| Notes |
- ===
1687-1698 Northumberland County, Virginia Order Book, Part 2; [Hamrick]; Page 766/9
Northumberland County Court April 21, 1697
JOHN HARTLY Attorney of Mrs. ANNE BRENT Relict and Administratrix of ROBERT BRENT deceased against Capt. RODHAM KENNER Referred to the next Court.
===
1687-1698 Northumberland County, Virginia Order Book, Part 2; [Hamrick]; Page 771
Northumberland County Court May 19, 1697
JOHN HARTLY Attorney of Mrs. ANNE BRENT Relict and Administratrix of Mr. ROBERT BRENT deceased brought Suit against Capt. RODHAM KENNER. A Nonsuit is granted the said KENNER against the said HARTLY the said KENNER pleading he passed the Obligation to Mr. ROBERT BRENT and not to the said HARTLY in his said Qualification Arid ordered the said HARTLY pay Damages according to Law with Costs alias Execution.
===
1687-1698 Northumberland County, Virginia Order Book, Part 2; [Hamrick]; Page 776/5
Northumberland County Court May 20, 1697
JOHN HARTLY Attorney of Mrs. ANNE BRENT Relict and Administratrix of Mr. ROBERT BRENT deceased brought Suit against Capt. ROD HAM KENNER. A Nonsuit is granted the said KENNER against the said HARTLY the said KENNER pleading he passed the Obligation to Mr. ROBERT BRENT and not to the said HARTLY in his said Qualification Arid ordered the said HARTLY pay Damages according to Law with Costs alias Execution.
===
Stafford County, Virginia Order Book Page 87 Court held 9th September 1690
822. SAMSON DARRELL who married the sole daughter now Living of Capt. JOHN NORGRAVE Petitioned this Court that Docter EDWARD MADDOCKS who married the relict and Exectx of the said John Norgrave deced might give security for the performance of the said Will according to the Tenor thereof and further alledged that Coll. Mason in his lifetime and all the time of his life gave Security and that Since his decease one of his Securitys are dead alsoe Therefore he prays the said Coll. Mason being dead as afsd and his Security dead Likewise that the said Docter Maddocks who Since intermarried as afsd and hath by the said Intermarriage the possession and Enjoyment of the said Norgraves Estate may be compelled to Enter into bond with good and Sufficient Securitys to be accountable for the same according to the request of the deced and as the Law enjoynes which said motion of Darrells is approved of by this Court and doe accordingly order that the said Doct Edward Maddocks doe immediately give good Security and Enter into bond for the same as the Law directs And he comes by GERRARD LOWTHER his Attorney and put in these reasons And Gerrard Lowther the attorney of Doct Edward Maddocks comes and puts in his plea in writing against Sampson Darrell and gives these reasons whereby he humbly presumes that he ought not nor is Liable to give Security Vizt. as to the Cattle they are paid Secondly the Ring is given to the Legatees according to, as to the negroes they are a personal Chattle and a remainder Limitted in the will of a Chatle personal is void because if given for an hour they are given forever but they are given to Mrs. Maddock for her life so that the remainder after her decease is void Therefore for them no Security ought to be given 4thly no Execr named by the Testator in his will are by Law compellable to find Security for the performance of the Testators will but we are Execrs therefore unless the Law will dispose and Intrust his Estate of the Testator otherwise than he designed we are not obliged to find Security for performance of the Testators will and this appears by the provision made by the Laws of this Country that admrs shall finde Security but no Law doth oblige Execrs 65 Act of assembly 21 Hen 8:15 Vide Title probate of Testaments in Wingates abridgment Lastly there has been Security already found in this matter and if the Court have discharged them without others we are not daily bound to finde new Securitys. With which Judgment of the Court as afsd he the said Edward Maddocks the deft not being content doth appeale to the Sixth day of the next General Court there to be heard before the honourable the Governour and Councel of State at James City. SAMUEL HAYWARD became Security with the said Edward Maddocks to present his appeale And ROBERT BRENT with Sampson Darrell to answer.
