uper Corner and running thence Wt 29 chains and 95 Links to a hickory tree then No 31 chains and 63 Links then Et 31 chains and 63 Links then So 31 Chains and 63 Links then vt to the Beginning". The surveyor's plat shovs the tract as a square, vith Denson's Fork running from the northvest corner through the property to the southeast corner, vhich vas the starting point of the description, and continuing on southeast from there. In all probability the tract lay just to the northvest of the original 100 acres, its southeast corner being the northvest corner of the first parcel. Clearly Denson's "Fork" mentioned in the foregoing descriptions vas Denson's Creek, vhich flovs into the Little River from the vest a short distance from Troy. (See sketch, p. 4). Joseph's property vas about a mile from the mouth of the Creek, vhich vould have placed it about 7 miles as the crow flies south of William Spencer's property on and near the mouth of Sugg's Creek. The fact that William Spencer witnessed the first deed to John Spencer, that John witnessed the first deed to Joseph Spencer, that all three arrived vithin the span of less than 3 years, and that they settled so close together, gives us an almost overwhelming presumption that they vere related. The foregoing deed and grant to Joseph Spencer are the only records we have of his presence in the Little rtiver area. He does not appear in the 1787 or 1790 census reports for Montgomery County, and it seems a fair guess that he had died before then without issue, or had moved elsewhere. The latter possibility does not seem too likely in view of William's continued presence in the vicinity.* * The 1790 census for Anson County (not Montgomery) listed a Joseph Spencer as head of household, with 1 male 16 and over, 1 female and 2 slaves. There is very strong evidence that this was a different, probably newly-married Joseph, who was somehow related to Judge Samuel Spencer of Anson County. For a discussion of the latter Joseph Spencer, see Appendix B hereto, "Early Spencers of Western North Carolina", pp (20)

27 IV. William and John Spencer of Craven County (nov Jones County), North Carolina. As indicated in the Foreword of this book, there is good reason to think that William Spencer of Montgomery County vas in Craven County, N. C, in a part that is now Jones County, in The evidence supporting this view is summarized in this Section IV. First for a little history and geography, the original Craven County, N. C. covered a great deal of territory to the south of the town of Bath. First called Archdale Precinct, it was formed out of the County of Bath in Its name was changed to Craven County in In addition to the present-day Craven County, its perimeter included the current counties of Pamlico and Lenoir, and parts of Greene, Wilson, Wayne, Johnston, Wake, Sampson, Pender and New Hanover. (Onslow seems to have been excluded). Jones County was created out of Craven in In the area of interest to us, the principal river is the Neuse, which rises far to the northwest above Raleigh, flows south and southeast just below Goldsboro, continues southeast for a short distance and then runs east and northeast to a point northeast of Kinston, finally turning southeast to New Bern. Some miles south of the Neuse River, we find the Trent River. Its main source is a swamp in the western part of Jones County knovn as Tuckahoe Swamp. The swamp is drained by Tuckahoe Creek, which soon runs into the Trent, which in turn flows,east and a little north to New Bern, where it joins the Neuse. A composite map showing the foregoing features appears on the following page. And now to our Spencers. On 17 May 1757 a William and a John Spencer each received a warrant for land in Craven County, N. C. William's warrant was No. 9, and John's was No. 10. Both were witnessed by the same persons. William's warrant.calledfor "One Hundred Acres of Land On the north side of Tuckaho Beginning Near the mouth of Turkey Branch Running up both sides of the Branch for Complement." John's land was described in his warrant as "Three Hundred /_sic_7 Acres of Land on Tuckaho Joining Samuel Johnston's Land Running up both sides of Tuckaho Swamp for Complement". William had his land surveyed promptly. The surveyor's certificate, dated 31 May 1757, described his tract as "One Hundred Acres of Land in Craven County on the No. side of Tuckahoe near the mouth of Turky branch Begin at a White oak /Cjno?_/ Jermans Corner Thence Runs No. 64 Et 31 Chains 64 Links to a pine So. 25 Wt 31 Chains 64 Links to a pine So. 64 Wt 31 Chains 64 Links to a Red oake No. 25 Et 31 Chains 64 Links to the first station. This description called for a rhomboid, but the surveyor's sketch showed a square (see reproduction at the top of page 23. * "Tuckahoe Creek rises from Tuckahoe Swamp in w Jones County and flows e into Trent River. " "Tuckahoe Swamp rises in s Lenoir County and flows se into w Jones County where it becomes less well defined and more nearly a true swa p. The swamp is drained to the e by Tuckahoe Creek." (North Carolina Gazeteer). (21) ai

28

29 The stream depicted in the sketch as flowing down into the swamp could have been Turkey Branch, since the land is on both sides of it. The chain bearers were Wm Jones and Wm Williams. William's grant issued on 26 November It described his land as "100 Craven on the No side of Tuckahoe near the Mouth of Turkey Branch Beginning at a White Oak by a Swamp thence runing No 64 Et 31 Chains 64 Links to a pine, So. 64 Wt 31 Chains 64 Links to a red oak No 26 Et 31 Chains 64 Links to the first Station". (Grant Book 16, p. 127). Comparing this description with the surveyor's, one finds that the words "by a swamp" have been added, and that the second course - from the first pine to the second pine - has been omitted. Surprisingly, on 15 December 1757 William Spencer, for tlo, sold the foregoing land to William Whaley. The description tallied with the grant, including the omission of the second course. No wife joined in the deed. William signed by mark, and the witnesses were Robert Jarman, Laurence Hall and John Jerman. Robert Jarman proved the deed in open court in the May term of court (Craven Deeds, Vol. 2, p. 176). To round out the story of this land, in January 1761 William "Whally of Trent River", for 1>15, sold 70 acres of the Spencer tract to John Jerman, describing the part sold as "Beginning at the Mouth of a littel Branch at a Gum and Runing with the branch to the head of it and from the head of the branch strait to the line and so Runing with Various Courses Round the said Land to the first Station". (Apparently the portion of the 100 acres to the left of the little Branch, which was not described as Turkey Branch). (Deed Book 1, p.' 579).. In October 1761 William Whaley "of trent", for fc2, sold to John Jerman the remaining 30 acres of the Spencer tract. Confusingly, the description again seemed to indicate the portion of the tract to the left of the little Branch, which this time was called "the first branch", (23)

30 a* but once more not Turkey Branch. (Deed Book 2, p. 51). One of the witnesses to the second deed from Whaley was Laurence Hall, this time signing by mark, whereas he signed as a witness to William Spencer's deed in his own writing. Attention is called to the presence of John Jerman (namo sometimes rendered Jarman or Jermain) as owning"land adjoining William Spencer's grant, and the subsequent purchaser from Whaley, and of Robert Jarman as a witness to William Spencer's deed to Whaley. The Jermans, Jarmans, or Jermains play an important part later on in our story. Returning now to John Spencer's land, we have no surveyor's report, and find that the grant to John did not issue until 3 March Furthermore, the grant was for only 100 acres, instead of the 300 called for in the warrant. The description read: "100 Craven on Tuckahoe Swamp Joining to the land called by the name of Samuel Johnston's plantation beginning at a white oak by the End of Tuckahoe thence running No 10 Et 31 Chains 64 Links to a Stake beyond a Little Branch No 80 Wt 40 Chains to a gum in the swamp of Cypres branch and thence down said branch and Tuckahoe as above delineated to the first station". (Grant Book 15, p. 253). No deed or other conveyance of the Tuckahoe land by John Spencer has been found, nor do we have any further record of him or William Spencer in Craven County after what appears above. There was almost certainly a survey for someone of John's 100 acres which has not been located. The most likely explanation would seem to be that John had sold his warrant rights to someone, who had the survey made and then had the grant issue in John's name, to avoid unnecessary red tape or expense. In any event it seems highly probable that William and John had left Craven County by the end of 1757, or at the latest shortly after John's grant issued on 3 March 1759.* Because of the simultaneous acquisition of warrants for the Tuckahoe land by William and John Spencer in 1757, i t seems almost certain that they were closely related, and might well have been brothers. John, with the more ambitious plan to acquire 300 acres, could have been the older. William must have been at least 21 in order to sell his land in November It seems quite possible that he had only recently reached age 21, his coming of age perhaps triggering the move for them both to acquire the Tuckahoe land. In any event they seem excellent candidates to have been the William and John who appeared in the Montgomery County area in If they were, what were they doing in the interim? We have a few clues, set forth in the following Section V. *The State Census for Jones County of 1786 shows a William Spencer household with 1 male and 2 females. Because of the long time gap between 1757 and 1786, with no interim record of either a William or John Spencer in Craven or Jones County, it is believed that the 1786 William was someone else. Later other Spencers appeared in Craven County who are definitely traceable to the large Hyde County, N. C. family. (See Appendix A, "The Spencers of Hyde County, N. C", pp. 148, ). (24)

31 V. John Spencer of Johnston County, and John and William Spencer of Rowan County. as Johnston County, N. C. was formed out of Craven County in Before the dates about to be mentioned, it had lost some of its land on the west by the formation of Orange County out of Johnston, Bladen and Granville in 1752} and some of its land on the east by the formation of Dobbs in 1758 (land now in the present-day counties of Wayne, Lenoir, and perhaps Greene). Its remaining land lay up the Neuse River to the northwest of what is now Jones County. On 22 July 1761 John Spencer received a grant of 700 acres in Johnston County "on the south side of Neuse River joining Brogdens line, etc.". (Grant Book 14, p. 244). Within a relatively short time, however, John had moved from Johnston County either directly - or after one or more interim stops - to Rowan County, as evidenced by the following deeds: (1) On 19 October 1762 John Spencer, "late of Johnston County", for fc50, sold to William Manerin of Johnston County 500 acres which John owned by virtue of an original deed from the Lord Proprietor's Office* dated 22 July 1761, the grant referred to just above. The land was described as "Beginning at a red Oak running South taking the / word illegible_/ on both sides fall Creek up to Blalock's Spring /_several words illegible_7". John signed in his own writing. The witnesses were Cornelius Keith, William Abit and William Abit, Jr. (Johnston County Deeds, First Transcript ( ), p. 2). (2) On 3 November 1763 /"after William Spencer had made his first land acquisition on the Little River_/, John Spencer, "of the County of Rowan", for fc20, sold to Millenton Blalock of Johnston County, 200 acres of land in Johnston County. The description readi "on fall creek, on the So. side of Neuse River & bounded as follows: beginning at the main fork of said creek, at a pine, thence E. & W. from the lower to the upper line, it being part of a tract of land granted to said Spencer containing 700 acres, thence along the No line from where the cross line strikes the No line a post oak, to the head of the said Blalock*s spring branch, then down the said branch to the mouth, thence an E. course, to the lower line". John Spencer again signed in his ovn writing. The vitnesses were an Amos "Reanolds", and a name that seems to read clearly "Jarrus" Spencer. (Johnston County Deeds, Book 1, P. 82). Finally, we have a 1761 Tax List for Rowan County, prepared by constable Thos. Stillvell, and covering an area that was later in southern Guilford County and still later in northern Randolph County. Named on the list was a William "Spenser". (N. C. Genealogy, Vol. XVIII (1972), p. 2701). *In 1761, long after all the other land owned by Proprietors under the original Carolina charters had reverted to the Crown, Lord Granville was still the Proprietor of this part of North Carolona. (25)

32 XL In view of the foregoing, there seems ample reason to think that the William and John Spencer in Craven County in 1757 were the William and John of the Montgomery County area in ; that John at least, and perhaps William, had moved to Johnston County by 22 July 1761 and possibly earlier; that by some date in 1761 William was in Rowan County (now Randolph*); and that by 3 November 1763, and perhaps by 19 October 1762 or earlier, John Spencer vas also in Rowan. Such a progression westward across North Carolina would not have been unusual. Even in the limited number of records examined for this study we find examples. The Sugg family who arrived in the Montgomery COunty area by 1758 seemed to have been in Johnston County earlier in the 1750*s, and may have been further east in North Carolina earlier after leaving Virginia. (Mrs. W. J. Sugg). Also, a William Williams was a chain bearer when William Spencer's Tuckahoe property vas surveyed in May A William Williams, Jr. vas granted land in Johnston County on 3 March 1759, adjoining land he already ovned. (Grant Book 15, p. 253). Some objections to the theory advanced herein may.be raisedt (1) William Spencer signed his 1757 deed of the Tuckahoe property to Whaley by mark, vhereas in 1772, nov settled on the Little River, he signed a deed in his ovn hand writing. One answer could be that he had learned to write in the meantime. More persuasive, hovever, is the fact that the vriter has observed quite a fev Craven County deeds vherein someone signed by mark vho had earlier signed other documents in his ovn hand. Possibly some scriveners vere in the habit of preparing documents before knowing whether those required to sign could write. (2) John Spencer of the Little River must have been married by 1759 when his son Jesse vas born, but no vife joined in his 1762 and 1763 deeds conveying his Johnston County land. Again the answer may turn on local practise. In Craven County many deeds were signed by the husband only, even when we know from other documents that he was married. Perhaps the practise was for the vife to sign a separate instrument of renunciation of dower, of which the records have not been retained. Or perhaps the question of the wife's possible dower rights was simply ignored, leaving the matter to be settled later if she survived her husband and raised a question. (3) The most troublesome question is the identity of the "Jarrus" Spencer vho vitnessed John Spencer's 1763 deed to Blalock. That first name, even if a garble (as seems likely), does not come * The vestern tvo-thirds of Guilford County vas carved out of Rovan i n l 7 7 i T n e norttern part-sf Randolph vas taken from Guilford vhen Randolph vas created in (26)

33 close to any of the names ve have thus far associated vith John Spencer of the Montgomery County area. Perhaps further research v i i l provide an ansver. One final fact, however, brought out in the following Section VI, reinforces most strongly the idea that the John Spencer of Tuckahoe and the John Spencer of the Little River vere one and the same person. 37 (27)

34 VI. Richard Spencer of the Trent River, and his Jerman (Jermain. Jarman) Neighbors. The minutes of the North Carolina Governor's Council tell us that on 3 March 1739 /_apparently new style, not 1739/40), the Council heard a number of petitions for land grants. Among them was one from a Richard Spencer, for 100 acres of land in Craven County. No Council action specifically on Richard's application is indicated. (After several other names Council's approval is indicated, which may have applied just to the immediately preceding name or to all of them). From what follows below, however, it would appear that Richard's petition was granted. On 24 November 1743, Richard Spencer, of Craven County, N. C, planter, for B200, sold to Jacob Futch a tract of land "on the fork of Mill CreeK on the South side of Trent River Joyning upon Pollock's line containing one hundred acres on West side of the Estermost fork Beginning at a hickory neir the said Branch and pattened /_patented_7 by the said Richard Spencer". Richard signed the deed by mark. The witnesses were Wm. Wickliff and Robert Jarman. On 22 December 1743, Richard Spencer acknowledged the foregoing deed, apparently in open court, and it was recorded on 6 January 1743 /j*a_7. (Deed Book 2, p. 386). We find no further record of Richard Spencer in Craven County, N. C, either before or after the foregoing two. A list of Craven County landowners in the 1750's (through 1756) showed a Thos. Jermain with 200 acres, a Thomas Jerman with 200 acres between Crooked Creek and Cypress Creek (John Spencer's grant referred to a Cypress Creek), and a Thos. Jarmyn with 100 acres on Crooked run, as well as a Jacob Futch with 150 acres on the north side of Trent River. However, it showed no Spencers. This leaves us, then, vith the following factsi (1) A Richard Spencer acquired land on the Trent River, vith Robert Jarman as a neighbor, some 18 years before William and John Spencer obtained varrants for land in the very same vicinity, vith Robert and other Jarmans as neighbors. (2) Richard stayed on the Trent River more than 3 1/2 years, and then apparently left. (3) In 1749, some 6 years after Richard's apparent departure from the Trent River, a Richard Spencer obtained a precept for land on the Little River of vhat is nov Fairfield County, South Carolina. (4) At some time before 20 October 1771, about 22 years after Richard Spenoer received his precept for his South Carolina land, John Spencar of Anson County, N. C. - he vho had followed his presumed brother William to the Little River area of present Montgomery County* N. C. - inherited Richard Spencer's South Carolina land. This history pushes us very strongly to the conclusion that the John Spencer of Tuckahoe vas the John Spencer ot Anson County, N. C.i and that he and his presumed brother William vere related to Richard Spencer. Further, assuming that the Richard Spencer of the Trent (29)

35 River was the Richard later in South Carolina, the time intervals suggest that Richard vas perhaps the father of John and William. But in that case one vould have to assume either that John and William vent vith their father to South Carolina, and for some reason backtracked to Tuckahoe in 1757; or that Richard had left them in someone else's care vhen he moved to South Carolina, and the boys applied for their Tuckahoe varrants vhen William had reached age 21. Either assumption seems a little improbable. As will appear later, another explanation is possible, namely, that Richard vas the uncle of John and William. One version of this idea vould be that John and William came from a family vho had lived on the lover reaches of the Santee River (French Santee) since the early 1700' s; the Richard Spencer in Tuckahoe vas their uncle; and the Richard in Fairfield County vas their brother. The other version vould place the Richard in both places as their uncle from Maryland. For the present, hovever, it is important to spend some time discussing the Jerman family vho vere neighbors Of Richard Spencer, and then William and John Spencer, of the Trent River and Tuckahoe. Before getting to the Jerman family, hovever, some comments about French Huguenots In the Trent River area may be relevant. A. The French Huguenots. With the repeal of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, thousands of French Huguenots fled France seeking safety elsewhere in Europe and in the Nev World. Scattered individuals appeared in a good many of the Colonies, but favorite refuges seemed to be Nev England, Nev York, Virginia and South Carolina. (Much of vhat follovs about the Huguenots is documented in a book entitled "The Early Spencers of South Carolina", published privately by the vriter on 1 May 1979.) In Virginia, vhich particularly concerns us at the moment, quite a fev arrived in small groups before 1700, but in that and the following year several shiploads, totalling some persons, came to that Colony. Of these, about vere settled at Manakintovn, an abandoned Indian territory some distance up the James River, in an area called King William's Parish. The remainder are said to have gone to other points in Virginia. One of the leaders of the Manakintovn colony vas a minister named Claude Philippe de Richebourg, about vhom ve viil hear more later. Some time in or shortly before 1707, a large part of the Manakintovn settlers, feeling cramped for space in the relatively small tracts they had selected, and hemmed in by the English, moved south to North Carolina, vhere they settled along the Neuse and Trent Rivers, particularly the Trent. This vas almost virgin territory at the time (the tovn of Bath, to the north, vas not laid out until about 1704, and Nev Bern, to the east, vas not founded until 1710). No clear-cut history of the Trent River Huguenots seems to exist. Certainly they must have been forced to abandon the territory at least temporarily vhen the Tuscarora Indians ravaged the country side in 1711, and again in a second var soon thereafter. But in the latter part of the 18th century the Jones County land records vere still referring to a "French Branch" of the Trent River, a "Randevough Branch", a Lanier Branch, and people named Gilliard, Debrule, Baset, Roulain, Colvet, Mercer, Guion and Amiet. (See Gvynn, Abstracts of the Records of Jones County, North Carolina ). B. The Jermans. On 1 July 1738, the North Carolina Governor's Council (30)

