HODGE PODGE of CLARKS

                                         by Linda Sparks Starr
                                               APR 1996


[Over the past few months I've received interesting and pertinent 
comments on several topics.  They've tended to pile up -- or  got
filed away when the "cleaning bug" bit -- while I waited for time 
to "update my updates".  In hindsight I SHOULD HAVE  kept  a  run
ning tab of comments which I sent all around on a regular  basis.
I'm now starting one, "behind" as usual, but will try to keep  up
as, hopefully, more stuff comes in. My apologies for not thinking 
of this earlier.  LSS]


To my question,  "Is there any significance that a  person  named
Thomas CLARK was one of some 200+ people  whose  "headright"  was
used for land in New Kent Co.?   Mary Stewart wrote FEB 2:  "Only 
that there was someone named Thomas Clark who  arrived  at  least
once in the colony at some time bef 1673.  In  other  words,  not
much significance."   I should add that Mary has attended several 
conferences where the land patent records  were  discussed.   The
"transported" names on the patent records WERE NOT  ALWAYS  inden
tured servants.


In a later message Mary responded to my: "One thing I've  noticed
in vol. II Nugent -- several patents were for land 'granted,  but
not patented' to ... another individual than the patentee. Can  I
guess that the first individual did the necessary work  to  claim
the land, but for some reason didn't pay the  money  to  finalize
it?"  
     "Not unusual.  One of the  requirements  was  that  land  be
settled -- i.e. acreage cleared, crops planted, house  built  and
occupied.  If it was not, the original patent failed and  someone
else could claim it.  As an aside, settling the  land  frequently
took place long before it was patented.  It  is  not  unusual  to
find a name appearing in county Order books (for  instance)  long
before there is any record of land ownership."  


On Capt. Christopher's birth -- to  my  comment  that  we  really
can't take the birth year "back" much  farther  than  1681,  Mary
wrote:  "I agree.  I also think that the date of this patent  may
account for Xpher's birthdate being set  at  1681.   However,  if
this is *our* Xpher, AND an infant, why isn't there some adult in 
this group who might be a family member?  Do we have any evidence 
of Xpher's birthdate (age given in a deposition, etc.)?  

Back in early FEB, I sent a "Wanna Play Devil's  Advocate?"  ques
tion to a handful of researchers.  As I remember it --  I  didn't
keep a copy -- I was asking if there were two Christopher  Clarks
-- one a Quaker and one an Anglican who was  appointed  overseer,
etc. which Quakers were generally barred from  because  of  their
stance on oath-taking.  Sue Wright has some interesting  comments
and raises other issues along this line:
     "I'm embarrassed that I've never noticed that Penelope would 
have been 26 when Edward was born in 1710.  (That's  usually  one
of the first things I check when looking at  census  listings  --
was there a first wife, etc.)  That certainly is a late age for a 
first child to be born in that time period.  As  you  point  out,
many babies died in those days, so children  born  before  Edward
are possible.  While looking through my Clark folder,  I  noticed
that the reference I was using for the year of  birth  for  Capt.
Christopher & Penelope's children was Mr. McConnell's work.   I'm
not trying to open up yet another "can of worms",  but  how  reli
able do you feel those dates are -- based on something factual or 
merely estimates?  I noticed that all are two years apart -- thus 
the mere estimates  possibility.  Could  Edward  have  been  born
before 1710 and possibly some of the other children been born ear-
lier?  There still could have been some more children who died as 
babies, but I wouldn't think there would have been but maybe  one
or two.  A cousin  ...  commented  that  the  average  number  of
children for a  woman  to  have  during  that  time  period  (and
presumably not die in childbirth) was seven.  I'm sure there were 
exceptions."

The next day Sue commented specifically upon Christopher's  young
age to be appointed overseer:  "do you think possible if say  the
family was well established in the  area?   In  other  words,  if
Christopher came from a good, reliable family?   Or,  if  he  had
good connections -- either by blood or marriage? 