===
1689-1690 Stafford County, Virginia Order Book [Antient Press]; Page 101 Court held 10th September 1690
868. SAMSON DARRELL who married the Sole daughter now living of Capt. JOHN NORGRAVE petitions this Court that EDWARD MADDOCK who married the Relict and Executrix of the said Norgrave deced might give security for the performance of the said Will according to the Tenor thereof and farther alledged that Coll. Mason in his lifetime and all the time of his life gave security and that since his decease one of his Sectys is dead also Therefore prays the said Coll. Mason being dead and his Security dead likewise that Doctor Maddocks who is since Intermarried and hath by the Intermarriage the possession and Enjoyment of the said Norgraves Estate may be compelled to enter Bond with good and sufficient security to be accountable for the same according to the bequest of the deced & as the Law Injoynes And Doctor Edward Maddock comes into Court by GERRARD LOWTHER his attorney and refuses to put in Security for these reasons following Vizt. 1. As to the cattle they are paid 2d the Ring is given the Legatee according to the Will 3. As to the negroes they are a personal chattel and a remainder Limited in the Will a Chattel personal is void because if given for one hour they are given forever they are given to Maddock for her life so that the remainder after her decease is void therefore from them no security ought to be given 4. noe Exectr named by the Testator in his will are by Law compelled to find Security for the performance of the Testators Will but we are Exectrs Therefore unless the Law will dispose and Intrust his Estate of the Testator otherwise then he designed we are not obliged to find security for performance of the Testators will and this appears by the provision made by the Laws of this Countrey that admrs shall find Security but no Law does oblige Exectrs 65 act of assembly 21 Henry 8. 15 Vid Title Probates of Testaments in Wingates abrigmt. Lastly there has been Security already found in this matter and if the Court have discharged them without other we are not every day bound to find new security.
And the Court having fully and maturelay considered the matter doe unanimously concurr with and approve of Darrells motion and they do accordingly order and Therefore tis ordered that Doctor Edward Maddock shall give good security and enter into bond accordingly for the same as the Law doth Enjoyn and direct with which Judgment of the Court Edward Maddock not being there-with content doth appeale to the Sixth day of the next General Court to be held at James City. Mr. SAMUEL HAYWARD became security with Doctor Edward Maddocks to prosecute his appeale and ROBERT BRENT with Sampson Darrell to answer his appeale.
===
1689-1693 Stafford County, Virginia Deed & Will Book, Part 2 [Antient Press];
P.140 TO ALL PEOPLE to whom these presents shall come Capta. GEORGE BRENT of the County of Stafford send greeting_ Whereas ISAAC MASON late of the County of Stafford deced & Mr, MATTHEW THOMPSON did jointiey purchase of WILLIAM BEACH late of said County deced a tract of land contajainge one thousand fourty acres in Stafford County & neare ye Southside of CHAPAWAIMISI CREEKE and Whereas said ISAAC MASON did by Deed dated ye Eighteenth day of Aprill in ye Six & thirtieth yeare of ye Reigne of or Late Sovereigne Lord KING CHARLES ye Second sell unto Capt. GEORGE BRENT & ELIZABETH his Wife all his right to ye above tract of land, Now Know yee that 1 the said Capt. GEORGE BRENT for ye natural love & affecon he bearer to ROBERT BRENT of ye County aforesaid Gent & for ye some of Tenne thousand pounds of Tobacco & Caske he the said GEORGE BRENT hath sold unto ye said ROBERT BRENT ell his right & Interest in said Land. In Wittness he hath sett his hand & Seale this 13th day of November 1689
In presence of FRANCIS HAMMESLEY, GEORGE BRENT RICHARD FOOT
This Deed of Sale was acknowledged by Capta. GEORGE BRENT in the County Court of Stafford the 12th day of December 1689 And was then recorded
===
1689-1693 Stafford County, Virginia Deed & Will Book, Part 2 [Antient Press];
p.235 TO ALL CHRISTIAN PEOPLE to whom these presents shall come Wee JOHN WITHERS & MATTHEW THOMPSON of Stafford County Gent have granted unto ROBERT BRENT one Towne Lott called number Eighty One bounded wth Lott number Eighty on ye East, Street number ( ) on ye South, Street number One on ye West, Lott number Eighty Nine on ye North beinge in figure a Rombus To Have and To Hold provided allwaies . . (build upon the premises) .. In Wittness whereof wee have sett our handes and Seales this 11th day of February 1691/2
The above Deed was signed and delivered in open Court unto ROBERT BRENT by JOHN WITHERS and MATTHEW THOMPSON Feoffes in Trust on ye 11th day of February 1691/2 and was then recorded.