36 approved a grant of 300 acres of land in Craven County to "Robert Germain and Thos. Smith". (Colonial Records of North Carolina, Vol. IV, p. 333). On the same day a grant issued to Robert Jerman and Thomas Smith for 300 acres on the south bank of the Neuse River in Craven County, N. C The land vas "in an Indian old field", and about half vay to its southern boundary it vas traversed by Whitely Creek. (Craven Co. Deed Book 1, p. 3). On 8 October 1748, the Governor's Council found that the original grant to "Robert Jermain and Thomas Smith" had been torn and was illegible, and approved issuing a replacement document. (Col. Rec, Vol. IV, p. 895). After this first known grant to Robert, a great many deeds and grants involving him and his family were recorded. A sampling of some of the more pertinent ones follows: (1) 20 July Robert Jerman sold the lower half of the above "Jermain"-Smith grant, containing 150 acres, to his son Thomas Jerman. (2) 22 July Thomas Jarman purchased 200 acres on the south side of the Trent River from a Charles Wilks. (Deed Book 1, p. 121). (3) 17 March Petition by "Thomas Jermain" for a warrant for 100 acres in Craven County approved. Apparently pursuant to this warrant, a grant issued to "Thomas Germain" on 27 November (Col. Rec. Vol. IV, pp , 710). (4) 20 December Thomas Jarman sold 100 acres of the 200 acres he had bought from Wilks, signing by mark. (Book 2, p. 387). (5) 21 June Thomas Jerman sold the 150 acres he had bought from his father in Thomas signed in his own writing. Robert Jerman was a witness. (Book2, p. 164). (6) 30 July Thomas Jarman (spelled "German" at one point in the deed) sold the remaining 100 acres he had bought from Wilks. Thomas signed by mark. (Book 1, p. 381). (7) 10 November Thomas Jerman bought 100 acres "on the south side of Trent River called by name of Crooked River". Robert Jerman vas a vitness. (Book 4, p. 118). (8) 30 August Robert "Jermain" vas granted 250 acres "on both sides of Beaver Dam Branch, on the South side of Trent river". (N. C. Grant No. 217, file 582). (9) 2 (or 22) October Thomas Jerman (sometimes spelled Jarman in the deed) bought 200 acres "on the South Side of Trent River". (Book 6, p. 424). (10) 31 May A Jerman (apparently "Jno", but possibly "Tho") vas named as an adjoining landovner in William Spencer's surveyor's certificate. If this Jerman vas John, it vas his first appearance in the Craven County land records. John vas another son of Robert Jerman. (11) 15 December Robert Jarman, Laurence Hall and John Jerman vitnessed William Spencer's deed to William Whaley. (31) 3i

37 3A (12) 30 August Thomas Jarman sold to John Jarman 150 acres "on the North side of Tuckahoe Creek". (13) 27 November John Jarman received a grant of 200 acres on Beaver Dam Branch, a branch of Trent River. (See Deed Book 11, p. 349). During the ensuing years, many more Jarman deeds and grants vere recorded, some of the later names being Hall Jarman, a younger Robert and a John Jarman, Jr., William Jarman, Rachel Jarman, Joseph Jarman, Reuben Jarman and McLendon Jarman. Many of these documents involved land on Tuckahoe Creek or Svamp, one of them involved land "on the south side of Tuckahoe Creek on Beaver Dam Branch", and several mentioned William Spencer's /_former_7 line, one of them calling him William "Spenee". (See Gvynn, Abstracts of the Records of Jones County, N. C ). And see viil of John Jarman of Craven County, N. C. dated 10 November 1813, and of Rachel Jarman of Jones County, N. C. dated 14 March 1815, probated in the February term of Court 1815 (Jones County Wills). Who vere these Jermans, and vhere did they come from? Fortunately, a great deal of vork has been done on this subject by Mr. Wilbur W. Jarmon, 2726 Hyde Park Rd., Jacksonville, Fla Mr. Jarmon is a direct descendant of the Robert "Jermain" vho, vith Thomas Smith, vas granted land on the Neuse River in 1738*, and has proved that that Robert came from Maryland. The story, based almost entirely on Mr. Jarmon's work, is set forth in Appendix AA hereto. To summarize the high points: (1) From at least 1699 until about , tvo brothers named John and Robert Jarman were living in Calvert County, Maryland, on the southwestern side of Chesapeake Bay. Their last name vas given various spellings, including Jarmin, Garman, Jerman, German, Jermin and, interestingly, "Jermine" /_a corruption of "Jermain"? _7. John Jarman was probably born in T680 or before, and Robert in 1686 or before. (2) Between 1729 and 1732, both Robert and John Jarman moved to Queen Anne's County, Maryland. Queen Anne's was part way down the eastern shore of Maryland, bounded by present-day Kent County on the north and east, and Talbot and Caroline Counties on the south. (3) Robert Jarman is believed to have married a Mary Meade in or before Their children: (a) Joseph Jarman (c ). (b) William Jarman ( ). *That Robert had a son Robert, Jr. who lived and died in Maryland c He in turn had a son named Robert, a surveyor who married a Mary Ann Pratt, and moved to Anson Co., N. C. c. 1768, where he obtained a large number of land grants over a period of time. The latter Robert, who died during the occupation of Charleston in 1782, had a son named Robert who later moved to Tennessee, and changed the spelling of his name to "Jarmon". He was Mr. Wilbur Jarmon's ancestor. (32)

38 (c) Robert Jarman. Jr. ( ). (d) Thomas Jarman (c ). (e) John Jarman (1712/13 - c. 1780). (4) Starting in November 1729, Robert Jarman, Sr. bought land in Queen Anne's County on and near Tuckahoe Creek, a tributary of the Choptank River. (5) The elder Robert's wife Mary may have died by (6) In 1735 Robert, Sr. found himself in debt, and was mentioned no more in Queen Anne's records. (7) On 1 July 1738, Robert /~Sr._/ and Thomas Smith received their grant of land in Craven County, N. C, as noted above. The Thomas and John Jarman who appeared thereafter in the Craven County land records were his sons. One wonders if Robert Jarman from Tuckahoe Creek, Queen Anne's County, Md. had something to do vith naming Tuckahoe Swamp and Creek in Craven County, N. C. 35 (8) In 1761 Robert Jarman /jsr._7 died in Craven County, N. C, leaving a viil dated 6 August of that year. In it he left to his grandson Joseph Jarman 50 acres of "a track of Land Lying in Queen Anne's County in the province of Maryland". (9) While this point is not of major importance, the vriter has indulged in some perhaps far-fetched speculation that the Jarman family mightpossibly have been of French Huguenot stock. We have at this point only a few facts suggesting this rather tenuous theory. First, Robert came to the Trent River area, vhich earlier had been settled by Huguenots from Manakintovn, Virginia. Second, his name, particularly in the earlier years, vas often rendered "Jermain", "Germain" or "Germane". The accent had to have been on the last syllable, as it vould have been in French. Third, ve knov there vere a fev Huguenots named Jermain, although none has been connected in any vay vith Robert. Finally, ve have coming a curious coincidence vhich is discussed in Section VIII hereof belov, dealing vith the Spencers of French Santee, S. C. That concludes our evidence concerning Richard spencer, and his Jerman neighbors, of Craven County, N. C.. It viil be noted that Richard applied for his Craven County grant about 8 months after Robert "Jermain" and Thomas Smith petitioned for theirs. (33)

39 VII. "Family Information". 35" In our quest for the origins of William Spencer of Montgomery County, we have thus far been dealing with solid facts of record, plus two highly plausible inferences, namely, that the William and John Spencer of Tuckahoe were the William and John in the Montgomery County area, and that they were related both to the Richard Spencer of the Trent River and the Richard Spencer of the Fairfield County area in South Carolina. Before preceding further, it would be well to summarize what we have in the way of "family information", that always treacherous but sometimes productive source of clues. The summary follows: A. Benjamin Franklin Spencer's Story. One of William Spencer's great-grandsons, descended through William's son Elias and Elias's son Levi, was a respected medical doctor named Benjamin Franklin Spencer ( ), who settled in the town of Weston, Collin County, Texas. Some time in or before 1889 he (or some member of his immediate family) apparently arranged for a biographical sketch of himself and his ancestors to be placed in a publication called "Biographical souvenir of the State of Texas", published in Chicago in 1889 by F. A. Batty & Co. We are told that the publishers undertook to print such sketches submitted by interested parties for a fee of $5.00. The article about Dr. Spencer outlined - accurately - his own career and a brief summary of his father Levi's life, and then continued: "The Spencers came from England and settled in North Carolina. There were three brothers of them. William Spencer, great-grandfather of Dr. Benjamin F. Spencer, settled in Randolph County, North Carolina. A new county was formed afterward out of Randolph and the adjoining counties, called Montgomery, and he was located in this county, and there he lived and died. He had four sons - Johnsey, Eliga, Elias and Seymore. During the Revolutionary War he and his oldest son, Johnsey, fought under General Pinckney. Elias Spencer (the doctor's grand-father) moved from Montgomery County, North Carolina to ". /_There follows a description - again accurate - of the various moves made by Elias, and later by his son Levi_/. The foregoing information was pretty much duplicated in a document signed by Dr. Spencer at Weston on 23 May 1904, which was included in a "History of the Spencer Family" put out by one of his descendants in Moss Point, Miss, on 14 August Dr. Spencer's 1904 document read in part as follows: "The Spencers came from England and settled in North Carolina. There were three brothers. William Spencer the great-grandfather of Columbus Marion, May Josephine, Elias Napoleon and Benjamin Franklin Spencer, settled in Randolph County, North Carolina. A new county was formed afterwards out of Randolph and the adjoining counties, called Montgomery, and he was located in this county, and there he lived and died. (35)

40 36, He had four sons, Johnsey, Elijah, Elias and Seymour. During the Revolutionary War, he and his oldest son, Johnsey, fought under General Pinckney. Elias Spencer, our grandfather, moved from Montgomery County, North Carolina to /^repetition of the moves by Elias and Levi_7". A number of comments on the foregoing are in order: (1) If the statements meant that William and two brothers came directly from England and settled in North Carolina, a grain or two of salt seems in order. In Tuckahoe we find two brothers, not three (although a third might have been with them and not applied for a land warrant). In the Montgomery County area we do find three Spencers who could have been brothers - William, John and Joseph. And yet the notion that William, John and Joseph came directly from England fails to account for the Richard Spencer of Trent River (unlikely to have been a brother, in view of the time between his appearance and that of William and John), or the Richard Spencer of South Carolina. And one wonders whether anyone arriving from England vould have headed straight for such relatively remote places as Tuckahoe or the Montgomery County area. Possibly the statements meant that the forebears of these Spencers came from England, and this generation - at least William - settled in North Carolina. (2) The statements about Montgomery County being formed out of Randolph and adjoining counties were wrong. Randolph was formed out of Guilford, and Montgomery out of Anson, at the same time. However, the thought that William settled first in Randolph, and was later in Montgomery, was essentially correct, if, as ve think, William and John vere both in vhat vas then Rovan County before coming to Anson. As ve have seen, a portion of Rovan became Guilford, and then Randolph, and someone speaking several years after the fact could easily have said that William came first to Randolph and then to Montgomery. _ 13) The statements that William and his son "Johnsey" /_Johnson_y fought in the Revolutionary War "under General Pinckney" are particularly interesting. We have no record of Johnson's service (he vould have been about 16 in 1781). As to William, there are tvo records of a William Spencer of North Carolina serving immediately under an Augustin Spain, first in the N. C. Continental Line-(William a private and Spain a sergeant), and then in the N. C. militia (William an ensign and Spain a Captain). This William vas possibly "ours" although it seems more likely that he vas a William Spencer of Hyde County (see Supp., pp. 8-9). Hovever, a third document pretty clearly concerns "our" William. It is Voucher No. 750 signed by auditors for the Lover Board of Salisbury District on 6 September 1782, saying that William Spencer "Exhibited h /jvords illegible_7" and vas alloved an amount apparently coming to i>27, 17 s., 9p. Salisbury District included Montgomery County. The voucher vas probably for military pay or expense rather than for goods or non-military services, since it was signed by auditors rather than a county Commissioner. (N. C. Archives). But vhat about the statement that William and Johnson fought under General Pinckney? There vere only tvo Pinckneys in the Revolutionary War vho became generals, the brothers Charles Cotes- OS)

41 31 worth Pinckney and Thomas Pinckney of Charleston, S. C. They both reached the rank of general very late in the war, but in later years were referred to as "General Pinckney". There were several occasions when William, a North Carolina resident, could have fought under one of the Pinckney si in the first defense of Charleston in 1776 (Johnson too young to have fought in that battle); in the second defense of Charleston in the spring of 1760 (William would have been taken prisoner but could veil have been released); or at the battle of Camden in August 1780, vhere Thomas Pinckney vas serving as aide to General Gates* (See Supp., pp ). In any event, it is a little odd that in recounting the military service of a North Carolina soldier, someone chose to mention General Pinckney rather than a North Carolina officer. The reference does, hovever, add authenticity to the account* since it is unlikely that someone vould invent service under a South Carolina general B. William Richmond Spencer's Story. Another great-grandson of William Spencer vas a William Richmond Spencer, descended from William's son Seymore ( ). William Richmond, vho vas born in Tennessee and lived the latter part of his life in Mississippi, kept a "Day-Book", vhich has been copied for us by his grandson Richmond Van Spencer of Whitehall* Pa. Part of the book, headed "A partial record of the Spencer families and their connections", contained the followingi "William Spencer's father came from England to the United States About His sons were Johnson, Elijah, Seymore, Elias. William Spencer's father had a brother named Joe Spencer. Johnson Spencer died in N. C. Elijah died in Tenn. He /_Elijah_/ had 3 sons named Roberson, Branson, Harbort." Again some comment si (1) William's father may have come to the united States from England, but it seems highly unlikely that he did so "about 1774". William was in Anson County by 1763, and probably in Tuckahoe by If Richard Spencer of the Trent River was his father, Richard vas in Craven County, N. C. by (2) Most of the remainder of the quoted passage, as veil as other information contained in the "Day-Book", vas accurate. Only three sons of Elijah are named, vhereas there vere actually six, but that kind of omission is not surprising. (3) The statement that William's father "had a brother named Joe Spencer" is considered important. Again, it is the kind of remark one vould scarcely invent. It has been asked, vith reason, vhy William's father's brother vas singled out for remembrance, vhen his father vas not even named. One possible answer is that the Joseph Spencer in the Montgomery County area was William's uncle, the only one of his generation to come to that part of the world, and hence the only one vhose name vas remembered. That is of course only a guess, and Joseph could have been a brother or cousin. C. The Randolph County Study. One of William's great great great grandchildren, de- (37)

42 3i scended from William's son Johnson and his Randolph County offspring, did a very useful study of the later Randolph County family, starting with an autobiography written by one of William's great grandsons named Alexander Spencer. The study is to be found in the Randolph County Library in Asheboro. Its opening portion consists of general remarks, quite disconnected, about various early Spencers in England and America, with no particular effort to tie them together or link them vith the Randolph County family. Then comes the folloving i "I have heard that ve are descendants of three brothers that settled one in Maryland, one in Virginia, and the other in North Carolina". This statement, so general and undocumented, and so typical of much "family information" that creeps into genealogy, seems to the vriter of little weight unless and until confirmed by specific reeords. D. Statements by Descendants of John Spencer. William's Presumed Brother. One of John Spencer's great-grandsons was an Alvis Harper Hortensius spencer; vho married Susan Elizabeth Anthony Burriss. They had a son named William Micajah Spencer (father of the William M. Spencer of Birmingham, Ala. mentioned on p. 10 hereof). In 1836 William Micajah compiled a "Family Record", vhich stated that John's son Jesse Spencer "moved from Maryland to Spartanburg, S. Carolina, thence to Greene County, Ala,, in 1816 and died there and buried at Beulah Church in said county". In about 1910, Mrs. Susan (Burriss) Spencer vrpte a biographical sketch of her husband Alvis H.H. Spencer, in vhich she said that her husband's grandfather, the same Jesse Spencer, emigrated from Maryland to Spartanburg District, South Carolina, and from there removed to Greene County, Ala. She vas perhaps simply copying the information provided by her son William Micajah. In any event, these statements that John's son Jesse came from Maryland to Spartanburg, S. C. are evidently incorrect. They ignore the statement on Jesse's headstone that he vas a native of North Carolina, and they ignore the undoubted fact that he vas vith his parents in Anson County, N. C. from at least 1765 until he moved to Spartanburg after his father's death. Furthermore, if the John Spencer of Tuckahoe vas the John of Anson County, Jesse - born in must have first seen the light of day in Craven County or Johnston County* N. C Nevertheless, the statements do raise the possibility that Jesse's parents came from Maryland. E. The "Tradition" of a Connection vith the Washington Family. The vriter has been told of a "word of mouth" tradition in the family, said to have come from tvo independent branches of William's descendants, to the effect that William's ancestors ovned landed estates in England, and vere kin to the ancestors of Seorge Washington. There is no solid evidence to support this idea, but one theory developed at the end of this compilation, involving certain assumptions, vould be compatible vith it. P. History of Alabama, by Thomas M. Oven. This source is not "family information", except that it was unearthed by Mr. William M. Spencer of Birmingham, Ala. He (38)

43 cites a biographical sketch of William Micajah Spencer (son of Alvis H. H. Spencer) appearing in Vol. IV, History of Alabama, by Thomas M. Oven, p The sketch_statedi "The earliest ancestry /_of William Macajah Spencer 7 came from Scotland and England, the great-grandparents settling in Virginia". William Macajah's great-grandfather vas Jesse Spencer, son of John, and Jesse certainly did not come from England or Scotland and settle in Virginia. Again, hovever, the statement might have had some validity if applied to William Macajah's more remote ancestors. We leave the foregoing "family information" vith the thought that much of it is conflicting and confusing, and some of it clearly wrong, but that it may contain some bits and pieces that viil fit vith other facts and ultimately make sense. Three points stand out. William Spencer vas thought to have been in vhat finally became Randolph County before he settled in Montgomery. William's father vas said to have had a brother named "Joe Spencer". And someone said that William and "Johnsey" had fought under General Pinckney, a south Carolinian, vhereas one might have expected to hear about a North Carolina commanding officer. 31 (39)