Part of my question came from a  Christopher Clarke being claimed 
as headright by Mr. Nicholas Ware -- patent  date  22  SEP  1682;
the land he received was on the north side of Mattaponi in  NKCo.
I wondered if this Christopher was the one  the  earlier  entries
referred to, and the later ones Capt. Xpher. But after reading _A 
Place in Time: Middlesex Co., VA 1650-1750_,  by  historians  Dar
rett B. and Anita H. Rutman, Norton: NY  1984, I changed my mind. 
They used as an example  a person born 1680, who was orphaned  at
eight and bound out; he married a widow DEC 1706 (thus  acquiring
land) and was appointed an overseer in  1708.   Capt.  Xpher  was
born c1681 and was apptd surveyor in  1706  and  overseer  c1708.
His marriage to Penelope, though specific year is unknown, is  in
the first decade of 1700.   

While on this book, here's another statistic which  is  of  inter
est.  (page 114)  "Almost half (48 percent) of the children  born
in this county through 1689 lost one or  both  parents  by  their
ninth birthday and almost two-thirds (61 percent) by  their  thir
teenth ... Of ... children born 1690  through  1709,  43  percent
lost at least one parent by  age  nine  and  60  percent  by  age
thirteen." 


Back in JAN Sue and Martha Wright followed up on my sugestion  we 
should see just how many other "Penelopes" appear in the New Kent 
area who could as easily be Xpher's wife.   Sue looked at the  in
dex for the St. Peter's Register and FOUND  NO  Penelope  listed.
Neither was Christopher or Jonathan CLARK listed in the index  to
the Essex Co. Deed abstracts 1724-1742.  

Sue also asked if anyone had considered if  the  Elizabeth  CLARK
who signed the marriage certificate is a SISTER  of  Christopher?
Earlier researchers have positioned her as his  wife.  Sue's  com
ment after checking Hinshaw's  reference to the marraige  certifi
cate: "Apparently Mr. Hinshaw split the record into two parts  to
make separate entries for Chris. and Edward and his  reading  was
that Eliz. was connected to Chris.  I would feel better about the 
entry if I could see the actual record."    

Continuing, she had re-read "The Albemarle Quakers"  by  Jay  Wor
rall Jr. published in MAG of VA Genelaogy, AUG 1984, No. 3:   "He
also states that Penelope died before Chris. (No. ref  given)   I
guess this could be possible because of the number  of  years  be
tween the date his will was written and the date it  was  proved.
If we accept all the Chris. Clarke entries as the same  man,  the
flip-flop in Church affiliations  is  troubling.   Based  on  the
times, I would  think  that  someone  who  had  broken  with  the
Anglican Church to join the Quakers would not have been  welcomed
back into a prominent position in the Church later.  I wonder  if
it would help to sort all the Chris.  Clarke  entries  chronologi
cally to see if such an analysis might point to there  being  two
Christophers?   [I did, and it doesn't point to two  Christophers
-- except for the religious flip-flop.]

Along this track, Martha Wright  talked  with  a  friend  who  is
knowledgable  about  Quaker  records.   Her  friend  says  "if  a
person's name appears in one of the registers (birth, marriage or 
death) that person is a Quaker.  However,  if  the  name  appears
among those signing that they had witnessed a wedding,  then  the
person may or  may  not  be  a  Quaker."   She  added  that  many
Anglicans became Quakers in 1744 during the period of  the  Great
Awakening.     [The  original  Quaker  records   are   found   at
Swarthmore College in PA.  I should have the address, but I can't 
find it right now.] 


We continued the "what ifs" on the children's ages without resolv-
ing the issue.  Worrell's article errs in that he has Edward born 
last instead of first; but he has  Agnes'  birth  in  1707  which
brings Penelope "down" to 23 when her first child  was  born.   A
bit old for the times... but their oldest child could  have  died
without his birth being recorded (remembered) later.   There  are
discrepancies among all  the  publications  on  these  children's
birth years.  