===
1691-1692 Stafford County, Virginia Order Book [Antient Press];
Page 244 (contd) Court held 11th March 1691/2
440. GEORGE BRENT complaining sheweth that EDWARD MASON late of this County deced Stood indebted to the plt the sum of Sixteen and Eighty nine pounds of Tobacco by bill and Survey herein Court ready to be produced for which he hath brought his action against the said ABRAM FARROW as admr of the said Edward Mason Estate .. And the said Abraham Farrow in Qualification afsd came into Court and Produced the Inventory of the Estate of. Edward Mason whereby it appeared that there was due onely the sum of Seven hundred pounds of Tobacco out of the said Inventory onely that he had in his hands a bill of one thou-sand pounds of Tobacco due from ROBERT BRENT to the said Estate who did likewise in Court acknowledge it that the same was due as afsd Therefore tis ordered that George Brent shall have Judgement for the sum of seven hundred pounds of Tobacco in the hands of Abram Farrow being the balance of the Inventory of the Edward Mason Estate for the sum of nine hundred pounds of Tobacco due to the said Estate from the afsd Robert Brent.
===
1691-1692 Stafford County, Virginia Order Book [Antient Press];
Page 245 (contd) Court held 11th March 1691/2
443. ROBERT BRENT complains against CHRISTOPHER BUTLER of this County in a plea of debt for that he the deft stands justly indebted to the pit by bill and account the sum of Eight hundred & Sixty pounds of Tobacco and Caske and denies payment And Robert Brent producing a bill of Christopher Butler for the sum of five hundred pounds of Tobacco and by his oath to his account herein Court also produced did also prove the sum of Two hundred and Ten pounds due by his account Therefore tis ordered that Christopher Butler shall make present payment of the sum of seven hundred and ten pounds of Tobacco to Robert Brent with costs.
===
1691-1699 Westmoreland County, Virginia Deeds-Wills No. 2; [John Frederick Dorman-1801 transcript];
Pages 48-49. 27 May 1696. James Neale of Charles Co., Md., Gent., to Mrs. Anne Brent, administratrix of Robert Brent, deceased, by John Minor of Westmoreland County. For 11,000 pounds of tobacco. 469 acres, being 772 acres adjoining the Court house and the other division formerly William Horton's part, except 3 acres formerly given for the said Court house and 100 acres sold and laid out for George Hinson, and next to him 100 acres laid out for John Champ but not yet granted and still in my possession, and 100 acres next adjoining the 100 acres laid out for Champ sold by me formerly to Richard Dudley. Capt. John Lord, deceased, and William Horton did in 1667 take up and pattent 1544 acres in Westmoreland County in joint tenancy, pattent dated 17 April in that year. Lord and Horton the said land did fairly divide. Horton his part thereof did sell. Lord first having granted 3 acres for a Court house for Westmoreland County out of his part, where the Court house now stands, did afterward give the remaining part to me Jas. Neale in consideration of marriage with his daughter, that is to say all the land belonging to Lord by virtue of the said pattent and division with Horton by a deed from Lord to me 26 Nov. 1687, by means whereof I am seized of the part of the pattent betwixt the said Lord and Whorton.
James Neale
Wit: Willoughby Allerton, William Harper.