44 VIII. THE EARLY SPENCERS OF SOUTH CAROLINA. Given the fact that John Spencer of Anson County, N. C. apparently inherited land from the Richard Spencer of present-day Fairfield County, S. C, one of the writer's early efforts was to explore the South Carolina records for Spencers of the 17th and 18th centuries who might have been related to that Richard. The results were published privately on 1 May 1979 in a book entitled "The Early Spencers of South Carolina".* The pertinent highlights brought out in the book are as follovs (documentation given in the book is not repeated here)i (1) The first known Spencer immigrant to South Carolina was a man named Oliver Spencer, who arrived in 1671 or at the latest (The first English settlers had landed in April 1670.) (2) Oliver and his wife (unidentified) had several sons and apparently at least tvo daughters, probably all born veil before Certain or probable sons werei (a) Oliver, Jr., who settled in Christ Church Parish. (b) Alexander Spencer, vho settled on James Island. (c) Anthony Spencer, vho settled in St. George's Parish. (d) Joseph Spencer, Sr., vho settled in the Parish of St. James, Santee, on the south banks of the Santee River, tovards it mouth, in an area knovn as French Santee. There is a good deal of information on the descendants and probable descendants of Oliver's sons listed above. It viil be mentioned herein only where it is considered relevant to our present story. (3) We are principally interested in the family of Joseph Spencer, Sr. We first hear of him in a warrant for land in Craven County (which included the Parish of St. James, Santee) dated 27 December The grant to Joseph apparently issued pursuant to that varrant vas dated 15 September 1705, and showed the land to be on the south shore of the Santee River. He later acquired other land in the area. At his death in December 1729, Joseph owned 600 acres of land, 500 on the south side of the Santee River, and 100 on an island in the river opposite his mainland property. (4) Joseph had a wife Elizabeth and the following children, the sons given in the approximate order of their birtht * The book has been lodged with the North Carolina State Library in Raleigh, N. C, the South Carolina State Library in Columbia, S. C, the South Carolina Historical society in Charleston, S. C, the Genealogical' Society of Utah, 50 East North Temple, Salt Lake City, Utah 84150, the Spencer Family Association, c/o Grayce Al sterda, 915 W. White Gate Drive, Mt. Prospect, , the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Library, Charlotte, N. C. and the Randolph County Library, Asheboro, N. C. (41)

45 H3L (a) Joseph Spencer, Jr. (b) John Spencer. (c) Richard Spencer. (d) Thomas Spenoer. (e) Francis Spencer. (f) Elizabeth Spencer. (5) We now come to the coincidence referred to earlier herein - or was it a coincidence? Some time before 24 February 1717, a Ralph Jerman appeared in South Carolina.* The name appeared at various times in South Carolina as Jermain, Jermaine, Germane, Jermyn, German and Garman, and may later have turned into Jarman, as it did in North Carolina. Further facts about Ralph Jermant (a) On 19 January 1720/21 Ralph married a Margaret Graham in St. Philip's Parish in Charleston. (b) On 14 February 1721/22, Ralph Jerman, then of Craven County, S*-C, bought 350 acres of land on the Santee River. The property consisted of 250 acres on the south bank of the River, and 100 acres on an island in the river opposite the mainland property. Both tracts bounded on the west on the land owned by Joseph Spencer, Sr.. (c) Ralph had two children, a son named Edward, said to have been born on 22 February 1722 /Cnew or old style?_7, and a daughter named Maty. (d) The Jermans were at the very least good friends of the Spencers. Ralph and Margaret Jerman witnessed Joseph Spencer, Sr.'s will dated 30 November Ralph was appointed as one of the appraisers of Joseph's Estate. On 13 April 1733 Ralph and Margaret sold 625 acres of land on the North Branch of Black River /_in Craven County, north of the Santee_7**, and one of the witnesses was Mary Spencer /_wife of Joseph Spencer, Jr._/. Ralph witnessed a deed to John Spencer, Joseph Sr.'s son, dated 1 March 1736/7, another from Joseph Spencer, Jr. and John Spencer dated 5-6 July 1737, and still another from John Spencer dated July Ralph's son Edward, and Thomas Spencer, Jr. (son of Joseph Spencer, Jr.) witnessed the marriage of Elizabeth Fitch (daughter of Joseph Spencer, Jr.'s wife Mary by her second marriage) on 21 February (e) Ralph "German" of the Parish of St. James, Santee left a will dated 29 December 1749, probated 23 February (f) There are indications, but no proof, that Ralph may have been of Huguenot descents (i) The name was often rendered "Jermain" or "Germane". (ii) Ralph eleeted to make- his home- in French Ralph signed a petition, officially dated- 24 February 1717, for the Crown to take over the province from the Proprietors. Many of the signatures were affixed before the official date. **Hdw Ralph and. Margaret obtained this land is not known. Perhaps one or the other inherited it. (42)

46 Santee, where Huguenots were the first settlers, and long remained the predominant element in the community. (iii) Ralph himself was well accepted among his Huguenot neighbors. His son married twice, and his daughter three times,* and all 5 spouses were from Huguenot families. (iv) As narrated earlier, a sizeable group of Huguenots settled in Manakintown, Va. in , where one of their principal ministers was Claude Philippe de Richebourg. In or shortly before 1707 a majority of them moved to the Trent River area in North Carolina. Contrary to what is said by some chroniclers, de Richebourg did not accompany them, staying with the remainder of the Manakintown congregation. However, in 1711 or 1712 the congregation of the Huguenot church in St. James, Santee, whose minister had retired, requested de Richebourg to come to South Carolina to be their minister. He complied, arriving in August Respected authorities have said that he brought some of his congregation with him. The writer has yet to find documentation of that point, but it does raise the question whether Ralph "Jermain", or his parents with their family, could have come to South Carolina at that time. There are lists purporting to name the members of the Manakintown colony. No "Jermain" has been discovered among them, but one list does include a "Grahame", reminding us that Ralph Jerman married a Margaret Graham. (v) Could Ralph Jerman of French Santee have been related to Robert Jerman of the Trent River area in North Carolina? One would have to say that it was possible, although we lack anything resembling proof. We have the fact that both settled in areas to which Huguenots had come, both were'sometimes called "Jermain", and both had Spencer neighbors. Ralph could have been the son of one of the other Jarmans found in Maryland, possibly Robert Jarman of Baltimore County, Md., who had a wife named Mary and left a will dated 16 December 1722, probated 7 March 1722/3. (See Appendix AA, p. (vii). Ralph Jerman called his only daughter Mary, although his wife was named Margaret, and may have had a sister named Mary who married Joseph Spencer, Jr. (see below). Both those facts suggest his mother may have been named Mary. Robert Jarman of Baltimore County had 6 children, of whom he identified only 2 in his will. (6) So much for Ralph Jerman of French.Santee. Let us now see what happened to the 5 sons of Joseph Spencer, Sr. (a) Joseph Spencer.- Jr. Joseph, Jr., thought to have been born in or before 1703, married a lady named Mary some time before 13 April They had three children: Mary, Martha, and Thomas (the latter later called Thomas, Jr. to distinguish him from his uncle, who was called Thomas Spencer, Sr.) There is a good deal of cir cumstantial evidence, but not direct proof, that Joseph, Jr.'s wife Mary was a sister of Ralph Jerman. In December 1730, about a year after their father's death, Joseph Spencer, Jr. and his *"The Early Spencers of South Carolina" has Mary Jerman married twice, to a James Belin and a David Boisseau. Since publication, it has been learned that she married as her third husband a Samuel Bonneau, after whom her brother Edward named a son Samuel. Hi (43)

47 brother John iointlv bouoht 500 acros of land on the south side of the Santee River adjoining Ralph Je.rman on the.west. Later John Spencer, who had inherited Joseph, Sr.'s 600 acres under his father's will, together with his wife Dorothy, assigned their interest in the 500 acres to Joseph, Jr., by a writing on the back of the joint deed. On 29-30"May 1735 Joseph, Jr. and John mortgaged the 500 acres, and on 5-6 July 1737 they sold it, using part of the proceeds to pay off the mortgage. (In another week and a half, John was to sell the 600 acres he had inherited from his father.) Meanwhile, Joseph, Jr. had obtained a warrant for 66 acres in the same vicinity, the grant to which issued on 2 February 1737/8. Between then and 22 February 1741/2 Joseph, Jr. died, apparently intestate. The inventory of his estate was taken on the latter date. (b) John Spencer. John was born in or before As indicated above, although he was the second son of Joseph Spencer, Sr., the latter's will left the* 600 acre home, place to him, with the proviso that if he died without issue the property was to go to his three younger brothers, Richard, Thomas and Francis (no share to Joseph, Jr.). On 14 January 1731/2, John married Dorothy McGregor in St. Philip's Parish in Charleston. Dorothy was the daughter of a Daniel McGregor, another early settler in French Santee, who had at one time owned some of the land that later found its way into Joseph Spencer, Sr.'s ownership. We have no record of children born to John and Dorothy (church records for the appropriate period are missing), but they must have had at least one child and perhaps more. On July 1737 John and Dorothy sold- the 600 acre home place.- Because-of the proviso in John's father's will about his dying without issue, he could not have conveyed good title to the property unless he had had at least one child born after Joseph, Sr.'s death*. After selling the Santee property, John and Dorothy vanish into thin air. There are a few later records of unidentified John Spencers in South Carolina, but none referring to Dorothy, or tying in any other way with Joseph, Sr.'s son John. (c) Richard Spencer. We have no way to determine Richard Spencer's birth date, but he was pretty clearly younger than Joseph, Jr. and John, and perhaps considerably younger. On 16 August 1733, some 3 1/2 years after Joseph, Sr.'s death, precepts issued to survey land for both Richard Spencer and his brother Francis, 150 acres each. The surveyor's certificate, dated 20 September 1733, showed both tracts on Wambaw Creek, a tributary of the Santee River, and adjoining each other. It was 8 November 1740 before Richard and Francis took out their grants to the Wambaw Creek property. On 1 April 1749 Richard and Francis borrowed L153, 10 s., from Benjamin Smith and John Palmer, Charleston merchants, secured by a note for L307, due 1 January 1749/50. As we shall see, the note was not paid when due. On 15 July 1751, Richard and Francis borrowed fc210 from James Michie of Charleston, secured by a note for fa420, due 24 July 1751 /^sic_y, and also by a mortgage on Richard's property, not Francis's. Michie brought suit against Richard and John on the note, and recovered judgment on 25 July 1751 (!) for the full fc420, plus another sum for interest and damages. Some time between 25 July 1751 and 6 April (44)

48 1756 Richard Spencer died. On the latter date a writ issued against Francis Spencer, as the surviving obligor on the note to Smith and Palmer, explaining that Richard was deceased. * Richard Spencer died intestate and without issue or, apparently, a surviving wife. His Wambaw Creek property descended to his nephew Thomas Spencer, Jr., son of Joseph Spencer, Jr., which tells us that, if John Spencer was still living or had issue living, Joseph, Jr. was the oldest brother, a fact born out by the order of bequests and other references-in Joseph, Sr.'s will. Thomas Spencer, Jr. sold Richard's Wambaw Creek property on May (d) Thomas Spencer. Sr. Our only clue as to Thomas's birth date is that he was grouped with Richard, Francis and Elizabeth in Joseph, Sr.'s will, and named between Richard and Francis in that grouping. Our only other*.records d Thomas are dated 21 November 1743, 2-3 March 1757, and 11 January There is some reason to suspect that-he was alive on 21 February 1760, but had died or left the area by 8 October There are no indications that he ever owned real estate, or was married or had children. (e) Francis Spencer. From the grouping in Joseph, Sr.'s will, it seems probable that Francis was the youngest of the brothers. If he was 21 when he obtained his precept for his Wambaw Creek land, he would have been born in about Apart from the records already discussed under Richard Spencer above, we know that on 23 February 1747 /C8_/, Francis Spencer married Mary Richards in St. Philip's Parish in Charleston.** Mary was then about 34, perhaps a widow. So far as is known, Francis and Mary did not have children. On 2-3 March 1757 Francis and Mary Speneer sold their Wambaw Creek property. On 10 January 1758 Francis was buried in St. Philip's Parish. The appraisal of his estate was filed on 7 July (7) The final point to be made about the Spencers of French Santee is that the 600 acres sold by John Spencer, and the 350 acres owned by Ralph Jerman, wound up in the possession of one of their Huguenot neighbors, a Daniel Horry, Jr., grandson of Elias Horry, Sr., the head of the prominent Horry family tn South Carolina. (Horry County was named after" one of Elias's. descendants). Young Daniel put together the Santee River estate known as "Hampton", which included the spencer and Jerman land. * "The Early Spencers of South Carolina" had Richard alive on 2-3 March 1757, because of a deed reference to him as the owner of the land adjoining Francis. That reference was evidently posthumous. For the information about the law suits described in the text, see S. C. Archives, Court of Common Pleas, Judgment Rolls Box 31B, #57A, and Smith and Palmer vs. Francis Spencer, Judgment Rolls 1756, computer code A-0187A-00, both discovered since publication. **Probably the Mary Richards who was a "surety" at a Spencer baptism in Christ Church Parish on 9 Nov The Spencers involved are thought to have been descendants of Oliver Spencer, Jr., presumed to have been Joseph Spencer, Sr.'s brother. (45)

49 On 15 February 1768, he married, as his second vife, Harriott Pinkney, sister of Charles Cotesvorth and Thomas Pinckney, the later Revolutionary War generals. Daniel died in 1785, but his vidov stayed on at Hampton, where-she extertained George Washington on his southern tour in A relatively short distance dovn the Santee River from Hampton was a plantation called Fairfield, vhich Thomas Pinckney acquired in 1779 through marriage to a lady named Motte. He later ovned a second plantation in the same vicinity. That completes the facts about the French Santee Spencers vhich are essential for present purposes. From them it is possible to construct the following theoryt (1) John and Dorothy Spencer, vho vere married on 14 January 1731/2, had at least 3 sons, named Richard, John and William, and perhaps a fourth named Joseph. (2) In 1739 John's brother Richard heard through Ralph Jerman that Robert Jerman had settled in the Trent River area of North Carolina. He decided to try his luck there too, and vent to North Carolina vhere he obtained a grant for 100 acres near the Trent River, leaving his Wambav Creek property to be managed by his brother Francis. (Francis handled the taking out of their grants in 1740). In 1743 Richard gave up on his North Carolina venture and returned to Wambav Creek. (3) John Spencer (and perhaps Dorothy) died shortly after they sold the 600 acre family home place on July Their sons vere raised.by their uncles, first, perhaps, by Joseph Spencer, Jr. (hence the later statement by a descendant that William's father had "a brother named Joe Spencer"). After Joseph* Jr.'s death in late 1741 or early 1742 they could possibly have stayed with Francis. (4) In 1749 young Richard, then,16 to 18 years old, decided to strike out for himself. He followed the old trading route up the south side of the Santee- to Saxe-Gotha, vhere he met John Pearson, who encouraged him to apply for a grant of land on the Little River. While taking his time about clearing the land and getting it in shape for habitation, he lived on the Raiford Creek place he had bought from John Pearson. (Richard would not have been the only one from French Santee to try settling in the present-day Fairfield County area. On 11 October 1755 a Richard Horry of Craven County obtained a grant of 300 acres "on the North East side of Broad River on a branch thereof called Jacksons Creek". Jackson's Creek was the first important stream below the East Fork of Little River (see map p. 14), Richard Horry and his wife Rebeckah sold the property to John Winn on July 1768, by a deed witnessed by a James Horry. Richard Horry had to have been a member of the Horry family of French Santee, perhaps a son of Elias Horry, Jr.) (5) In 1757 young John- and William Spencer decided to strike out for the area in North Carolina where their uncle Richard had been, and where there were still Jermans. Perhaps their decision was triggered by William reaching- age 21. Or perhaps it had to do with Francis Spencer's sale of his Wambaw Creek land. (Francis sold on 2-3 March John and William obtained their warrants for the Tuckahoe property on 17 May 1757.) (46)

50 (6) When Richard Spencer of the Fairfield County, S. C. area died some time before 20 October 1771, his land descended to John Spencer, then of Anson County, N. C, as the oldest surviving brother. (7) The Joseph Spencer who appeared in the Montgomery County, N. C. area was either a brother of Richard, John and William, or a cousin from South Carolina. The foregoing theory is of course just that, a theory only, with some factors supporting it and others arguing against it. Points in favor: (1) The probable birth dates of sons of John and Dorothy Spencer would fit the probable ages of William and John Spencer of the Montgomery County, N. C. area quite nicely. (2) It would have been entirely natural for John and Dorothy to name sons Richard, John, William and Joseph. The sons of Joseph, Sr. of French Santee included, as we have seen, a Richard, John and Joseph. And the name William was widely used among other descendants of Oliver Spencer, Sr. found elsewhere in South Carolina. (3) If the Richard Spencer of the Fairfield County area was from South Carolina, he almost had to have been a member of the French Santee family, and a son of John and Dorothy. He was clearly not the Richard Spencer of Wambaw creek, who died before 6 April 1756, and whose land descended to Thomas Spencer, Jr., son of Joseph, Jr. He could not have been a son of Joseph Spencer, jr., since, if he had been, his land would also have descended to Thomas Spencer, Jr.* He could not have been a son of Richard, Thomas, Sr. or Francis Spencer unless John and William of North Carolina were also sons of the same man, because - again - his land would have descended to Thomas Spencer, Jr. unless it went to his own oldest brother. We know that Richard of Wambaw Creek died without issue. And the evidence suggests that neither Thomas, Sr. nor Francis had any children, much less 3 or 4 sons. The writer knows of only one other Richard Spencer in South Carolina in the general time frame with which we are dealing. That was a sen of Anthony Spencer of St. George's Parish, Berkeley County, who in turn is thought to have been a son of Oliver Spencer, Sr. That Richard, born no later than 1721 and probably before, lived in or near Dorchester, Berkeley County (northwest of Charleston, oh the southeast side of the Ashley River, across from Beech Hill in Colleton County.) Some time before 12 February 1740/_41_7 he married Sarah Stiles, daughter of a Colleton County resident who owned property in Beech Hill. They had a son John, probably an only child, and were apparently divorced before 3 July 1749, when the will of Rebekah Stiles /_Sarah's step-mother_j referred to Sarah as Richard's "former" wife. On 5 March 1749/50 Richard Spencer "of St. George's Parish, planter" sold 200 acres of Berkely County land he had Thomas, Jr. was alive on 31 October 1771, when he married his second wife in Prince George Parish, S. C. That would have been 11 days after John and Susannah Spencer of Anson Co., N. C. sold the Fairfield County property to John Winn. Hi (47)