I  think  I've  commented  upon  the  fact  that  most  of  Capt.
Chistopher's children "signed by mark" rather  than  wrote  their
name.  Back in JAN this interesting message came across va-roots: 
"Prior to the 20th century, and absolutely prior to the 19th  cen
tury, a signature was not considered valid without the signer set-
ting his hand (making his mark) and seal (using a wax seal).  The 
fact that someone made a mark does  not  necessarily  reflect  il
literacy, but may, in fact, reflect the desire to make a  "legal"
signature."  This was sent by Gareth L. Mark


Moving on to Thomas Clark  as  possible  father  of  Capt.  Chris
topher.  I asked Mary Stewart if Thomas Clark could have  claimed
the land, but died before he patented it, then others moving into 
the area didn't intrude on his claim in right of his  sons?   She
responded, "Not likely. People were just as greedy then  as  they
are now!"  She then urged me to be very careful about  "assuming"
there were several Thomas Clarks "transported" (vol. II Nugent)  
     "It could be one person who travelled frequently (a merchant 
for instance).  Every time he got off a boat  he  got  the  equiv
alent of another certificate for 50 acres  which  he  could  then
sell to a  land  speculator  (and  there  were  lots  of  those!)
Headrights essentially prove nothing."


Doug Tucker makes the following points about the relationship  be
tween these CLARKs and the Quakers and  partly  explains  Xpher's
flip-flop in the religion dept.
     "Francis Clark was a practicing Quaker, as were most of  his
children.  Edward's daughters married Quakers so Edward  probably
was a Quaker as well.   I  think  Christopher  was  raised  as  a
Quaker, but chose a path outside or on the fringes of the Society 
for most of his adult life.  Since he rejoined the  Friends  late
in life, we probably should consider him  a  'latent'  Quaker,  a
category that may have fit Edward as well.
     Edward Clark was married (wife's  name  probably  Elizabeth)
and appears to have had several daughters who  survived  to  adul
thood.  I found no evidence of a  surviving  son.   Edward  Clark
died in Hanover Co. sometime between 1715 and 1719."

Adding another "source" to the Micajah Clark / Sallie Ann Moorman 
legend,  Doug  says  Christopher  and  Penelope's  great-grandson
Thomas CLARK of Surry Co. NC  (married  Rhoda  Dunegan)  named  a
daughter, Sally Ann Moorman Clark b. 1817.   He adds this  was  a
full century before the "legend" was published.  


Doug also gives information on a John CLARK of NC which  I'll  in
clude here for I'm leaving NC research to others.  He  says  most
of Francis and Edward CLARK's children migrated to Anson  Co.  NC
between 1749 and 1770.  "A mysterious John CLARK was one  of  the
larger landowners in the area of NC where Andrew MOORMAN  settled
in 1747 and where [the above CLARKs] ... settled  later.   Andrew
Moorman acquired his land from this John Clark  as  did  Benjamin
Dumas, son-in-law of Francis  Clark,  and  several  other  Quaker
migrants from Louisa Co.
     John Clark was reportedly born in Bladen Co. along the  Cape
Fear River in 1702.  There was a Quaker settlement near the mouth 
of the Cape Fear River as early as 1680 and though  there  is  no
evidence that John Clark was a Qauker  himself,  several  of  his
children married Quakers (one a Clark) from Louisa Co. and joined 
the Friends.  Was this John Clark a blood relation?" 


The question was raised on  va-roots  about  legal  ages;  Martha
Wright answered  David  Sadler's  general  question,  citing  THE
SOURCE, by Arlene Eakle and Johni Cerny, Ancestry Pub  Co:  Utah,
1984, page 186:  Witness documents, testify in  court,  choose  a
quardian, serve as an apprentice, show land to processioners,  be
punished for a crime, sign contracts,  act  as  an  executor,  be
queath personal property, or marry: 14 (male) and 12 (female)
     Be taxed or muster into militia:  16 (males only);  Take pos-
session of land holdings:  16;  'In possession of' on  tax  rolls
signifies that the person is at  least  16  years  old;  Practice
trade 18; Release of guardian:  21  (males)   18  (females);  Own
land:  21, but some states allowed females to  own  land  at  18;
devise land by will, be taxed, plead or sue in court, be  natural
ized, fill public office, serve on jury or vote:  21.