27 May 1696. Acknowledged by James Neale.
===
1694-1703 Middlesex County, Virginia Deed Book 2, Part 3 [Antient Press]; Page 167
I ANN BRENT of STAFFORD COUNTY the Widdow and Admx of Mr. ROBT. BRENT Deced doe appoynt my Friend Mr. GAWIN CORBIN my lawfull Attorney to demand & recover all and every sume of money due to my husband at his death in RAPPA. or YORKE Rivers or the Countys on them or the braches of either of said Rivers & the respective deliverys or any of them to sue and prosecute as to my said Attorney shall seem moste convenient and also one or more Attorney or Attorneys to substitute under him with like power ye same to do & perform & upon receipt full releases to grant I do by these presents Rattifie and confirme with Wittness my hand and Seale this 13th day of February 1696/7
In presence of us MALACHY PEALE. Ann Brent
GEORGE BRENT
At a Court held for the County of Middlesex the 1st day of March 1696/7
This Letter of Attorney was produced in Court and by the compareing of hands was allowed to be good and authentik and admitted to record by order of Court
Honble Sr February 12th 1696/7
I acknowledge the Rect. of 2 of yours which should soone have answered but that my Brother BRENT hath been in Maryland ever since xpress tell receive lately I must acknowledge yours faver and return you my humble thanks I shall be extremely gladd if I can gett MR. BOLTONs Bills of Exhange which you shall readily have but am in fear I shall find noe better usage from him then I have melt with from Every body since Mr. Brent's Death Noe body paying me. according to your advice have sued Mr. Bolton wch MR. SPICER hath the manangement of and hope heel bring it to judgment next WESTMORELAND Court & I am in hopes CAPT. PEALE will doe me the favor to come to me after he takes his jorney into your parts where I understand he desires suddenly to goe, if so being Encouraged by your Civillity shall take the bouldness to send some Money bills to you by him yt. are in your parts and adjacent to about forty pounds In which shall begg the favor of you to putt them in such hands to gett as may bee influenced by you this Debt of yours & yt: to use WADDING being my utmost care to comply with and in order thereunto have not desposed one penny nor pound of Tobacco likewise be pleased to prosecute Mr. JOHN STEEVENS for the four pounds & recover the money, by CAPT PEALE shall send a full power for all but if that should not come this your sufficient Warrant, by wch shall be more particular Pardon this Trouble in Sr
The Bills I shall send are Your Very humble Servant
Mr. ROBT. SHOLFIELDs protested bill 11..13...0 ANN BRENT
Mr. JOHN WALTON of K & Queen 10...0...0
Mr. JA. TAYLOR Mr, JNO DIXSON 10...0...0
Mr. ALEX:NEWMAN 5...0„.0
Reovens in yor Office
Total 40_13_0
At a Court held for the County of Middlesex the 1st day of March 1696/7 The above Letter was produced in Court and admitted to record
===
1701-1707 Westmoreland County, Virginia Deeds-Wills No. 3; [Antient Press]; Page 253. 7 Aug. 1704.
Ann Brent widow of Robert Brent Gent. appoint Nathl. Pope of Westmoreland County, practitioner at law, my attorney for me in my personal capacity or as I am guardian to my son Richd. Brent son and heir at law of my late husband Robert Brent, to defend a piece of land belonging to my son Richd. Brent, now in the possession of Elizabeth Booth in Westmoreland County nigh Nominy River.
Ann Brent
Wit: Nicho. Brent, Robert Brent.