51 18 inherited from his father. No wife joined. On 27 Sept he witnessed the will of a resident of St, Paul's Parish, Colleton County, who owned property in Beech Hill and Jorchester. As of 5 Feb. 1757, Richard had moved to Newport, Ga.. on that date Sarah, "Wife of Richard Spencer of Newport in the Colony of Georgia", acknowledged a previous 1757 indenture whereby Richard and Sarah gave to Mary Wright /sister or half-sister of sarah?_7 162 acres in Colleton County. (S. C. Court of Common Pleas MinutesT 3. C. Archives Code 4/1/4/1.40). Clearly this Richard Spencer could not have been the one in Fairfield County, S. C, hor the one on the Trent River, N. C. from 3 March 1739 to 22 Jecember (This Richard was a defendant in law suits in Berkely County, S. C. in and See Moses Mitchell vs. rfichard Spenceri Thomas Langley vs. Anthony Sponeer ot al«i John Jones vs. Anthony dpencer et als, 3. c. Archivos, Box 23B, Roll 29A, 12/1/12/4.20; Box 2313, Roll 34A, 15/1/15/5.25; Box 2GB, Roll 2A, 6/ 1/6/2.10). (4) If Richard, John and William were sons of John and Dorothy Spencer, William's father had a brother named Joseph Spencer, Jr., the "Joe Spencer" referred to in the family information. (5) The theory suggested would give us an excellent reason why William Spencer might have been detailed to serve with Thomas Pinckney, and why he or his family mentioned that fact rather than referring to a North Carolina commanding officer. At some point during the war, William may have encountered Thomas Pinckney personally,* and, if he was indeed from French Santee, have disclosed that his family's property had been absorbed into Hampton Plantation, just a short distance upstream from Fairfield Plantation. The weak points in the theory might be summarized as follows: (1) Although John and Dorothy Spencer had to have had at least one child born after Joseph Spencer, Sr.'s death, we have no proof that they had sons named Richard, John, William or Joseph. (2) The notion that Richard Spencer of Wambaw Creek went to North Carolina for.several years and then returned hardly overwhelms one with its probability. It becomes somewhat more convincing- if we assume that Joseph Jr.'s wife Mary was Ralph Jerman's sister, and that Ralph Jerman and Robert Jerman of the Trent River area were related. (3) While young men 16 to 18 years of age sometimes did assume responsibilities, and become landowners, in those days, it seems a little questionable to assume that young Richard Spencer, the supposed son of John and Dorothy, started out for Saxe-Gotha by himself when he could have been no more than 18. (4) While the names Richard, John, William and Joseph fit the French Santee family and their South Carolina kin admirably, the same cannot be said for the names given to their sons by William and John Spencer of the Montgomery County area. William might have Between 1776 and 1778 Thomas Pinckney spent several months recruiting "in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina". (Dictionary of American Biography). (48)

52 borrowed the name Elias from the Horry family, but where did he get Johnson, Elijah and Seymore? The name Seymore or Seymour has been found in South Carolina records, but in no context suggesting a link with the Spencers.* And what caused John to name sons Jesse, Benjamin and Samuel? Those names, also, are unfamiliar in South Carolina. Perhaps the distaff side had a lot to do vith picking names. (5) Nothing in the Spencer background in South Carolina explains the identity of the "Jarrus" Spencer who vitnessed one of John Spencer's deeds to his Johnston County property. On balance, the case for concluding that William and John Spencer of the Montgomery County area came from French santee remains a possibility, but its weak points ask us to please find another answer. *Some of William's descendants have suggested the name came from the Seymour family in England, which produced, among other notables, Jane Seymour, third vife of Henry VIII. No support for such an idea has been found. Frederick, 4th Earl Spencer, married (2nd) Adelaide Seymour in 1854, and John Poyntz, 5th Earl Spencer, married Charlotte Seymour in 1858, but this vas long after "our" William's birth. (49)

53 IX. SOME OTHER NORTH CAROLINA SPENCERS. SI Leaving the French Santee theory as neither proved nor disproved, we turn for possible help to the records left by certain other Spencer families in North Carolina. Time has not permitted anything approaching a comprehensive investigation of all the numerous Spencers to be found in North Carolina in the 18th and 19th centuries. The ones chosen for study have been selected because geography or other leads indicated they might have something to do with the Spencers who came to present-day Montgomery County. The results have been essentially negative, suggesting that we must look outside of North Carolina for an alternative to the French Santee theory. There follows a digest of what has been learned to date about Spencers within North Carolina. A. Descendants of Benjamin S. Spencer of Randolph County. N. C. In a Benjamin S. Spencer was in a part of Rowan County, N. C. which later became Randolph County. At some point he married a young lady named Margaret (Peggy) Cox, who came from a Quaker family of. London Grove, Chester County, Pa., and later of Menalien Township, in what is now Adams County, Pa. Margaret had come to present-day Randolph County before her marriage to Benjamin, which apparently took place in 1771 or before. Benjamin S. (who may not have been a Quaker) and Margaret had children, of whom one was an Isaac Spencer, born 20 March 1772.* From Isaac's children a long line of Spencers descended, most of whom seem to have stayed in Randolph County, and. many of whom were Quakers. Apart from the geographical proximity, there is no evidence to suggest that Benjamin S. Spencer was related to the William, John and Joseph of the Montgomery County area. Such skimpy facts as we have would lead us to think that he, as well as Margaret, came from Pennsylvania. Word of mouth family tradition placed him as a descendant of the New England Spencers, a multitudinous line headed by four brothers who immigrated to Massachusetts in the early 1630's. (See The American Genealogist, Vol.'s 27-30). No support for that tradition has yet been found. For details about this line of Randolph County Spencers, see DOWS, Appendix A, and Supp., pp *0ther unidentified Spencers who might have been children of Benjamin S. and Margarett (1) John Spencer, apparently a single man, who was in Randolph County in 1789, 1790 and 1797, and in the Montgomery County census in 1800 (alternatively, this could have been a son of John Spencer, brother of "our" William); (2) Benjamin Spencer, whose only appearance was in the 1800 census for Montgomery County, where he was listed with 1 male and 1 female 26-45, 1 male and 1 female 10-16, and 1 male and 1 female under 10 (possibly a son of William's brother also, although the latter Benjamin was in Spartanburg District, S. C. in the 1790 census, with a household that doesn't fit the foregoing one very well). (51)

54 B. Judge Samuel Spencer of Anson County, N. C. The most prominent Spencer in 18th century North Carolina was Judge Samuel Spencer, who made his home in Anson County, on the west side of the Pee Dee River, some 10 miles east of Wadesboro. Judge Samuel, born in Connecticut on 21 January 1734, was a descendant of Gerard Spencer, one of the 4 brothers who came to Massachusetts in the 1630*s, and whose ancestors have been traced back to the mid-1500's, when they lived in Edworth, and then Stotfold, Bedfordshire, England.(-foAg«S«u*ue4?ScwM** liw^wl* <Hr«.nl l ) Samuel attended college at Nassau Hall, the forerunner of Princeton University, graduating in Soon thereafter he came south. We first pick him up in North Carolina in November 1764, when he became a Justice of the Peace for Anson County. On 2<=:May 1766 he married Philippa CSybil) Pegues, daughter of a prominent Huguenot planter named Claudius Pegues who lived over the line in Chesterfield County, S. C.. Samuel became county clerk, in which position he antagonized the "Regulators", later became an officer in the provincial military, and fought on the royal governor's side against the Regulators at the battle of Alamance. When the winds of Revolution started bloving, however, he became an ardent supporter of the colonist cause. He vas a delegate to the first provincial Congress at Nev Bern in 1774, vhich set up local Committees of Correspondence, and decided on a boycott of British goods. He served on the Anson County Committee of Correspondence, and spoke for the boycott throughout his district. In August 1775 he was again a delegate to the Provincial Congress at Hillsborough, which created a military organization, and in later sessions virtually ran the state government. Samuel became a colonel of the Anson County forces, Chairman of the Anson County Committee of Safety, and finally a member of the 13-man Provincial Council which took responsibility for governing the local Committees of Safety. In March 1776 Samuel resigned his colonelcy to concentrate on political affairs. By early 1777 he was a district judge, and that fall he was one of the 3 men elected as judges of the newly created Superior Court, the state's highest judicial body. In July 1788, at the state convention in Hillsborough, he actively opposed the adoption of the proposed Federal Constitution, helping to block its passage in its then form. At a second convention in Fayetteville in 1789, the Federalists won out, but not until a committee was formed, which included Samuel, to draft a bill of rights. Meanwhile Samuel had been acquiring land, and raising a family. He and Sybil had a son William S. (for Samuel) Spencer, whom we find in the Anson County census for 1800 and 1810, and as the grantee of land in Anson County in 1811, 1817 and November They also had tvo daughters! Mary Pegues Spencer, born 25 June 1770, vho married Isaac Jackson vhen she vas twelve years old (they later moved to Huntsville, Ala., where they raised a family and Isaac died on 13 June 1831); and Nancy Spencer, who married a Pegues cousin. Samuel had a considerably younger halfbrother named Calvin Spencer, who appeared in Charleston, S. C. during the Revolutionary War; served in the S. C. Continental Line as a Captain, and then as Assistant Deputy Quarter Master General for the State of South Carolina, vith the rank of Captain; had a fling at privateering against the British for a vhile; married Rebecca Ford of Georgetovn, S. C. on 22 August 1782; and shortly (52)

55 thereafter moved to Thompson Creek, near Cheraw, Chesterfield County, S. C. where he developed a large plantation. Calvin and Rebecca had a large family. One son, Samuel, later moved to North Carolina where he acquired some or all of the land that had belonged to Judge Samuel, and left a will dated 17 February 1859, probated in the January term of court Calvin himself died in Chesterfield County in January Meanwhile Judge Samuel had died in April 1793 (not 1794 as some reports say) as the result of an infection caused by the bite of a turkey. The foregoing account has largely been documented in other studies, including The American Genealogist, Vol.'s 27-30, and a biography of Judge Samuel put out by Princeton University. The Colonial Records of North Carolina are replete with references to Judge Samuel, and the North Carolina Archives in Raleigh have considerable information about him, including some interesting letters he wrote to his half-brother Calvin, which prove the existence of his daughter Nancy, and discuss Calvin's privateering ventures. In view of the wealth of material, it has been thought unnecessary to document Judge Samuel's activities here. In all the evidence reviewed in connection with Judge Samuel Spencer, there is not the slightest suggestion of a relationship with the William, John and Joseph Spencer of the Montgomery County area. C. The Spencers of Hyde County. N. C. In the 18th and early 19th centuries, there seem to have been far more Spencers in Hyde County, oh the eastern coast, than in any other county of North Carolina. Because it was relatively close to the old Craven County (more accessible by sea than overland), it appeared a likely locality in which to look for tne origins of William and John Spencer of Tuckahoe. The writer has therefore undertaken a study in depth of the Hyde County Spencers, with extensive and invaluable aid from Mr. R. S. Spencer, Jr., Box 159, Engelhard, N. C , supplemented by a masterful index to Hyde County cemeteries, entitled "In Memory Of compiled by Mr. Spencer and Miss Martha Rebecca Swindell. The results of the study appear in Appendix A hereto. To summarizes (1) Almost all, if not all, the Spencers in Hyde County were of the same family. Some eventually moved to close-by areas such as Tyrell County and the present Craven County, and a few even went as far afield as Caswell and Orange County, N. C, Illinois, and Tennessee. By and large, however, the Hyde County family stayed pretty much in the general area where they had started, at least compared to other North Carolina Spencers. (2) The first known ancestor of the Hyde County family was a Thomas Spencer, whose origin is unknown, but who was born before 1700, probably well before. We find him in Currituck Pre- (53) S3

56 cinct, N. C. (which included the present Lake Landing Township of Hyde County) in March He diod in what is now Hyde County short ly before 4 November (3) Thomas Spencer had a son named William, born in an unknown place before 1715, and probably before William had a» wife, unidentified, living on 14 February They had a large family, apparently including 7, and possibly 8, sons. The 7 certain or almost certain sons were (not necessarily in order of birth): Thomas Spencer, born by 1733 or before. John Spencer, born by 1733 or before. Edward Spencer, born by 1726 or before. Richard Spencer, born between 1725 and Died in Hyde County in September Benjamin Spencer, born between 1725 and Nathan Spencer, born between 1725 and Christopher Spencer, born between 1725 and There may have been an 8th son, William Spencer, Jr., but his existence is quite doubtful. If there was a William, Jr., he would have been at least 16, and probably 21 or over, on 27 September The father William Spencer is believed to have died in or shortly before (4) From William's sons came a great abundance of descendants, whose lives are chronicled to the best of the writer's ability in Appendix A. (5) Nowhere among the Hyde County Spencers do we find men who could have been the Richard Spencer of the Trent River or the Fairfield County area of South Carolina, the William and John of Tuckahoe or the Montgomery County area, or the Joseph Spencer of the latter area. The family did use the names William, John, Richard, Benjamin and Samuel, but never the name Joseph until well into the 1800's. (6) As already indicated, the origins of the first Thomas Spencer are unknown. We have the following facts that are tantalizing, but really prove nothing: (a) Curiously, there was another Thomas Spencer in Currituck Precinct in He was of Roanoke in that year, had a wife named Sarah, and died before 13 October 1725, when Sarah, his widow and administratrix, sold a tract of his land. There is nothing to show that the surviving Thomas was related to this Thomas. It seems doubtful that the surviving Thomas was his son, since Sarah was appointed administratrix, and was able to convey good title to his land without being joined by the second Thomas. (b) The very first Spencer known to the writer to have been in North Carolina vas a John Spencer, who died in Albemarle County before 24 January 1694/5. His administrators were a Robert Kitching and his wife Diana (John's daughter?). If Thomas had been John's son, one would normally expect that he would have been appointed as administrator. (c) There is a "tradition", fanciful enough to suit (54)

57 anyone, that the Hyde County Spencers descended from a Stuart supporter vho fled England in the mid-1600's, shortly after Cromvell came to power. His name may have been Laurence, and he had a vife called Lady Rose. While en route from Virginia to Charleston, S. C. off the North Carolina coast, his vife died, and he vent ashore and buried her in a place he called the "Great Marsh". He proceeded to Charleston, but later returned, acquiring lands from Pamlico Sound to Lake Mattamuskeet. Unable to find his vife's burial place, he nevertheless settled in the vicinity of Engelhard. This "tradition" has quite a few gaping holes in it, but one wonders vhether, despite time-induced distortions of places and dates, it could contain some elements of fact. D. Early Spencers of Western North Carolina. In the latter part of the 18th century, there vere at least three, and possibly four, different Spencer families in vestern North Carolina. Their early footsteps appeared chiefly in the nov extinct Tryon County (formed out of Rovan and Mecklenburg in 1769) and Burke County (formed out of Rovan in 1777). The area included all or part of today's counties of Burke r Lincoln (formed out* of Tryon in 1778), Rutherford (formed out of Burke and Tryon in 1779), Caldwell (formed out of Burke and Wilkes in 1841), Catavba. (formed out of Lincoln in 1842), Gaston (formed out of Lincoln in 1846), and Polk (formed out of Henderson and Rutherford in 1847). What is knovn to date about these Spencer families is set forth in Appendix B attached. To summarizes (1). Family of Zachariah Spencer. As early as 2 March 1727 a Zachariah Spencer vas in Baltimore County, Maryland. He vas at least 16 at the time, and probably older, and - astonishingly - vas a native of Germany.* He married (1st) Christian Coob (or Cobb) before and (2nd) Charity Cobb, daughter of James and Rebecca Cobb, vho vas born 15 April The second marriage took place betveen 13 March 1732 and Zachariah had 8 children, including a Zachariah (bom 13 March 1732), a Charity (born 19 February 1744), and a William (born 8 April 1745). Young Zachariah and William came to Tryon County, N. C. by 26 December 1772, and their sister Charity did likewise, perhaps at the same time, and later married a Robinson. Oh 13 October 1742 the older Zachariah vas naturalized in Annapolis, Md. He left a viil dated 13 August 1782, probated in Harford County (previously Baltimore County), Md. in Our records of young Zachariah and William shove (a) Zachariah. Married Ann Pogue in Baltimore Co., Maryland, on 29 September They had four children born in There is some faint reason to suspect that his German father died before or shortly after his birth, that his mother then married a Spencer, and Zachariah grev up using the Spencer name. 55 (55)

58 sz, Baltimore Co., Md. named Elizabeth, Sarah, Ann and Zachariah, and eight more born in or after 1761 (births not recorded in the Maryland Parish where the others vere born) named Charity., John, Mary, William, James, Joseph, George Und Bibul y_isahe_lla_/. This Zachariah left a will dated 6 Ou.pUeinfenr probated the following October. We have a partial picture of what happened to his descendants which is set forth in Appendix B. (b) William Spencer. William Spencer, some 13 years younger than his brother Zachariah, apparently never married, lie had some sort of relationship with a Margaret Martin of Burke Co., by whom he had two illegitimate children. He may -have been living in Lincoln Co. in 1800, but apparently was in. Burke Co. in 1789, and probably in In any event, he vas clearly in Burke Co. at the time of the 1810 and 1820 census. In or shortly before the July 1822 session of court, William died intestate in Burke Co. (Court Minutes, p. T4XJ). tfrs estate papers show that he left no legitimate children. Nothing in the records of the Zachariah Spencer family suggests that they were in any way related to,william Spencer of Montgomery Co., N. C. (2) Family of the Reverend William Spencer and Beniamin Spencer of Burke Co., N. C.» A Methodist minister named William Spencer, and his younger brother. Revolutionary War veteran Benjamin Spencer, were in Burke Co., N. C. (Benjamin also in Lincoln Co.) during the last quarter of the 18th century and the first half of the 19th, and each raised large families there. Their father vas a John Spencer, Sr., vho had been in Bedford County in 1755, and in Orange Co., N. C. in 1760, and had apparently come to Burke Co., N. C. by 177S. John, Sr. seems to have had a brother^ William Spencer, Sr., whom ve find in Bedford Co., Va. in the, I7 r 8Qr*s> and in Montgomery Co., Va. from 1785 until his death there in Tvo of William, Sr.'s sons, William, Jr. and Levi, and his vidov Mary, came to Burke Co^ in the 1790's* What is knovn or thought probable about the first two generations of these families is shovn in chart form on pp (John Spencer, Sr. may have had more children than shovn). The total available evidence concerning them, largely having to do with the Reverend William and Benjamin Spencer and their families, is set forth in Appendix B. No discernible connection with William Spencer of Montgomery County, N. C. has been found. (3) Joseph Spencer of Burke Co., N. C. We have quite a few records of a Joseph Spencer, who was apparently in Burke County, N. C. by 1787, in Anson Co., N. c in 1790, and back in Burke by He seemed to have a sister named Hannah Spencer, whose mother was a Rebekah Watkins who later married a Joel Blackwell, Hannah Spencer eventually marrying a Samuel Chunn. Joseph Spencer married «-lady named Sarah, perhaps Sarah Tisdale, and had 7 children (all. identified). He died intestate in Burke Co. in 18*05-8, vhe» all his children were still minors. This Joseph Spencer vas plainly related in some way to Judge Samuel Spencer of Anson County, J*. C (discussed, above). (56)

59 John Spencer, Sr.? (In Bedford Co., Va. in 1755, orange Co., N. C. in 1760, and Burke Co., N. C. by Oct May have married twice.) en \ i i Rev. William Spencer (b. 19 Jan in Bedford Co., Va., in Burke Co., N. C. between 1790 and Still living in Burke 1831). Apparently 8 sons and 3 daughters* all identified. Fanny (quite possibly dau. of William Spencer, Sr.)!! I Benjamin» Spencer (b in Orange Co., N. C, in Burke Co., N. c. by 2 June 1779, in Bedford Co. va. in 1780's, in Burke and Lincoln Co.'s N. C, d. Burke Dec. 1842). i (1) Elizabeth Kelly (2) Mary Winkler. i Apparently 5 sons and 3 daughters by 1st vife, 1 son and 1 daughter by 2nd vife, all identified. t i t John Spencer, Jr. (in Burke Co. N. C. by Oct apparently married and had children, unidentified.)! I t I 5 Mollie Spencer (married Shervood Bowman, and lived in Burke Co., N. C.) t s i! Kaziahspence r (female, apparently lived in Burke Co., N. C., perhaps vith brother Rev. William Spencer). -4

60 William Spencer, Sr. (In Bedford Co., Va. in 1780 * si in Montgomery Co., va. by 1785t died there ) Mary? (as widow, moved to Burke Co., N. C. with her sons, in 1790*s). William Upen- = Sarah cer, Jr. (Sally) (in Bedford Co., Va. in 1780's; in Montgomery Co., Va. by 1785» in Burke Co., N. C. by 1794i perhaps there until maybe 1810). Levi Spencer (in Montgomery Co., Va. in late 1780*ss in Burke Co., N. C. by 1794) Frances Spencer (quite possibly Fanny who married Rev. William Spencer and lived in Burke Co., N. C). Dolly Spencer (married John French, of Bedford Co., Va.