     I then raised specific questions about  the  1698  order  to
clear roads with Edward  and  Christopher  Clark's  name  on  it.
Charles Hamrick answered:  "The only thing that can be known with 
any degree of reliability is that both of the men were  16  years
old at the time the List of Tithables was taken."
     I also asked if the appearance of a 'family' between  Edward
and Xpher meant they each were heads of  households.   "The  tith
able lists that I have transcribed usually list  each  individual
tithable and I assume he is the head of household unless  specifi
cally named as in the household of another (e.g. 'living  with').
Of course this may change from one jurisdiction to  another...  I
have noticed deceased property owners in quitrent listings (which 
comes from the law that makes their heirs responsible for all  in
debtedness and the property can't be conveyed  to  another  until
those things are setttled) but dead people  paid  no  taxes  even
back when and were not found in a listing of tithables.  
     Charles then sent the specific law covering  tithables  from
vol. 2, page 83 Hening's VA STATUTES AT  LARGE:   "all  male  per
sons, or what age soever  imported  into  the  country  shall  be
brought into the lysts and be lyable to the payment of all  taxes
... but such christians  only  as  are  either  natives  of  this
country, or are imported free by  their  parents  or  others  who
shall not be lyable to the payment of levyes until  they  be  six
teen years of age ..."  For those online, his web page  has  more
Henings:  http://www.aa.net/h~hamrick


A correction that I may have made, but  probably  didn't,  to  my
"Micajah Clark and Sallie Ann Moorman" update.  The comment about 
a Capt. Micajah Clark in Isle of Wight Co. is an error;  just  ig
nore the whole bit.  I can identify  Ralph  Lock  Taylor  as  the
grand-uncle of Paul  B.  Phelps.   Taylor  "was  an  enthusiastic
genealogist, but he wasn't a scholar" according to Paul.


On the subject of researching in England, Mary Stewart wrote  the
end of FEB:  "If we are ever able to connect back to  England  it
may be through investigating Thomas (Moorman) of Warwickshire and 
what happened to him.  I think this is the most  interesting  pos
sibility I've seen in a long time...and a whole  new  methodology
to learn.  As for Capt. Chirstopher -- my gut tells me  that  Bar
badoes is the place to look, not VA.  Too few  records  to  estab
lish much of anything. Barbadoes may offer more fertile ground."


Another correction:   I  apparently  gave  credit  to  the  wrong
researcher in a recent update -- Arlene Anthony is  the  one  who
provided the intrigueing comment that Lord Shaftesbury's personal 
physician was an ANTHONY.  It's her research "which turned up the 
full  extent  of  Anthony/Clarke  ties  in  Exeter,   Devonshire,
England" according to Dave Goodwin.  She brought back  copies  of
two CLARK wills which he promises to provide details to the  rest
of us.

I asked  Dave  for  an  explanation  of  "Visitations"  which  he
provided from _Heraldry, Ancestry and  Titles_  by  L.  G.  Pine,
Gramercy Pub Co: NY 1985.  Pine formerly edited _Burke's  Peerage
and Burke's Landed Gentry_.  Briefly  --  if  anyone  wants  more
detailed explanation I did manage to save this message from  Dave
which Jeffrey can forward to those on-line  --  Visitations  were
tours of inspection by heralds, conducted roughly once  a  genera
tion and covering one county as a time.  They met  with  everyone
claiming to process a coat of arms; these had  to  provide  proof
which the heralds could accept or reject.  They began in 1529 and 
ended in 1686.  Over the  years  the  heralds  drew  "rudimentary
pedigree charts" which they enlarged as the generations went by.

He ends "I do have a problem with the coat of  arms  which  Nancy
Vashti Jacob Anthony presents in her books as possibly being that 
for Christopher Clarke of VA, since she shows no source  for  her
information."



[And that's only from all the "stuff" I've filed  in  my  various
CLARK folders!  I have one large folder of the more recent e-mail 
and letters which I haven't filed as yet.  I  have  less  MOORMAN
and only a dauble of CANDLER comments plus  more  on  Quakers  in
general.  The JOHNSON data may entail more than I think for  Dick
Baldauf's letters will be hard to condense, but less  interesting
to the group for he's sorting out JOHNSONs trying to  get  to  Ed
ward. I plan to "do" the "unfiled" folder last.   LSS] 



NOTE:  Someone with more time than I have may want to get on the
list to receive "Issue No. 2" of West Indian Genealogy.  I got
the first issue, but when I went to read the file, it wasn't
there -- and never followed through to get Jeffrey to locate it
on our disk!  The person to contact if you didn't get the message
is Vaughn W. Royal  ---  75231.511@CompuServe.com