10 Aug. 1704. Proved by Nicho. Brent, Gent.
===
1705-1707 Westmoreland County, Virginia Order Book, Part I [Antient Press]; Page 16
Westmoreland County Orders 1st of March 1705/06
- RUST p STURMAN v BRENT. &c. THOMAS BONAM was attached to answer at July Court 1704, GEORGE RUST in a Plea why hee by force and armes &c. into one certaine tract ofland containing three hundred acres ofland with one Plantation thereon made and the appurtenances scituate lying and being in on the West side of NOMINY RIVER in the Parish of CopIe and County aforesd and now or late in the possession of ELIZABETH BOOTH, which JOHN STURMAN, Gent., demised to him, the said GEORGE RUST, for a tenn not yett expired, did order and him the said GEORGE from the land, Plantation and premises did eject and other enormities to him did do to his great damage and against the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen that now, &c. And whereupon GEORGE RUST by GEORGE ESKRIDGE his Attorney saith that hee is damnified and damage hath sustained to the value of one hundred pounds sterling, and thereofhath brought suit &c., And at a Court held for the sd County the 30th day of August 1704, Oath being made that the tennant in possession was duely served with a coppy of the Plaintiffs Declaration and the notice thereon endorsed, it was ordered that the tenant in possession or those under whom shee claimed haveing legall notice by the Sheriff ofthis County, or his Deputy, did not appeare at the then next Court to bee held for the said County and make him or themselves Defendants, confess Lease Entry and suffer and insist only on the title ofthe premises then Judgment to go for the Plaintiff, &c., And at a Court held for the sd. County the 27th day ofAprill 1705 continued by adjournment from the 25th day ofthe said month appeared ANN BRENT, Widdo, by NATHANIELL POPE, her Attorney, confessed Lease Entry and ouster and was admitted Defendant in the room ofTHOMAS BONAM and praysed Lycence of Imparlance till the then next Court, which was granted her; And at a Court held for the said County the 30th day ofMay 1705, ANN BRENT by her Attorney defended the force and injury when &c., and saith that the Plaintiff his action ought not tohave for that JOHN STURMAN under whom the Plaintiffsaith hee holds by virtue ofa demise did bring suite in this Court against ARTHUR BALDRO for the land now in dispute and obtained Judgment for the same, from which Judgment ARTHUR BALDRO by Mr. GEORGE BRENT his Attorney appeared at the Genrall Court held at JAMES CITTY the first day of October 1680, the matter being fully heard the oppinion of the Court was that ARTHUR BALDRO had good right and title to the land and that JOHN STURMAN had no cause of action; And did order said BALDRO to bee possessed of the land &c. ad by the Order dated as aforesd.and here &c., and ready &c. may appeare. and said BALDRO being so seized in fee of the same and makeing no disposition thereofnor haveing any heirs to inheritt the lands with the appurtenances did Escheate to the Proprietors of the Northern Neck of Virginia, whereupon ROBERT BRENT, late of STAFFORD County, deceased, and late Husband ofthe Defendant, and from whom the Defendant claimes Dower of the lands suggested the same to the Office and whereupon obtained a Grant of the Escheat as per Patent under the hand of WILLIAM FITZHUGH and GEORGE BRENT, late Agents &c., and Seale of the Office dated the 28th day of November 1694 and here in this Court ready &c., by virtue of which Gant ROBERT BRENT became possessed in fee of the land and so dyeing without makeing any disposition of the land with the appurtenances comes and descends upon ROBERT BRENT, the Father ofthe Defendant's son, and Son and heir to said ROBERT, which ROBERT BRENT being under age and the Defendant haveing Dower in the same doth hold occupy and possess by the Law shee is warranted, Whereupon the Plaintiff prayed tyme till the next Court to reply or demurr to the Plea which was granted him; And now at this Court both Plaintiffand Defendant being present, GEORGE RUST in replication saith that nothwithstanding anything by sd. ANN in her Plea aIledged hee from his claime and action ought not to bee barred for that said GEORGE saith that the Judgment ofthe Generall Court in the Defendant's Plea mentioned inter BALDRO and STURMAN under which said STURMAN said GEORGE now claimes appeares to grounded upon and for that there appeared a sale ofthe land in dispute from JOHN STURMAN, Father of the aforesd JOHN STURMAN under whom GEORGE now claimes unto THOMAS YOUELL of the County aforesd. and therefore the Generall Court adjudged as said ANN in her Plea hath alledged. Now said GEORGE by his protestation saith that the said Sale from said STURMAN the Elder to THOMAS YOUELL was but for life only, and hee said THOMAS haveing an Estate only for life could not convey an Estate of Inheritance EDMUND BRENT under whome ARTHUR BALDRO claimes from whom said ANN derives her title, And said GEORGE by protestation further saith that THOMAS YOUELL hath departed this life for some considerable tyme before the demise to him made, therefore said GEORGE conceives the whole right and title of the land is again devolved to JOHN STURMAN under whome said GEORGE claimes as the only heir at Law to JOHN STURMAN, the Elder, deced., And therefore hee from his action aforesd ought not to be barred without that the aforesd pretended sale is insufficient in the Law to pass the aforesd land in fee, And GEORGE saith hee is read to verifie and therefore prays as by his Declaration, &c.