61 While the record is murky, it vould seem that he vas a son of the Rebekah Watkins vho married Joel Blackvell, and that he and his sister Hannah vere children of a Spencer male (possibly Judge Samuel himself), vho had either divorced Rebekah or sired tvo illegitimate children by her. The other possibility is that Rebekah Watkins vas the vidov of a Spencer relative of Judge Samuel, perhaps a brother, vho had died. Hovever, the vriter has been unable to locate any male relative of Judge Samuel vho vould fit that scenario. The evidence concerning Joseph Spencer is included in Appendix B, and again no tie to William Spencer of Montgomery County, N. C. has been found. (4) William Spencer of Ireland. We have a tale, almost totally unsupported by records, that a William Spencer left Ireland in 1744, arrived in Virginia in 1745, married a Louise Spenoer, daughter of Hamilton Spencer, and moved from Virginia to various places in North Carolina (all of them probably in vhat vas once Rovan County), the last one being present-day Burke County.vhere he arrived in He is said to have had 14 children, starting vith a William born on 11 September Despite the lack of solid evidence to back up this story, it is set forth in Appendix B for completeness. If it is anywhere near being accurate, the family could not have been related to William Spencer of Montgomery County* N. C E. The Spencers of Casvell and Rockingham Counties. There is a fair amount Of evidence about a Thomas Spencer vho arrived in Casvell County, N. C. in or before 1777, and died there in 1781, leaving a family consisting of his vife Elizabeth, 3 sons named Benjamin, John and Thomas, Jr., and 5 daughters named Frances, Betty, Mary, Susannah and Barbara. Thomas apparently came from Virginia (Casvell County borders on the Virginia line, just south of Pittsylvania and Halifax counties, Va.) Thomas died in 1781; his vidov and sons moved to neighboring Rockingham County in or around 1790; and the sons disappeared from the area, perhaps as early as 1796, and certainly by the end of the first decade in the 1800's. At least tvo of the sons - John and Thomas - were in Tennessee by September The story of these Spencers is set forth in Appendix C attached. Once more, no tie with William Spencer of Montgomery County* N. C. is evident. F. Some Spencers of Surry County. N. C. A Thomas Spencer appeared in vhat is nov Lavrence county, Ky. (then Floyd County), apparently by 1819, and certainly by 1820; and a John Spencer arrived at the very same location betveen 1824 and They vere very probably related, perhaps brothers. John had spent a number of years in Surry County, N. C. Thomas had apparently been in North Carolina, perhaps Surry Co., at one time or another, and had definitely been in Charlotte Co., Va. in the early 1800's. It seems likely that John and Thomas vere sons of a James Spencer of Charlotte Co., Va., vho died there in The story, vhich includes information about other (59) 51

62 6>o Spencers in Charlotte Co., Va., and certain New England Spencers who came south, is set forth in Appendix 0. No relationship with William Spencer of Montgomery Co., N. C. is suggested by any of the evidence. X. NICHOLAS SPENCER OF VIRGINIA In the 1650*s through the 1680*s a Nicholas.Spencer played a prominent role in the Province of Virginia, serving several times as Secretary of the Colony, and for a short period as acting Governor. He came from a family of landed gentry in the Parish of Cople, Bedfordshire, England, who were probably related to the Spencer nobility of Northamptonshire. What is Known about Nicholas, his five sons William, Mottram, Nicholas, John and Francis, and a grandson William, is set forth in AppendixE. No connection with the Spencers of Montgomery County, N. C. is apparent. XI. SOME SPENCERS OF MARYLAND. It will be recalled that some descendants of John Spencer of Anson Co., N. C. thought John's son Jesse had come from Maryland. Although that seems to have been wrong, Jesse's parents might have been there, and an effort has therefore been made to identify early Spencers in that state. Time has not permitted an exhaustive search, but a good deal of help is provided by an 1892 study Mr. Theodore F. Jewell entitled "Notes of the Descendants of James.Spencer (Junior) of Spencer Hall, Talbot County, Maryland". This has been supplemented by four days of search at the Maryland Hall of Records in Annapolis. The results follow. The first definitely identified Spencer in the Talbot County family vas a James Spencer, Sr. Three accounts say he came from England and settled in Talbot County, two of them in about 1670 (one of these saying he was then about age 20), and the third about Mr. Jewell prefers the latter date, noting that James was probably born about 1677 (in a 1714 affidavit he said he was then 47), but suggests that James's father (unidentified) may have been the first of the family in Talbot County. In any event James and his vife I so be 1 are found selling land on St. Michael's River in Talbot County called "Fairplay" on 5 September In 1709/10 he had surveys made for him of two tracts in the same area, called Mainsaile and Foresaile, but he later sold these properties also. Mr. Jevell says James vas considered something of a spendthrift, and vonders hov he acquired his first land if he didn't inherit it. James is said to have had three sonst Hugh, James, Jr. and Philip. Hugh and James, Jr. left records, but nothing has been found about Philip. Mr. Jevell gives us several descendants of Hugh, and then takes us through 5 generations of James, Jr.'s descendants up through Male names included Hugh, Robert, Richard (several of them), Nicholas, Thomas, Samuel, Henry, Jonathan, Joseph, Perry, Lambert, William, Edvard, Charles and George. None of thos identified can be placed as. the Richard *t)ne Thomas, a son of James, Jr., is said to have gone "vest or south" and vas never heard of again in Maryland. Probably born , he could hardly have been the Thomas vho appeared in. Hyde Co., N. C. in the early 1700's. (60)

63 Spencer of Craven Co., N. C. or Fairfield Co., S. C, or the William, John or Joseph in vhat is today Montgomery Co., N. C. In "Old Kentt The Eastern Shore of Maryland", by Col. George A. Hanson, published in 1876, it vas stated that the first James Spencer vas of "the ancient and noble house of Spencer of (Northampton) England". Mr. Jevell commentedt "On vhat authority this statement is made I do not knov, but there vas a veil established conviction among the earlier generations that the family vas of gentle origin. There is in existence an old seal, set in silver, that has been in the family for many years, vhich bears as a crest a griff en's head armed and collared, an evident derivation from the crest of the Northampton family. Of course this crest may have been assumed by the original owner of the seal vithout any very substantial right to do so, but the crest differs sufficiently from that of the Northamptonshire family to varrant the belief that it is not a mere assumption." Mr. Jevell then goes on to remark about the similarity of names in the Talbot County family and the Northamptonshire line, mentioning Robert, Hugh, Nicholas, Thomas, James, Richard, Eleanor and Dorothy. Mr. Jewell also advances the theory that the Talbot County Spencers were related to the Nicholas Spencer family of Virginia, citing (a) the names Nicholas and Robert used by the Talbot County Spencers, and the same names used in the Virginia linei (b) the friendship betveen the Washingtons and the Northamptonshire family in England, and the friendship betveen Nicholas Spencer of Virginia and John and Laurence Washington there, coupled vith a piece of silver vith the Washington crest on it ovned by Richard Spencer, son of James Spencer, Jr. of Talbot County, Mr. Jevell also says that vhen Nicholas Spencer came to Virginia, he vas accompanied not only by John and Laurence Washington, but also by his brother Robert Spencer from Cople. Unfortunately no evidence is cited for this, and it looks to the vriter as though Robert Spencer of Cople died there in 1682 (Cople Parish Register). Nevertheless, Mr. Jevell notes the arrival of a Robert Spencer (unidentified) in Maryland in 1678, and speculates that he may have been Nicholas Spencer's brother, and the father of the first James Spencer of Talbot County. In addition to the identified members of the Talbot County family, Mr. Jevell mentions a number of other Spencers in Maryland vhom he vas unable to connect vith the James Spencer descendants. I t vould be v e i l to reviev this information, supplemented in a fev cases by the vriter's findings in Annapolis* (1) Walter Spencer of Larikford's Bay in Chester River, Kent County. (The Chester River separates Kent County from Queen Anne's County just to the south, vhile Talbot County lies just south of Queen Anne's.) Walter Spencer vas in Kent County as early as 27 February 1671 /_2?_/. on that date Henry Hosier ef.-. Kent conveyed to Walter Spencer of Kent, for 5,000 pounds of tobacco, a tract in Kent, on Langford's Bay, called "Spencers Fancy", consisting of 200 acres. (Book A, p. 224). Walter left a viil dated 14 April 1675, proved 10 January 1675/6. As executors he appointed his "trusty and veil beloved friends" Henry Hosier, Cornelius Comegys and John Bovles. All his estate vas to be sold, and the proceeds used in "the breeding up and maintenance of my Sonne Charles Spencer vhich is a child of about one yea re old". (Book 5, p. 37; Book A, p. 490).(Walter just possibly the father of (61)

64 Charles Spencer of Talbot (item (2) belov), and conceivably an uncle of Jervis and Henry Spencor (items (3) and (4) belov). (2) Charles Spencer of Talbot County. Died in 1762 leaving vi.ll mentioning vife Katherine, sons Philemon and Charles, daughters Frances and Prudence, and grandson Joseph (son of testator's son Joseph vho died in 1760). Ovned 2 tracts once held by James Spencer the elder, vho sold both of them. Charles acquired one in 1718 by purchase from James's purchaser, and the other in an unknown vay. Mr. Jevell says Charles might have been a 4th son of the elder James Spencer, but doubts it. Possibly he vas the Charles mentioned above who vas 1 year old in 1675, and had moved to Talbot. If so, he vould have been about 88 at death. This idea not mentioned by Mr. Jevell, vho may have had reason to think that the testator Charles was younger. (3) Jervis (often Jarvis, once Garvis) Spencer of Kent. Probably born in or before 1695 (power-of-attorney to him dated 22 Aug vhen he vas presumably at least 21). Married Anne Comegys in or before She vas the daughter of William Comegys, Sr. of Kent Co., vho vas born about 1664 (his affidavit of 23 March 1729/C30?_7 said he vas about 66, and told of an oak that had been standing on a property line some 40 years ago; Vol. IS No. 16, p. 18). Jervis and vife Anne vere members of Shrewsbury Parish Church vhose records shov the folloving births to themt Mary, b. 10 Nov (later married a Williams). Elizabeth, b. 6 March 1722/3 (later married a Maxwell). John, b. 18 January Anne, b. 1 March 1727 (later married a Blackiston). William, b. 15 March 1731/2. Isaac, b. 27 Jan. 1734/5. Sarah, b. 10 Sept (later married a Comegys.) Hannah, b. 15 Aug (unmarried on 11 Nov. 1760). Our earliest record of Jervis is thepoverof attorney mentioned above, dated 22 August It vas from Mary Comegys of Kent County on the Chester River to "my trusty friend Garvis Spencer"of Kent County, authorizing him to sign and acknovledge for her a deed of land located in Queen Anne's County to a number of men from the City of Bristol, England. (Vol. IK No. A, p. 84). In 1719 Jervis vas granted a 50 acre tract in Kent Co. called "Neglect"; later grants to him vere in 1723 ("Dearby", 90 acres; 1730, 100 acres called "Smally", and 400 acres called "Marrovbone", acres called "Darby". On 20 June 1720 William Comegys, Sr. and Samuel Wallis, both of kent, for only fclo, conveyed to Jarvis Spencer of Kent a 340 acre tract in Kent called "The Agreement". (Vol. I. G. No. W, p. 91). On 20 November 1723 William Comegys of Kent., Gent., presented a power-of-attorney from Nicholas Love, Esq. authorizing William to acknovledge "the vithin deed of gift to the within named Jarvis Spencer"for 400 acres. (Who vas making the gift is not clear to the writer), (IG No. W, p. 344). On 30 January 1724 Robert George of Kent, weaver* fox il8«conveyed to Jarvis Spencer of Kent, weaver, a 74 acre tract in Kent called "The Conclusion" on the north side of Chester River, being at the River side. The vitnesses vere Wm Comegys and Abraham Redgraves. (IG No. W, p. 401). On 21 April 1729 Mr. Jervis Spencer of Kent County, Gent., and his vife Anne, for B16, conveyed to Edvard (62)

65 Brooks of Kent 82 acres* part of a tract in Kent called "The Agreement"* being at the end of a line of land sold to Henry Spencer (see belov). The vitnesses vere George Skinner and Mitchell. (Vol. I. S. NO. X, p. 342). There vere other deeds involving Jervis* and ve knov from his viil that he acquired some land in Queen Anne's County. There vere also a good many references to him in the records of administration and testamentary proceedings. Among the latter* Jervis Spencer of Kent vas a surety on the bond of Sarah Given* admrx of George Skinner, dated 4 October 1736) and on 19 May 1750 there vas a Queen Anne's County record of Jervis (probably the one ve have been discussing) as "administrator" of Christopher Williams (Jervis*s grandson) during Christopher's minority. (Book 33, p. 141). We should divert here to record the viil of William Comegys, Sr. of Kent County, planter, dated 5 June 1735, proved 22 May In disposing of his real estate* William provided: (a) To eldest son Wm. Comegys (i) part of a tract called "The Rescue") (ii) part of a tract called "The Remainder") (iii) a third part of an Island of Marsh. (b) To son Cornelius Comegys in Kent Co. 100 acres called "The Little Forest". (c) To youngest son Edvard Comegys* my nov dwelling plantation vith all lands belonging to it* viz.. Hopberry, Little Worth and Chance, vith the third part of an Island Marsh and being part of a tract in Queen Anne's County called Sandy Hurst. (d) To daughter Anne Spencer, one third part of Island Marsh. The viil also remembered daughters Elizabeth Brisko and Hannah Freeman, as veil as my eldest grandson William Comegys. (Book 21, p. 657). Finally, ve have the viil of Jervis Spencer of Kent County dated 11 November 1760, proved on 1 January It named son Isaac as executor* and disposed of personal property as follovs I (a) To son Isaac* I»150 and 2 negroes, 2 saddle horses and his choice of my surveying instruments. (b) To daughter Hannah Spencer fcl50 and 2 negroes. (c) To daughter Ann Blackiston* b70 and 1 negro. (d) To daughter Sarah Comegyrs I»70 and 1 negro. (e) Residue of net personal estate to be divided betveen my children, viz.* son Isaac Spencer and daughters Elizabeth Maxvell, Ann Blackiston* Sarah Comegyrs and Hannah Spencer. (f) To grandson Christopher Williams* son of my deceased daughter Mary* 1 negro vhen he is 21. Son Isaac is to be Christopher's guardian during his minority. As to real estatei (a) To son Isaac, my plantation vhere I nov live called Marrovbone, about 400 acresi also my plantation in Kent near Prickle Pear mill called Darby* about 400 acres. (b) To grandson Christopher Williams, the plantation (63)

66 near the head of Prickly Pair branch in Kent called "The Agree- Ment", about 80 acres, nov occupied by George Saundersi and 30 acres in Queen Anne's County near the mouth of the Unicorn Creek, that I bought of Dr. Humphrey Wells, called the "Landing"! also a grist mill in Queen Anne's County on Unicorn River Branch. The lands and the mill are to go to him when he is 21. Son Isaac is to rebuild the mill and keep it in good repair. Jervis signed the will in his own writing. The witnesses were Samuel Thompson; William Comegys; Mary Comegys, and Nicholas Smith. Note that Jervis did not mention a wife, who may have predeceased him. Nor, more interesting for our purposes, did he mention sons John and William. One vonders if they had died without issue, or whether they may have left Maryland. A separate item on son Isaac is set forth below. (4) Henry Spencer of Kent County. We have quite a few records of a Henry Spencer of Kent County. No accurate fix on his birthdate has been found, but one would guess him as the same generation as Jervis, and most likely his brother. Henry married a lady named Sarah, and they - like Jervis and Anne - belonged to the Shrewsbury Parish Church. Children born to themt (a) Mary Spencer, b. 21 Jan >0?J % (b) Ann Spencer, b. 14 Feb. 17 /I23?_7. (c) Hannah Spencer, b. 1 May (d) Jarvis Spencer, b. 1 Nov (e) Thomas Spencer, b. 12 June (possibly in or after 1727). Apparently in 1723 Jervis Spencer sold 150 acres of "The Agreement" to Henry Spencer. The deed index shovs a conveyance from Jervis to Henry in that year, and by a power-of-attorney from Jervis's wife Anne to her father Wm. Comegys, Sr. dated 18 June 1723, Anne authorized her father to acknowledge conveyance of her right in 150 acres, part of "The Agreement", to Henry Spencer. The vitnesses vere Wm. Comegys, Jr., and John Jones. (IG No. W, p. 314). Jervis's deed to Edvard Brooks mentioned above, dated 21 April 1729, mr ntioned land sold to Henry, and recorded on the same page was a deed from Henry to Edward Brooks.( IS No. X, p. 342). Henry was mentioned in testamentary proceedings in.kent in 1731 and His own will, dated 31 December 1748, describing himself as planter, was probated 14 August He left to his vife Sarah for life the house and plantation vhere he lived, "being part of a Tract of Land called Agreement" being about 130 acres, remainder in fee tail to his son Thomas, but if Thomas died vithout heirs, to his daughter Mary Jones. Other bequests: (a) to my grandsons James and Jerves McCaan* sons of my deceased daughter Ann, 100 acres being part of a tract called Kilingsvorth More (which I bought of John Dunkan) for their lives until one reaches age 21, to be rented out and the proceeds used for their schooling, and on their death to my son Thomas, or if he dies vithout heirs, to my daughter Mary Jones. (b) To my grandson Henry Jones, son of my daughter Mary, my old racing mare Fancey. (c) To my son Thomas, all the remainder of my personal estate. (64)

67 Son Thomas was appointed as sole executor. Henry signed by mark (perhaps feeble?). The vitnesses vere Nicholas Smith, John Kelly and Daniel Mullin. (Vol. 27, pp ). Note that there vas no mention of son Jervis or daughter Hannah. They could have died vithout issue, but again could son Jervis have left Maryland, perhaps vith his presumed cousins, John and William Spencer, the first tvo sons of the older Jervis? (5) John Spencer of Kent County. The first record of this John Spencer found by the vriter is a deed to him dated 4 September 1720, from John Smithers, Gent, of Kent Co., and Katherine his vife, vhereby the Smithers, for 4,000 pounds of tobacco, conveyed to John Spencer of Kent County, Joyner, a part of a tract called "Langford Rock", on the north side of Dividing Creek and the east side of "Graisend" /jgray's Inn? 7 Creek. The tract began on the side of Dividing Creek on the vest south vest of land of Langford Rock, and ran parallel to "Graisend" Creek to the mouth of Dividing Creek. The vitnesses vere Wm. Hovby and Fred Hannon. (IS No. X, p. 302). On 19 June 1728 John Hunt of Talbot Co., planter, for 3,000 pounds of tobacco, conveyed to John Spencer of Kent, Joyner, 200 acres that had been laid out for Francis (Bellaise?), a part of land called "Selby" on the north side of Chester River and the east side of Grays Inn Creek, adjoining land laid out for Hovard Skinner. The vitnesses vere George Skinner and Chris Baleman, Jr. (IS No..l, p. 217). On 7 September 1730, Simon Kilmer and vife Dorcas of Kent Co., Gent., for h2, conveyed to John Spencer of Kent, Joyner. the southwest half of lots 78 and 79 in Chester Tovn. (IG No. 16, p. 24) i and on 5 April 1730 /_31?_/ John Spencer of Kent, Joyner, and vife Elizabeth, for fal5, conveyed one-half of lots 78 and 79 to Alexander McGachen in Chester Tovn. one of the vitnesses vas named Hynson. (IG No. 16, p. 193). John Spencer of Kent left a will dated 24 September 1732, probated 24 November It provided! (a) To son John Spencer, 50 acres, part of a tract called Memento Mori vhere I nov dvell, beginning at an oak at the head of cove on Grafen* Creek marking the southernmost boundary of Andrev Skinner land down the Creek to the lower end of a marsh called the great marsh, then with the Creek and up a cove called the sycamore Cove to an oak at the head of said cove, then north east to the upper end of a parcel of clear ground called Cornfield thence north north vest to Skinner's line - then vith the said line to the beginning. (b) To vife Elizabeth Spencer my dwelling plantation vith all lands belonging thereto except the above 50 acres for life, remainder to son Thomas. (c) My personal estate to be divided into three parts, 2/3 to my vife, and 1/3 to son John. (d) Son Samuel Spencer may have the tobacco nov in the hands of Samuel Tovey, vhich is 6,000 laid out to. puchase a negro boy vithin 3 years from the present date (my vife may keep the negro boy until son Samuel is 18), and that Samuel may have learning so far as to read veil and vrite and cypher as far as the Rule of Three and may be bound as apprentice to some good The elder Jervis Spencer had been surety on the bond of Sarah Givsn, admrx. of George Skinner, dated 4 Oct (65)

68 b6 joyner until 18 - all the rest of say joyner*s tools to be kept for son Samuel. Elizabeth was appuliiunl sole executrix. John signed his ovn name. The witnesses were Samuel Toveys William Newton, and Tho. Salter. (Vol. 20, p. 755). In 1734 a grant of 184 acres, called Memento Mori (evidently an addition), issued to John, Elizabeth and Thomas Spencer (EI No. 5, p. 69, and No 2, p. 9). This may have been applied for before John, Sr.*s death, and taken down in the name of his widow and two elder sons. There are quite a few records of one sort or another relating to an Elizabeth Spencer, a Thomas Spencer, a John Spencer and a Samuel Spencer in. Kent County. Not all of them necessarily involved the vidow and sons of the John Spencer just discussed, but they seem to have little bearing on the main topic being pursued herein. John may or may not have been related to Jervis and Henry Spencer. There is 1 **-*-if> to indicate that he was, except that he was definitely in the same neighborhood. A John Spencer, probably John's son, married a Sarah, and belonged to Shrewsbury Parish Church. They had a son John born 1 December 1742 (probably too early for the father to have been Jervis*s son John), and a daughter Sarah born 26 May A John and Mary Spencer had a srm Samuel born 31 March In view of the name Samuel, it seems possible that John's wife Sarah had died, and he had married Mary as his second vife. (6) Isaac Spencer of Kent and Queen Anne's Counties. The first Jervis Spencer's son Isaac lived a fairly long, busy and apparently prosperous life. The Kent records abound vith references to him, and he vers also quite active in Queen Armes County, vhere he bought very substantial quantities of land, all of it apparently on or near branches flowing into the Chester.River from the south, some of the land, at least, being near the River's head. His biggest purchase came on 5 November It appears that a Henry Collison of Queen Anne's County, merchant, had acquired two important tracts called "Crompton" (or Crumpton) and "The Pearle"*, and part of a third tract called "Sandy Hurst". During Henry's lifetime, and at his death, his interests in these lands had passed to his daughters, his sole heirs, except for his vidov's interest by dower or jointure. On 5 November Isaac Spencer and Benjamin Chambers.of Kent County, gentlemen, for L45.695, bought all the daughters interests as tenants in common, and on the saml day, for bl0,000, they bought the vidov* s rights. From later documents, it vould appear that Isaac subsequently bought out some, if not all. of Benjamin Chambers rights. (For the joint purchases see Vol RT No. 12, pp , 359, 364). These three trftpt» wee adjoining, and 'Fron later documents it appears that the "Pearle" alone contained 1,094- acres* ** In the earlier deeds Isaae vas described as a farmer, in some of the later ones as a merchant, and finally In a good many deed* as gentleman. (66)

69 Sandy Hurst" began at the westernmost point of the mouth of a branch of the Chester River called "Red Lyon Branch". Isaac is believed to have married an Elizabeth Thompson in Kent County, she the daughter of Col. John Thompson of Piney Grove, Anne Arundel County, who had died in (Hodges Marriage Reference Index, citing Abstract of Deeds, Vol. I, p. 818, Land Office, Annapolis. )"Ve lack a date for the marriage. Isaac had at least two sons, Isaac and William, and at least one daughter named Charlotte, who married Thomas Ringgold at some time before March 1785*.* (Hodges Index, supra, citing Chancery Papers No. 4296). In addition to the children named, Isaac may have had a son named Jervis. On 30 May 1797 Jospeh "Cacy" of Queen Anne's County, for b40, conveyed to Jervis Spencer of Kent Co. a part of "Conoway" in Queen Anne's County beginning "near Unicorn Branch and on the main road from Church Hill to the Head of Chester" (this land previously involved in deeds from James Cacy to Christopher Williams - grandson of the first Jervis Spencer - and from Christopher Williams to Isaac Spencer). (Vol. STW No. 4, p. 236; Vol. RT, No. 1, p. 430). A Jervis Spencer appeared in the 1800 census for Queen Anne's Co. (single man, age 16-26, with 5 slaves), and in the 1810 census for Kent County. There is a doubtful suggestion that Isaac also had a daughter named Ann.*** Isaac Spencer died intestate between 18 March 1782 and 2 January His son William was appointed as his administrator. (7) Francis Spencer of Calvert County. In 1664 Francis Spencer and Edward Gowdry were granted a 100 acre tract in Calvert County called "Friendship". In 1674 Francis received another grant in Calvert of 150 acres, called "Stafford". And in 1675 he was granted a 50 acre tract in Calvert called "Coxes Folly". (Book 7, p. 73; Book 17, p. 624; Book 18, pp. 187, 251). Hodges Marriage Reference Index (marriages inferred from wills or other documents) tells us that by 1677 Francis Spencer had married Mary Anderson, vidow of John Anderson in Calvert County, citing Calvert Testamentary Proceedings, #9, p. 501, #10, p A Thomas Spencer vas mentioned in Calvert Testamentary Proceedings in 1688 (Book 14, pp. 61, 114, 115)a Daniel Spencer in 1719 (Book 24, pp. 35, 94) and a John Spencer in and 1730 (Book 27, pp. 215, 242; Book 29* p. 328). The 1800 census for Calvert County shoved a * Samuel Thompson vas a vitness to the viil of the elder Jervis Spencer, dated 11 November ** On 26 July 1774 Thomas Ringgold vitnessed a conveyance of land in Queen Anne's County to Isaac Spencer. (Vol. RT, No. K, p. 375). ***Hodges Marriage Reference Index (marriages inferred from vills and other documents) suggests that Ann Spencer, daughter of Isaac, married a Walter Meade some time before 1795, citing Queen Anne's Co. Chancery Papers No This appears to be erroneous. Ann vas a daughter of Walter Meade, and his vife's name vas Mary. (67)

70 Francis Spencer. Mr. Jewell thought that the original Francis was the son of Nicholas Spencer of Virginia. This could not have been, for the reasons given in Appendix, and because Nicholas's son Francis was under 21 in 1688, when Nicholas wrote his will. His identity remains a mystery. (8) John Spencer of Anne Arundel County. In 1683 John Spencer was granted a 17"* acre tract in Anne Arundel County named "Spencer's Search". (Vol. 20, p. 351; Vol. SO, No. A, p. 91). Hodges Marriage Reference Index says that by 1682 (or 1683) a John Spencer had married Mary Hall (Mary, daughter of Godfrey Harmer, had married (1st) James Maxwell, and (2nd) Patrick Hall), citing Anne Arundel Testamentary Proceedings, Book 13, pp Mr. Jewell states that John, William and Mary Spencer came to Maryland in 1663, but cites no records and does not assign them a county. Whether the latter John was the one in Anne Arundel in 1683, and in any event who either John was, is not known. (9) Matthew Spencer. Mr. Jewell gives us a Matthew Spencer arriving in 1677, with no citation or other information. Nothing found by the writer. (10) Robert Spencer. Mr. Jewell says "it is recorded"that a Robert Spencer came into the province in The writer has not found the record. Mr. Jewell did not know where this Robert settled in Maryland, but thought the record possibly tied in with a tradition in the Talbot Co. Spencer family that the first Spencer came to Talbot County with the ancestor of the Goldsborough family. He continues, apparently still speaking from tradition: "Nicholas Goldsborough came to Maryland in 1670, settled on Kent Island and died there soon after. His son, Robert, came from England in 1678 and settled in Talbot Co." He wonders if the Robert of record vas the father of the first James Spencer of the Talbot Co. family. (11) George Spencer of Cecil County. According to Mr. Jewell, a George Spencer,* merchant of York, England, settled in Cecil County in In that year George Spencer received a grant of 500 acres in Cecil County called "Danby". (Book 21, p. 517; Book CB, p. 251). In 1707 an Edward Spencer and a Robert Macormack were sureties on the bond of Semore(?) Parker, Administrator of Temperance Parker (Cecil Co. Testamentary Proceedings, Vol. 19C, p. 244). Edward appeared in further Cecil Co. Testamentary Proceedings in 1720 and 1722 (Vol. 24, pp ; Vol. 26, p. 6). (12) William Spencer of Dorchester County. (Dorchester just to the south of Talbot County). In 1707 a William Spencer was granted 100 acres in Dorchester Co. called "Radge". (DD, #5, p. 373; PL #2, p. 276). In 1734, William Spencer, Sr. received a grant of 50 acres in Dorchester called "The Hope". (El #3, p. 207). Apparently the grant issued in the name of Andrew Gray (EI # 2, p. 213). We have the will of Elizabeth Spencer of "Dorset" County (indexed as Dorchester), dated 12 October 1748, proved 9 April She did not mention her husband, and made bequests only to two sons, evidently by a prior marriaget William Dean and Mathev Dean. The vitnesses vere Thomas Gray, Andrew Gray and Francis Henry. (Will Book 27, p. 301). (68)

71 That concludes the review of the early Maryland Spencers noted by Mr. Jewell, and those found by the writer in his all-too-brief search. There were others in the 18th century, increasing in numbers as the century rolled on, but none that seemed of particular relevance to our inquiry. XII. CONCLUSIONS. From all that has been said above, the writer believes there is a good probability that the John and William Spencer who appeared in what is now Montgomery County, N. C. in did indeed come from Maryland, and were sons of Jervis and Anne (Comegys) Spencer, John born on 18 January 1725, and William on 15 March 1731/2. First, we have three sets of facts pointing to the idea of a Maryland origin. (1) Belief held by some of John's descendants. As stated earlier, the vidov of one of John's grandchildren, and her son, John's great-grandson, thought one of their forebears had originated in Maryland. Although the generation they vere talking about came from North Carolina and not Maryland, and they vere wrong about some other details, the possibility that an earlier ancestor might have come from Maryland remains open. (2) The Spencer-Jerman connection. A Richard Spencer was in the Tuckahoe area of old Craven County, N. C. from March 1739 to November One of his close neighbors was a Robert Jerman, who had come there from Queen Anne's County, Maryland, only a few months before Richard arrived. John and William Spencer started to settle in the very same spot, vith Robert Jerman and his family close by. Since Robert Jerman had come from Maryland, it is not difficult to believe that Richard, and John and William, had done likewise* This point would become much stronger if a relevant Spencer-Jerman connection in Maryland could be shovn. Some investigation of this has been done. The results thus far do not amount to much, but they suggest tvo leads that need further following up. (a) A connection in Queen Anne's County? Robert Jerman and his brother John vere in Calvert County during the first quarter of the 1700's. Betveen 1729 and 1732 they moved aoross the Chesapeake Bay to Queen Anne's County, taking up land on Tuckahoe Creek. To get there, it is said one vent to the mouth of the Choptank River in Talbot County, then east (actually northeast) up the Choptank some 40 miles to Tuckahoe Creek, then north up Tuckahoe about 20 miles to a branch entering on the vest, later called Jarman Branch. The first Jervis Spencer's lands lay primarily on the north side of the Chester River near Chester Tovn, roughly 10 miles as the crov flies north and a little east of the Chester's mouth. He did, hovever, ovn some la rid across the River in Queen Anne's County. His son Isaac acquired much more land in Queen Anne's, but all apparently on or near the Chester River, including holdings on Red Lion Branch, some 8 miles east of Chester Tovn. Hov far off overland were the Jermans? Taking into account the 20 mile journey fc9 (69)

72 to they had to make north up Tuckahoe Creek, perhaps not too far. But the exact distance overland between the two families, and the practicality of going overland at that time, are not known. There is one fact, however, to be noted. In Calvert County, before 6 May 1711, Robert Jerman had almost certainly married Mary Meade (sometimes "Meeds"), daughter of John Meade of Calvert County. John Meade had sons named Thomas, John and William. After the move to Queen Anne's County, in 1732, Robert Jerman bought land from both John Meeds and Mary his wife, and from William Meeds and Elizabeth his wife. On 18 March 1782 Isaac owned the tract of land in Queen Anne's County called "The Pearle" (purchase by him referred to earlier). On that day he contracted to sell it to a Walter Meade of Queen Anne's County for fc3,282 in gold or silver, the purchase price to be paid in 8 equal installments. On the due date of the first installment, Walter Meade was unable to make the payment, and the parties re-framed their bargain. Isaac was to convey only the northern half of the tract, and 4 of the later installment payments vere cancelled. Apparently one or more of the first installments were paid, but then Isaac died, and Walter left the area, reportedly dying elsewhere. On 2 January 1793 Isaac's son William and Abraham Falconer, as administrators of Isaac's estate, brought suit against Malachi "Meads", Rebecca "Meads" and Anne "Meads", heirs of Walter "Meads", to force sale of the northern half of the land because of a further default in the payments. The Meade children were minors, and guardians were appointed to represent them. The result was that the Meade equity interest in the property was sold to satisfy a claim of L820, 10s. Samuel Comegyrs of Kent Co. bought the interest for fc710, 14s. Curiously, the record showed that William Spencer, Isaac's son, vas also acting as administrator of the estate of Walter Meade. (Queen Anne Co. Chancery Papers, 17, ). Out of this^record, Mrs. Hodges, the compiler of the Marriage Record Index, concluded that Ann, daughter of Isaac Spencer, had married Walter Meade. The record clearly state that the 3 defendants vere Walter's children, and that his vidov vas a Mary Meade. Therefore, unless a portion of the record no longer legible stated that the children vere children of Ann (a vife preceding Mary), Mrs. Hodges appears to have been in error. It is, hovever, peculiar that William Spencer vas administrator for both estates unless there vas some sort of relationship. In any event, if Walter Meade vas a descendant of the Meade family into vhich Robert Jerman married, there is some basis for a guess that Robert Jerman might have knovn the Jervis Spencer family before he left for North Carolina. Further research into Walter Meade's origins might be useful. (b) A connection in Calvert County? As noted above, an early settler in Calvin County vas a Francis Spencer vho vas present at least from 1664 to 1677, folloved by later references to a scattering of other Spencers. Wheth-: er he vas related to Jervis Spencer is not knovn (as noted belov ve are missing the father of the first Jervis and his presumed brother Henry). If by any chance there vas such a relationship, it is possible that the Jervis Spencer family knew the Jermans (70)

73 from those days. In this case there are a vhole lot of "ifs" to be resolved. Among other leads, ve knov that Robert Jerman vas a member of All Saints Parish Church. We don't knov vhat church affiliation* if any* Francis Spencer had. (The 1800 Francis Spencer lived in Christ Church Parish). For further information about the Jermans in Calvert County* as veil as in Queen Anne's, see Appendix AA. Even if the Jervis Spencer family did not knov the Jerman family in Maryland, it is possible that the Richard Spencer vho came to the Tuckahoe area of Craven Co., N. C. simply stumbled on Robert Jerman there, and, discovering they vere from the same province, decided to settle there. If* as seems possible {sec belov), Richard Spencer vas related to Jervis's sons John and William Spencer, he could have suggested the Tuckahoe location to them, leading them to come there in (3) The Haltom Family of Maryland and Montgomery County. N. C. When John and William Spencer arrived in present-day Montgomery County, N. C, some people named Haltom (rendered in various vays, including Hoi torn,.hal ton and Holton ) had preceded them there by a fev years. The early records, chronologically! (a) 1763 Tax List for Anson County shoved a John Haltom and a William Haltom, each vith 1 taxable person. (The North Carolinian, Vol's. 3-4, p. 296 et seq.). (b) Surveyor's certificate for William Haltam dated 12 June acres lying betveen Dumas's fork and Denson's fork of the Little River. Grant issued 29 April (Land grant records, Sec. of State, Raleigh, N. C). (c) Grant dated 11 December 1770 to "John Holton Major" (Major meaning Sr., or military title?)covering 150 acres on "Uvarry about 8 miles above the mouth on the Western bank ". (d) Surveyor's certificate dated 22 June 1772 for William Haltom, Jr., covering 100 acres on north side of Pe? Dee River "on the north side of Pine Branch". Resulting grant issued 24 May (Land Grant Rec's, supra). (e) Deed dated 16 Jan from John Ha 11 torn to Charles Morris "adjoining Maccullocks line". The signature vas "John Alltorn", by mark. (f) Precept dated 20 February 1785 instructing surveyor to lay out 100 acres for William Holtom, Sr. in Montgomery Co. "beginning on the Suck Branch on the No. side Runing to Holtoms line to include White Harts Improvement for Compliment". Survey certified 8 April 1785) grant -issued 9 August Chain bearers for survey vere Richard Green and Joseph Holtom. (Land Grant Rec's, supra). (g) Some time in 1785 Spencer "Aultum" vas granted land near the head of Dumas Creek. (Heritage of Montgomery Co.* p. 322). (h) Census for Anson County* District 2, taken 3 July 1787 listedi (i) William Holtom, 1 male 21-60, 4 males under 21 or over 60, 2 females. (ii) William Holtom, 1 male under 21 or over 60, 1 female, 2 blacks. This household next to (i) above. (iii) Spencer Holtom, 1 male 21-60, 4 males under Suck Branch ran northeasterly into Denson's Creek, belov Bishop's Creek. (71)