And the Defendant saith that the aforesaid Plea of the Plaintiffby pleading pleaded and the matter in the same contained does not appeare sufficient in Law, the Plaintiff his action against Defendant to have and maintaine and that shee to that Plea in manner and form to plead hath no need nor by the Law ofthe land is bound to answer; And this shee is ready to verefie; Wherefore for default of sufficient Replication of the Plaintiffin that part the Defendant desireth Judgment and that the Plaintiff from his action against her to have may bee debarred, Which severall Pleas being fully heard and considered by the Court, it is adjudged the Plaintiffs Replication to be good and sufficient in the Law for her the Defendant to answer and doe therefore overrule her Plea thereto. Whereupon the Defendant refused to make any further Plea or to say anything more in barr or preclusion ofthe Plaintiff's action by means whereof the Plaintiffremaines against the Defendant without defence; therefore it is considered that Plaintiffdo recover against the Defendant his term aforesd. ofand in the land and premises with appurtenances as yet to come as also his damages occasioned by the trespass and ejection, but because it is not known what damage the Plaintiffhath sustained by occasion of the trespass and ejectment, it was commanded the Sheriff that by Oaths ofhonest and lawfull men of his Baylywick hee dilligently enquire what damages the Plaintiffhath sustained by occasion ofthe trespass and ejectment and return the same under their hand to this Court immediately; And the Sheriffhaveing returned twelve honest and lawfull men ofhis Baylywick who being impannelled sworn and charged to say the truth in the premises and upon their Oath do say "Wee find the Defendant a Trespasser and that the Plaintiffis damnified two pounds, tenn shillings sterling;" And further Plaintiff prayes her Majties Writ ofhere facias possessionem directed to the Sheriff of this County to putt him in the possession of his terme yet to come and uncompleated
ofand in the land and premises, And upon reexamination ofthe Court's Order the Defendant moves in arrest ofJudgment and says the Court has given Judgment for the Plaintiff although the Plaintiffnever did produce any title in evidence to the Court whereby it did appeare that the title of the land in dispute was in the said STURMAN under whome the Plaintiff claimes, therefore prayes the Judgment may bee quashed, but for the fact the Defendant as before had refused to plead any further in the matter it is considered as before that the Plaintiff do recover against the Defendant his term aforesd. of and in the land with the appurtenances as yett to come and that hee have her Majties Writt ofhere facias possessionem to the Sheriff of this County to putt him into the possession of the same. It is also further ordered that the Plaintiffdo recover against the Defendant as well the surne oftwo pounds, teoo shillings sterling, the damages by the Jury in form found as also his costs of suite by him expended, which is ordered the said ANN BRENT do pay to GEORGE RUST als execution From which Judgment, ANN BRENT by her Attorney, prayed an Appeale to the sixth day ofthe next Generall Court which is granted, the Appellant entering into Bond with good and sufficient Security to appeare and prosecute her Appeale, &c.
NATHANIEL POPE, SENR. acknowledged himself indebted to GEORGE RUST in the surne of (blank) to be paid to GEORGE RUST his heirs &c. if ANN BRENT failes to appeare and prosecute her Appeale, to perform the award and Judgment of the Court therein and to pay damages according to Law if cast in the Appeale
===
1695-1699 Lancaster County Order Book 4; [Antient Press]; Page 76
Lancaster County Court - 13th of September 1696
- Att this Court JOHN PITTMAN confest Judgment to ANN BRENT, Administratrix of ROBERT BRENT [deced], for five hundred fifty pounds of tobacco and casque which is ordered to be paid with costs als Execution
===
1694-1697 Richmond County, Virginia Order Book 2; Part 1 [Antient Press]; Page 172)
Richmond County Court 8th of October 1696
- This day EVAN THOMAS confessed Judgment to ANN BRENT, Admrx. of ROBERT BRENT deced, for Five hundred & thirty pounds of tobacco in cask upon Bill, this Court have ordered to be paid with cost of suit alias Execution
- This day JOHN KERBY confessed Judgment to ANN BRENT Administratrix of ROBERT BRENT deceased, for Five hundred & fifty pounds of good tobacco in cask upon sealed Bill which this Court have ordered to be paid with cost of suit als: Exo.