74 or over 60, 4 females and 1 black. Fifth household from (ii). (iv) Joseph Holtom. 1 male 21-60, 1 male under 21 or over 60, 2 females. Tenth household from (iii). Notet Some of the creek mamas- InfiJao. land, records, and thu HUHKLS of others in District 2, show that the Haltoms vere in the area vhere the Spencers first settled. (i) On 20 Nov William Hal turn obtained varrant for 25 acres on Denson*s fork, adjoing his ovn land and land of James Reynolds. Survey completed 13 Dec Grant issued 17 Nov (j) In 1789 Spencer Halton vas granted additional land near head of Dumas Creek. (Heritage of Montgomery Co., p. 322). (k) On 25 Aug Spencer Holtom obtained varrant for 30 acres on the east side of Bishop's creek*adjoining his ovn land. This land may or may not have been the tract in (j) above. The 30 acres vas surveyed 29 November 1789, vith Spencer Holtom and Joseph Holtom as chain bearers. The grant issued 17 November (1) The 1790 census for Montgomery County listedt (i) Joseph Holtom. No family breakdown. (ii) Spencer Holtom. No family breakdovn. This household apparently adjacent to (i). (iii) William Holtom, 1 male 16 and over* 1 male under 16, 3 females* 2 slaves. (m) 1800 census for Montgomery Countyi (i) Spencer Holtom, Sr.* 1 male over 45, 2 males 10-16, 1 female over 45, 2 females 10-16, 2 females under 10. (ii) Joseph Haltum, Sr., 1 male" 26-45, 1 male under 10, 1 female 26-45, 1 female 10-16, 2 females under 10. This household second avay from (i). (iii) William Altom, Jr. 1 male (iv) William Alton "C" _7, 1 male 26-45, 1 male 16-26, 1 male 10-16, 1 male under 10, 1 female 26-45, 1 female 10-16, 1 female under 10. (v) Joseph Alton, 1 male 16-26, 1 female 16-26, 1 female under 10. (ri) The 1810 census for Montgomery County shoved an Elijah, John, Spencer (over 45), 2 Josephs, and possibly a James. The 1830 census listed Alexander, Elisha, John, Joseph, Sr., Mary, Charles and James. An article in Heritage of Montgomery County states that Spencer Haltom, Sr. vas born c He married Mary West in or * Bishop's Creek ran more or less northeast, joining Dumas Creek coming into it from the vest. The resulting single stream ran a short distance southeast and then northeast into Den&cm*j"Greeks (72)

75 before 1773, and had children named.joseph, Charles, John, Elijah, Nita, Elizabeth and Nancy. Of the third generation of Spencers in Montgomery County, tvo married Haltoms. William Spencer of Montgomery had a son named Elijah, vhose son William married an Allafair Halton, and vhose daughter Mary married an Eben Haltom. It is virtually certain that the Haltom family of Montgomery County, N. C. came from Maryland. Most members of the family there were to be found in Cecil County (just north of Kent), although a fev spilled over into other counties. The line from vhich they are believed to have come starts vith a John Haltham, vhose viil vas tinted 28 April 1728, and proved 26 July 1728.* It shovs that he h^d a wife Mary, and childrent John, Joseph, William, Charles, Nicholas, James, Katherine and Mary. The witnesses were John (?), Samuel Alexander and Martin Alexander. (Cecil r Co>.Book 5, p. 520). We have a number of succeeding land records involving a John Haltham or Holtham, presumably the first John's son, shoving that at least at first he lived on Elk River near the Court _ House; that he later bought land, called "Collett's Land /Heirs?_/ Delight" and later "Blanford", vhich-vas part of a tract called "Tovn Point" or "Cecil Tovn", plus land which vas part of "The Three Bohemian Sisters", on the road hstveen the "Head of Elk and the Head of Bohemia"; that he had neighbors named Javerts, Herman and Van Bebber /~J rom Germany or Bohemia?_7; that he married Ann Latham,"daughter of Aaron Latham, innkeeper /^confirmed by Aaron's viil probated 5 Nov. 1751_/***; and that at least for a time he himself vas an innkeeper. In June 1748 he bought a shallop named Svallov "nov riding in Elk River near the ferry landing". In March 1758 he vas living in Tovn Point. (Vol. 5, p. 520; Vol. 7, pp. 99, 320, 437; Vol. 6, p. 500). Vol. 4, p. 503). The second John Holtham left a viil dated 23 December 1760, probated 25 May His vife vas not mentioned, suggesting that she had died. He provided for 4 childrent Mary Mills, Spencer Holtham, Ann Holtham and Joseph Holtham. To Mary he left "a small bouse standing on my plantation in Tovnpoint near Elk River therevith 16 acres adjoining thereto" for life. The residue he left to be divided among the three other children. He appointed Mr. Jacob "Hamon?" /HHerman?_7 to take over Ann and Joseph, send them to school and educate and bring them up. As executors he appointed son Spencer Holtham and John Veazy, Jr.. The vitnesses vere John Getty, Jeremiah Holton, and Hyland Pennington. (Vol. 31, p. 433). Where did John get the name Spencer for his son? Not from his vife, vho vas a Latham. Perhaps from his mother Mary,.vho might have been a Spencer, or perhaps from a neighbor, although the documents examined don't mention any neighboring Spencers. If Between June 1716 and May 1722 a Cecil Co. deed vas recorded from a Charles"Hulton" to a York Yorkson. (Cecil Co. Deed Index, citing Vo. 3, p. 326). ** Tovn Point vas a "neck, a strip of land lying betveen Bohemia and Elk Rivers" (Gannett, Gazetteer of Maryland (1904), p. 77). *** There vere Lathams in Montgomery Co., N. C. A daughter or granddaughter of William Spencer may have married a Latham. (DOWS, pp. 21-2). (73)

76 his mother's maiden name was Spencer, there is no evidence that she was of the Jervis Spencer family. More likely, she belonged to the Talbot County Spencers, since she and her husband called sons Nicholas and James. We.know of comparatively fev Spencers in Cecil County during the 13th century. A George Spencer, a merchant from York, England, was there by 1683, and an Edward Spencer's name appeared in Cecil County Probate Proceedings in 1707, 1720 and (See p. 66 above). Also several records concerning a Thomas Spencer are to be found in Cecil County, but he was a mariner from Bideford, Devonshire, England, who commanded the good ship Falcon plying between England and America, and although he finally settled in Maryland, he seems to be unrelated to any of the other Spencers there. (Cecil Co. Deeds, Vol. 4, pp. 400, 483) Vol. 5, pp. Ill, 504; and for Kent Co. deeds involving his son Thomas, see Kent Deeds, Vol. DD, No. 4, pp. 68, 126). After the second John Holtham's death, we find Spencer Halthom and Ann his wife selling Cecil County land to Francis Alexander between 1772 and 1774 (Cecil Deeds Index, citing Vol. 13, p deed not examined)) and Joseph Haltham, presumably Spencer's brother, selling land to the same man between 1774 and 1779 (Vol. 14, p deed not examined). One would guess that these were the Spencer and Joseph Haltom vho appeared in Montgomery Co., N. C. in (see p. 69 above, sub-paragraphs (f) and (g). )*Curiously, the 1800 census for Cecil County, Md. lists a Spencer Halton, with 1 male and 1 female 45 and over) 1 male 16-26; perhaps 1 female under 10 (enumerator's mark uncertain)) and 6 slaves. If this was the son of the second John Haltham, it TOUld appear that the one in Montgomery Co., N. C. was a grandson of the first John by one of his other sons. Perhaps, however, the Spencer Halton in the 1800 Maryland census vas such a grandson of the first John. Who were the John and William Haltom in Montgomery Co., N. C. by 1763? The first John had a son William and John, but the latter was presumably the second John in Cecil Co. As a guess, the Montgomery William and John were sons of the second John, not mentioned in his will because they had left Maryland, or sons of another son of the first John. In any event, it hardly seems possible that the Spencer Haltom in Montgomery could have come from any family other than the one in Cecil County, Maryland, where ve knov there vas a Spencer Haltham, a name most unlikely to be duplicated by coincidence. And the similarity of the other names is too striking to be ignored. Assuming, then, that the Montgomery County, N. C. Haltoms came from Maryland, ve have tvo instances vhere John and William Spencer of Montgomery County-found themselves to be close neighbors of families from Maryland, namely the Jermans and the Haltoms. So much for the general likelihood that John and William SfwnCeTr of Montgomery Co., N. C. jcame from Maryland. Were they sams of Jervis Spencer ef Kent County? Looking only at John and William for the moment, the answer seems most ptodorjly yesi (1) Their birthdates fit the subsequent records of the Montgomery John and William quite satisfactoriy. William, in fact, vas only a few years older than the writer's previous vild guess. (2) John vas older than William, as had been thought. *Note, hovever, that the Montgomery Spencer supposedly married Mary West. (74)

77 (3) Jervis Spencer's sons John and William seemed to disappear from the Maryland records, and vere not mentioned in their father's viil. (4) The strongest point concerns the second Jervis Spencer, son of Henry Spencer of Kent. He, too, appeared to vanish from the Maryland records, and vas not mentioned in his' father's viil. Let's recall that the deed vhereby John Spencer disposed of his Johnston County, North Carolina land in 1763 vas vitnessed by a "Jarrus" Spencer, a name that has alvays troubled the vriter. By far the most logical explanation for that name is that it vas a slight mis-reading by some copyist of the vritten name Jarvis. It is difficult indeed to resist the"conclusion that Jarvis either accompanied John and William vhen they left Maryland and was with them in Tuckahoe, Johnston and Rovan County, N. C.» or that he left Maryland after they did and joined them in Rovan County. In either event, he apparently did not invest in real estate so far as the available records shov, and he must have died, gone elsewhere, or returned to Maryland before John and William reached Montgomery County. If this theory is correct, all of them must have left Maryland before December 1748 when Henry Spencer made his will) or perhaps Jarvis had been omitted from the will for some other reason, and left some time after his father's death because of the omission. All of this, the reader may find quite acceptable. But how are ve to explain the Richard Spencer vho preceded John and William in Craven County, N. C, and the Richard Spencer in Fairfield County, S. C. vhose land descended to John? And for that matter, hov are ve to account for the tale that William's father had a brother named Joe Spencer, coupled vith the arrival of a Joseph Spencer in Montgomery County, N. C. in 1766? The vriter can think of only one possible explanation, and this requires inventing tvo people of vhom ve have no record in Maryland. It takes no invention to say that the older Jervis Spencer and his presumed brother Henry had to have had a father) and it isn't a bad guess that he vas a brother or other relative of Walter Spencer vho first appeared in Kent County in February 16?2. (One of Walter's "trusty friends" vas a Cornelius Comegys, certainly the brother of, or otherwise related to, William Comegys, Sr. of Kent, Jervis Spencer's father-in-law, vho named a son Cornelius). Let us suppose that Jervis*s father had tvo other sons, Richard and Joseph, vho departed from Maryland at an early stage and hence left no records there. Richard found himself in the Tuckahoe area of Craven County, N. C. in , and in Fairfield County, S. C. from at least 1749 until he died, probably in or shortly before Joseph may also have gone to South Carolina, to a different location. In September 1742 a Joseph Spencer bought a 400 acre tract of land in Prince George Parish, Craven County, S. C, and in April 1762 he sold it, at that time apparently a single man, since no vife joined in the conveyance. The vriter has never been able to fit.that Joseph into the other Spencer families of South Carolina. (See The Early Spencers 75" (75

78 76 of South Carolina, pp ). This could have been the Joseph who joined John and William in Montgomery County, N. C. in Yes, the reader may say, but how did Richard's South Carolina land come to descend to John Spencer? Here we have to assume that the elder Jervis Spencer was older than his brother Henry, not an unreasonable assumption since Henry named a son after Jervis. (We vould have to assume that Jervis was older than Joseph, also, unless - as seems likely - Joseph had died without issue before Richard's death.) In these circumstances, when Richard died intestate and without issue, his real property would have descended to the oldest son of his deceased brother Jervis, namely John. As a final buttress for the theory being advanced, we should point out that, adopting Mr. Jewell's ideas about the background of the Talbot County family, and assuming that Jervis Spencer was somehow related to them, we come closer to satisfying the persistent tradition among William Spencer's descendants that their ancestors had been landed gentry in England, and kin to the Washingtons. At present writing, only one fairly minor flaw in the foregoing theory occurs to the writer. Neither John nor William Spencer of the Montgomery County area, N. C. named a son Jervis after the i t presumed father, nor for that matter Joseph or Richard after their presumed uncles> and the name Jesse (used by John) and Johnston, Elijah, Elisha and Seymore (used by William) don't fit any Maryland frame of reference discovered thus far. Perhaps, hovever, an estrangement developed betveen John and William, and their presumed father Jervis, leading to - or resulting from - their departure from Maryland, and some of the names used for their sons vere picked at random, or from the disstaff sides of their families. Much mare research can profitably be done. Among the more immediate objectives, ve should assure ourselves, so far as possible, that neither Jervis's sons John and William, nor Henry's son Jervis, died in Maryland. And of course further efforts should be made to identify the father of the elder Jervis and Henry (and presumably Richard and Joseph). Among the more likely candidates would be the Francis, John, Matthew and Robert Spencer mentioned on pp above. Of course we don't know that Jervis and Henry's father came to Maryland. One final word about the "Maryland origin" theory advanced above. It would rule out the South Carolina Spencers as immediate ancestors of William Spencer of Montgomery County, N. C. But it would not erase the remarkable similarity of male names in the South Carolina lines and the North Carolina names of John, William, Richard and Joseph, nor the odd fact that Spencers and Jermans were close neighbors in both North Carolina and South Carolina. If we are ever successful in identifying the father of Jervis and Henry Spencer of Kent Co., Maryland, it would not surprise the writer to find that there was some connection between his family and that of Oliver Spencer, the first immigrant to South Carolina. As an aid to understanding of the Maryland story, there follow maps of the current Maryland counties, a segment of Kent and Queen Anne's County (old), and Cecil County.(1877). (76)

79

80

81 11

82 APPENDIX AA THE JERMANS OF CRAVEN COUNTY, N. C. AND QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY, MD.

83 App. AA THE JERMANS OF CRAVEN COUNTY, N. C. AND QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND This Appendix deals vith the background of a Robert Jerman (German, Jarman, Garman, Jermain, Germane) who appeared of record in Craven County, N. C. on 1 July 1738, having co;.ie there from Maryland. It is based almost entirely on the work of Mr. Wilbur W. Jarmon, 2726 Hyde Park Rd., Jacksonville, Fla , who is a direct descendant of the above Robert Jerman. Mr. Jarmon gives us the following history, all carefully documented from Maryland and North Carolina recordsi We start with two brothers named John and Robert Jarman who lived in Calvert County, Maryland from at least 1699 until about Calvert County, an original county formerly called Patuxent, is located in southwestern Maryland, on the southwestern shore of Chesapeake Bay. Mr. Jarmon points out that in Maryland /_as elsewhere_/, the Jarman name was given a variety of spellings, including Jarman, Garman, Jerman, German, Jermin and, interestingly, "Jermine" /_a corruption of Jermain? The parents of John and Robert Jarman have not been identified. Mr. Jarmon suggests, but cannot prove, that they may have been sons of a Robert "Jermine", who was recorded in 1677 as having entered Maryland as a "headright" under a patent to Robert Loekwood of Anne Arundel County, adjoining Calvert on the north. Nor can we fix a precise birthdate for either John or Robert, although we can establish some parameters. John witnessed (ii)

84 App. AA a Calvert County will on 15 March 1698 /~9?_7. He may have been as young as 16 at the time. However, he was a surety on a Calvert County administrative bond in 1701, at which point he should have been at least 21, suggesting that he was born by 1680, and perhaps before. We cannot be quite so clear about Robert. However, his oldest son Joseph married an Anne Thomas on 17 February 172t. If one is willing to assume a marrying age of 21, we would haw. Joseph born c. 1707, and his father Robert born in 1686 or before. Apart from land records, we have a number of references to both John and Robert during the first quarter of the 1700's. John was a surety on other Calvert County administrative bonds in 1710, 1714, 1720 and As to Robert, we have the following: (1) The will of John Meade (or Meads) of Calvert County, dated 6 May 1711 and probated 11 July 1711, made bequests to sons Thomas, John, Jr. and William, to his eldest daughter Ann Sanders, and to "my daughter Mary Jarman". We know that later in life Robert Jarman had a wife named Mary, and that in 1732 he purchased land in Queen Anne's County from "William Meeds and Elizabeth his wife", and "John Meeds and Mary, his wife". It seems highly probable that the tfary Jarman mentioned in the 1711 will was Robert's wife. (2) On 8 January 1714 Robert Jarman, along with John, was a surety on a Calvert County administrative bond. (3) In April 1720 Robert Jarman, with John Wood, was surety on another Calvert County administrative bond, and in June 1722 on still another. (4) On 6 April 1724, "Mr. Robert Jarman" was elected a warden of All Saints Parish Church, one of the oldest Protestant Episcopal churches in Maryland, established in On 13 May 1725 he was elected a vestryman, serving as such until 11 April And now as to real estate records, both John and Robert had interests in a Calvert County property known as "Builings Right" (or "Bullins Right"), located at Deep Landing on the east bank of the Patuxent River. The land was some 8 miles south of All saints Parish Church. (iii)

85 App. AA Apparently John owned a considerable part of the property as early as 17 August On that date John Jarman and his wife, plus a Benjamin Wood* con/eyed a part of the tract to a Charles Allen. Subsequent transactions concerning the property were as follows, in chronological orders (1) On 25 November 1718, a Richard Blake conveyed 130 acres of ''Bullins Right" to Robert Jarman. (2) On 16 April 1729 John Jarman conveyed 260 acres out of the tract to Robert Jarman. (3V On 6 May 1730 Robert Jarman conveyed 130 acres out of the property-to Benjamin Sedgewick. (This was some 6 months after Robert had started acquiring land in Queen Anne's County, anctthe last record we have of Robert-in.Calvert County.) (4) On 15 May 1732 John Jarman and his wife conveyed 135 acres of "Bullins Right" to Benjamin Sedgewick. This is the last record-we have of John Jarman in Calvert County. With reference to the last two conveyances, the will of Benjamin Sedgewick, dated 29 December 1743, devised to his son Benjamin "my now dwelling plantation called 'Bullins Right* lately purchased of Robert and John Jarman for 375 acres." We next find that both Robert and John Jarman moved to Queen Anne's County, apparently between 1729 and Queen Anne's County is part way down the eastern shore of Maryland, bounded by the present-day counties of Kent on the north and east and Talbot and Caroline on the south. Queen Anne's was formed out of Talbot in 1706, and Caroline out of Queen Anne's and Dorcheste in Before taking up the Queen Anne's records, it may be useful to summarize what is known about the families of John and Robert. John was married before 17 August 1708, and so far as we know had only one wife. Later records show him with a wife named Lavinia, and at least two childrent (1) Lavinia, who married John Fowler (presumably in Calvert County), and had been widowed by 9 March 1726/7", when her father John and a William Whittington became sureties on her bona as administratrix of John Fowler's estate. (2) Amos, who witnessed a Queen Anne's will dated 20 (iv)

86 App. AA 25 November Whether John had other children is not knovn. Robert Jarman, as explained above, almost certainly married Mary Meade (or Meads) before Mr. Jarmon lists their children asi (1) Joseph Jarman (c ), married Ann Thomas 17 February (2) William Jarman ( ), married Penelope (Thomas) Derrenton, first child born in August (3) Robert Jarman, Jr. ( ), married Mary Ann, oldest son Robert born in February (4) Thomas Jarman (c ), son Thomas, Jr. born by 1740 and possibly before. (5) John Jarman (1712/13 - c. 1780). Presumably the foregoing is a complete list of Robert's children. Returning nov to the move to Queen Anne's County, on 4 November 1729 Robert Jarman, "of Queen Anne's County", for fc22 sterling, bought 130 acres of land in that County called "Hog Hole". To get to this property by vater one had to go up the Choptank River about 40 miles, vhere a branch called Tuckahoe Creek entered, then north up Tuckahoe about 20 miles to a branch on the vest of Tuckahoe, later called Jarman Branch. Within a fairly short time Robert made tvo more acquisitions in the same areas (1) 24 March Robert Jarman of Queen Anne's County, "gentleman", for 1»150 sterling, bought 690 acres, part of a tract called "Branford", on the vest side of Tuckahoe Creek. (2) 17 August Robert Jarman of Queen Anne's County, "Planter", for feloo sterling/ bought from William and John "Meeds" and their wives, of Queen Anne's County, 400 acres called "St. Martins", on the north side of Choptank River "in the northern main branch called Tuckahoe Creek". One of the vitnesses to this deed vas John Jarman. By various deeds dated from August 1732 through June 1734, Robert Jarman, "planter" (once "gentleman"), sold or gave away a considerable part of the lands he had acquired. (He sold 100 acres of "St. Martins" to his brother John, and gave the 130 (v)

87 App, A A acre "Hog Hole" to his son Robert, Jr.) In three of the deeds, dated 17 August 1732, Robert waa joined by his wife Mary, who signed by mark. She did not join in the later deeds, suggesting that perhaps she had died. In March 1734 Robert Jarman vas a member of the Grand Jury for Queen Anne's County. Shortly thereafter Robert may have found himself in some financial trouble. In the August term of court 1735, a Richard Bennett brought suit against "Robert Jarman, of Queen Anne's County, Gentleman", to recover on tvo bonds dated in August 1734, one for fe68. Is., 2d, current silver of Maryland, and the other for 10,104 pounds of tobacco. Robert entered a plea of "indebtedness", and the court gave judgment for the plaintiff, vith damages. With that entry, Robert's name disappears from the Queen Anne's records, and ve next pick him up in Craven County, N. C, vhen he and Thomas Smith received their grant on 1 July 173&. Hov much of his Queen Anne's property Robert retained we don't knov, but as ve shall see belov he seems to have kept at least 50 acres out of the St. Martins tract. Meanwhile, John Jarman had also moved to Queen Anne's; County. On 17 August 1732, John Jarman, "of Queen Anne's County", for b30 sterling, bought from Robert Jarman and Mary his wife 100 acres "vhich is part of a tract called 'St. Martins' and 'Branford' on the north side of the Choptank-River, "in the main branch called Tuckahoe Creek", Evidently John also picked up one more parcel out of a tract called "Enclosure". The debt books shov John Jarman living on a plantation on the west side of Tuckahoe Creek in the southeastern part of Queen Anne's: County, made up of parts of three tracts called "St.Martins", "Branford", and "Enclosure". John died intestate in 1756, and these lands passed to his son Amos as heir-at-law. John's widoved daughter Lavinia Fovler evidently moved to Queen Anne's vith him. A Thomas Hollingsvorth of Queen Anne's, left a will dated 10 November 1733, probated 18 Februaxy 1741, in which he named as his executrix "Lavinia Fowler, widow, daughter of John and Lavinia Jarman", and left his dwelling plantation, "Forest Lodge", to Lavinia for life, with remainder to his own (vi)

88 App. AA daughters. And now to tie the Robert Jarman described above to the Craven County Robert, we should first note that Craven County records showed a conveyance from Robert to his son Thomas in 1739, and the presence of a John Jerman (also his son, see Robert's will) by Note also the name "Tuckahoe". one wonders if Robert was responsible for naming the swamp and creek in what is now western Jones County. But the clincher is the Craven County will of Robert Jarman, dated 6 August 1761 (his inventory was dated 1 October 1761). The will left (1) to Margaret Wilkinson, 50 acres of land and certain personal property "as a Reward for her Services"i (2) to Margaret Cookson, one yearling heiferi (3) "to my grandson joseph jarman fifty acres of a track of Land Lying in Queen Anne's County in the province of Maryland known by the name of St. Martins"} and (4) to my son John, all the rest of my lands and personal property, he to be my sole executor. Before leaving the Jarmans of Maryland, three additional points should be notedt (1) There were other Jarmans in Maryland in the period we have been discussing,among them the following! (a) James Jarman, who witnessed the will of Leavan Smith of Cecil County, dated 21 December 1703, probated 22 May Cecil County is at the head of Chesapeake Bay, above Kent County, out of which it was formed in (b) William Jarman of Somerset County, who left a will dated 30 December 1708, probated 27 January 1708/9. Somerset County is well down the eastern shore of Maryland, below the present-day Wicomico (formed out of Somerset and. Worcester in 1867), which is in turn below Dorchester. (c) Robert Jarman of Baltimore County, who left a will dated 16 December 1722, probated 7 March 1722/3. Robert had a wife named Mary whom he named as executrix. He left his dwelling plantation, "Come by Chance", to "my two sons Thomas Jarman and William Jarman", and his personal property to "my Six Children". The witnesses were Micheall Rutledge and William Gallaway. Baltimore County, out of which the City of Baltimore was carved in 1729, is at the northwest end of Chesapeake Bay. Mr. Jarmon says that this Robert Jarman came to Baltimore from Kent County. (vii)

89 2% App. AA In Mr. Jarmon's opinion, some or all of these other Jarmans could have been related to the John and Robert discussed above, but he has found no evidence suggesting any link. (2) Nowhere in any of the Maryland records reported by Mr. Jarmon is there any reference to anyone named Spencer. (3) It has been suggested in tne main text tnac Robert Jerman may have been of French Huguenot extraction. As stated above, he was a member of All Saints Parish Church, a Protestant Episcopal church, in That fact does not negative the idea that he was a Huguenot if, as seems likely, there was no Huguenot church in the area. Under such circumstances Huguenots were known to attend the nearest outpost of the Church of England. In French Santee, S. C, the early Huguenot settlers, who had already established their own church, asked to have it taken under the wing of the Church of England in order to get financial help. (viii)

90 APPENDIX A THE SPENCERS OF HYDE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA July 1, 1981

91 App. A <f FOREWORD This Appendix A is a summary of vhat is knovn to the vriter about the first five generations of Spencer males (and some females) vho lived in Currituck Precinct, later Hyde County, North Carolina in the 18th and 19th centuries. It is based pri marily on a mountain of information supplied by Mr. R. S. Spencer, Jr., Box 159, Engelhard, N. C, 27824, a descendant of the Hyde County Spencers treated of herein, much of it in the form of abstracts of wills, deeds, estate papers, etc., plus information from other sources. Mr. Spencer is also the co-author, along vith Miss Martha Rebecca Swindell, Box 85, Fairfield, N. C, 27826, of an outstanding book entitled "In Memory Of", vhich is an extremely thorough and accurate index of Hyde County cemetery monuments. The book is cited herein as "Mem.". Important information has also been supplied by Mr. Alton Warren Payne of Nev York, formerly of Gull Rock, Hyde County. Other sources utilized herein includes The Colonial Records of North Carolina The State Records of North Carolina North Carolina Higher-Court Records and , edited by Martha Erma Edwards Parker North Carolina Higher Court Records and , edited by William S. Price, Jr. Hyde County History, a Hyde County Bicentennial Project (1976) The North Carolina Historical and Genealogical Register The North Carolinian The Mattamuskeet Documentsi A Study in Social History, by Patrick H. Garrov Journal of North Carolina Genealogy Abstracts of Wills and other Records, Currituck and Dare Counties, North Carolina ( ), compiled by Gordon C. Jones Abstracts of Vital Records from Raleigh, North Carolina Nevspapers ( ), compiled by Lois Smathers Neal. Census Records La Despencer, Nevsletter of the Spencer Family Association, Editor Mrs. Grayce H. Alsterda, 915 W. White Gate Dr., Mt. Prospect,

92 9a APPENDIX A TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages I. Hyde County - Its Location and Early History. 1-4 II. The First Recorded Spencers in Hyde County - Thomas and his son William i and another Thomas III. Descendants of William Spencer A. Thomas Spencer and his Descendants B. John Spencer and his Descendants C. Edvard Spencer and 4 his Descendants Spencer a William Spencer David Spencer Tucker Spencer Jones Spencer Benjamin Spencer Samuel Spencer John Spencer Fifth generation D. Richard Spencer and his Descendants Benjamin Spencer Frisby Spencer Robert Spencer]! Thomas Spencer? Samuel Spencer? Morris Spencer Fifth generation E. Benjamin Spencer nd his Descendants Benjamin Spencer Samuel Spencer" Selby Spencer Fifth generation F. Nathan Spencer 3 and his Descendants William Spencer Nathan Spencer Richard Spencer Benjamin Spencer Fifth generation, G. Christopher Spencer and his Descendants Peleg Spencer William Spencer. 186 Christopher Spencer, Jr Fifth generation IV. Some Unidentified Spencers V. Possible Origins of Thomas Spencer

93 APPENDIX A THE SPENCERS OF HYDE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA I. Hyde County - Its Location and Early History. One of the prominent features of northeastern North Carolina is a peninsula extending eastward, bounded on the north by Albemarle Sound (into which the Chowan River empties), and on the east and south by Pamlico Sound (into vhich the Pungo, Pamlico and Neuse Rivers flow). Today the peninsula is divided into 4 countiesi across the northern half, from east to vest, are Dare, Tyrell and Washington Counties, and the southern half is Hyde County. Some 20 miles out to sea to the east are the Outer Banks, which include Ocracoke Island (southwest of Hatteras), a part of Hyde County. To the west of Hyde County lies Beaufort County. Hyde County is divided into five townshipst Currituck on the west! Fairfield in the north central area; Lake Landing on the east and southeast; Swan Quarter on the south, between Currituck and Lake Landing; and Ocracoke Island. An interesting feature of the County is its large Lake Mattamuskeet, located more or less centrally in unorganized territory, with the town of Swan Quarter (the county seat) to its southwest, and the town of Engelhard to its east, both on Pamlico Sound. Below are a current, small-scale map of the peninsula, with a somewhat larger-scale inset (p. 3(a)), a 1733 map of the area (p. 3(b)), and a current map of Hyde County Townships (p. 3(c)). Historically, Hyde County is part of the large area established in 1663 as Albemarle County, the first county in North Carolina. Well before that year people had started moving southward from Virginia, settling on both the north and south sides of Albemarle Sound (sometimes called the Chowan River in the early days). In 1653 a clergyman named Roger Green, of Nansemond County, Va., vas granted 10,000 acres "for the first hundred persons to settle south of the Chowan River". (The North Carolinian, Vol. 1-2, pp. 165 et seq.). In 1663 the Lords Proprietors obtained their first Carolina charter, covering a vast area from about the middle of Albemarle Sound on the north, (1)

94 *f App. A to the 30th parallel on the south, and purporting to extend west across the entire continent. In that same year they established Albemarle County, and commissioned Sir William Berkeley, Governor of Virginia, to appoint a governor of "all that part of the province aforesaid /jcarolina_/ which lyeth on the North East or Starboard side entering the river Chowan, now named by us Albemarle River, together vith the Islands & Isletts within 10 leagues thereof. The same person or another to govern on the South West or larboard side entering the river and from the entrance thereof 20 leagues up the river and from the river side southerly miles southerly into the land". Another document dated 7 January 1664/5 stated that Albemarle County was to cover 1600 square miles. (N. C. Historical and Genealogical Register, Vol. 3, pp. 304 et seq.) By 1665 the Proprietors discovered that their charter did not include the land north of Albemarle Sound, where most of the settlers were living, and therefore they obtained a revision of the charter extending their northern boundary to the present Virginia line, the additional land becoming part of Albemarle County. By the early 1670's, Albemarle County had been divided into 3 Precinctsi Carteret, Berkeley and Shaftesbury, of which both Carteret and Shaftesbury included land south of Albemarle Sound. In or about 1681, Carteret Precinct was divided into two new precincts, and the names of Berkely and Shaftesbury were changed. As a result, we then had 4 precincts in Albemarle County: Currituck.said to embrace present-day Currituck County and part of today's Dare County; Pasquotank, made up of today's Pasquotank and Camden Counties and part of Tyre11 County; Perquimans, embracing present-day Perquimans County and a strip along the eastern edge of today's Gates County; and Chowan, including all of today's Chowan County, most of Gates County, the settlements in presentday Northampton, Hertford and Bertie Counties, as well as parts of Martin, Tyrell and Washington Counties. (The North Carolinian, Vol.'s 1-2, pp. 165 et seq.) Despite the statement that Currituck Precinct covered today's eurrituck county plus part of Dare, it is clear from records cited later herein that Currituck Precinct extended farther south than Dare, and included part or all of what is now the Lake Landing township of Hyde County. (2)

95 App. A 9 5"

96

97

98 App. A In 1696 enough settlers had moved south of the defined area of Albemarle County to varrant the establishment of a nev county called Bath. It is said to have embraced the present counties of Hyde, Beaufort, Pitt, Craven, Carteret and part of Dare, plus territory still further to the south and west (Idem). Again, hovever, notwithstanding the statement that Bath included today's Hyde County, it appears from records cited below that Bath did not include the Lake Landing area of present-day Hyde County, vhich remained in Albemarle County. By 1705 a part of Bath County vas established as Wickham Precinct, and in 1712 or 1713 its name vas changed to Hyde Precinct, in honor of the deceased Governor Hyde. In 1739 Albemarle and Bath Counties vent out of existence, and Hyde Precinct became Hyde County. In 1748 the area east and south of Lake Mattamuskeet, until then part of Currituck County, became part of Hyde County. The early years in vhat is nov Hyde County did not pass vithout Indian troubles. The Machapunga tribe inhabited the area, and vhen the Tuscaroras launched their attack in September 1711, the Machapungas joined in, being finally subdued in By treaty at that time the surviving Indians, sometimes called "Arrovmuskeets", were allowed to settle on the east and southeast side of Lake Mattamuskeet. In 1724 tvo of the Indians' chiefs, knovn as John Squires and John Mackey,* asked that a reservation be officially surveyed for them, and on 1 April 1727 they vere granted an area vhich vas supposed to contain 10,240 acres. From later descriptions the reservation seems to have been much larger, running from about the present Engelhard vestvard following the line of Old Mattamuskeet Creek (Far Creek) and beyond its source to the Lake, then south and vest along the Lake shore to a point near the source of Wiasockin Creek, then folloving the direction of that Creek to Machapungo Bluff on Wyesocking Bay, and then north along the sea shore to the starting point. Some time in or before 1731 John Squires became King of the Arrovmuskeet Indians. He died in By 1731 the Indians had started selling off parts of their reservation, some of the purchasers being the Spencers under discussion, and their kinsman Henry Gibbs. *A third chief vas "long Tom", mentioned belov. (4)

99 App. A <\<) II. The First Recorded Spencers in Hyde County - Thomas and his son William; and another Thomas. In the 18th century there vere apparently more Spencers in Hyde County, North Carolina, than in any other county of the state. The 1790 census shoved 12 Spencer households in Hyde, out of a total of 31 state-vide. From the available records ve can assume that all, or most, of the Hyde County Spencers descended from a Thomas Spencer, vhom I viil call Thomas 1 to signify his generation, and his son William, vhom I will call William 2. Where and vhen Thomas Spencer 1 first sav the light of day we do not yet know. However, he was certainly born before probably veil before - and he vas living in Currituck Precinct, North Carolina, by Strangely enough, another Thomas Spencer vas living in Currituck Precinct in that year, but vhether they vere related is not knovn. We have tvo "Corrytuck" Tax Lists for One named the "levies" (taxable persons), and the other listed landovners vho paid land taxes in that year. On the first list, as of 24 March 1715, ve have "Thomas Spencer, Chekencomick" /jthomas 1^ vith 2 taxable persons /Cone quite possibly his son William_7, and a tax of one pound, ten shillings. On the same list appeared "Thomas Spencer, rovnocke /~Roanoke_7", vith one taxable person Ind a tax of 15 shillings, his name having been entered on 27 April Also on that list vas a "Henry Gibs", vith one taxable person, and a tax of 15 shillings. The second list shoved "Thomas Spencer, Chekencomick" as of 24 March, vith one person owning 100 acres, taxed at 2 shillings, sixpence; a "Thomas Spencer" as of 27 April, with one person owning 100 acres, taxed at 2 shillings, sixpence; and a"henry Gibs", with tvo persons owning 600 acres, taxed at 15 shillings. (Journal of North Carolina Genealogy - Summer 1964, pp ). Some time betveen 1 April 1727 and November 1736 Thomas Spencer 1, together vith Henry Gibbs referred to above, bought a tract of land in vhat is nov Lake Landing Township, Hyde County. Thomas 1 died before (probably shortly before) 4 November 1736; and he and a vife (William 2 «s mother) vere buried in a burial place on or adjoining land in present-day Lake Landing Township 2 then owned by William. (5)