===
1694-1697 Richmond County, Virginia Order Book 2; Part 1 [Antient Press]; Page 178)
Richmond County Court 8th of October 1696
- Order is granted against the Sheriff to Mrs. ANN BRENT, Administratrix of Mr. ROBT. BRENT, for the non appearance of HENRY LUCAS
- Order is granted against the Sheriff to Mrs, ANN BRENT, Administrx. of Mr. ROBT. BRENT deced, for the non appearance of RICHD. APPLEBY
- Judgment is granted to ANN BRENT. Administrx. of ROBT. BRENT deceased, against SAMUEL BAYLY for Fourteen hundred & fifty pounds of good tobacco incask upon Bill of Specialty to be paid with cost of suit alias Execution
- Refference is granted between ANN BRENT, Administrx. of ROBT. BRENT deceased. Plt. and EDWARD JEFFERY Deft., till next Court &c.
- This day WILLIAM YATES confessed Judgment to Mrs. ANN BRENT. Administrx of Mr. ROBT. BRENT deced, for Seven hundred pounds of good sweet seated tobacco in cask upon Bill which this Court have ordered to be paid with cost of suit alias Execution
- Attachment is granted to ANN BRENT. Administratrix of ROBERT deceased, against the Estate of WILLIAM BROWN according to Declaration returnable &c.
- Order is granted against the Sheriff to ANN BRENT, Administratrix of ROBERT BRENT deceased for the non appearance of LUKE WILLIAMS according to Declaration. Attachment hereon is granted to the Sheriff
- The action brought by ANN BRENT, Administratrix of ROBERT BRENT, deceased against PETER EVANS is dismist, the Atto. of the Plantiff saying it is done with
- Judgment is granted to ANN BRENT, Administratrix of ROBERT BRENT deceased, against WILLIAM TOMLIN for Seventeen hundred & seventy five pounds of tobacco upon Bill, to be paid with cost of suit alias Execution
- Order is granted against the Sheriff to ANN BRENT, Administratrix of ROBERT BRENT deceased, for the non appearance of Capt. JOHN GLENDENING &c, Attachment hereon is granted to the Sheriff
- Order is granted against the Sheriff to ANN BRENT, Admrx. of ROBT. BRENT deceased, for the non appearance of JNO; SYMONS Attachment hereon is granted to the Sheriff
===
=== contributed by Linda Reno
1755-1765 Stafford County, Virginia Deed Book P; [Antient Press]; Page 217
6/1720: Clod of the Demise of Robert DOYNE, Thomas Heath & others in Ejectmt Francis Hammersley* of Charles County in Province of Maryland Gent aged about 40 years being sworn deposeth & saith that he well knew Richard, Elizabeth, and Anne the eputed children of Robert BRENT late of the County of Stafford Gent deced & which Robert this Depont understood from several persons lived on the plantation where Nathaniel SMITH now lives, that the said Richard Brent died without issue & as this Depont. believes under age that sd Elizabeth married Jesse Doyne late of Charles County in Province of Maryland Gent as this Depont. & believes for that they were always reputed to be married & that Robert Doyne the Lessor of the Plt has always reputed the Son & heir of the said Jesse Doyne by the sd Elizabeth his Wife & is in possession of his Fathers Estate in Maryland, That the sd Anne died without issue that Anne the Widow of Robert Brent lived on the sd plantation after the Death of her Husband till she Died that the Depont. knew one William Fenwick who lived on the sd plantation & this Depont. always understood that he lived there as a Tenant under the sd Jesse Doyne Deced & this Depont has heard the sd Jesse Doyne complain & threaten to sue Fenwick for delivering up the possession of the sd plantation to one George Grant who married the Widow of Robt. Hewitt & is now the wife of Thomas Heath & further this Depont. saith not. This deposition is to be admitted as evidence in the Trial. Jon. Mercer; Z.
Lewis. Sworn before me N day of June 1720. Jno. Lee.
===
1748-1767 Stafford County, Virginia Will Book O; [Antient Press]; Page 218
ROBERT DOYNE Son of JESSE and ELIZABETH DOYNE was Borne on the 26th February Anno Dom 1709 attested as a True Copy from the Register of Durham Parish in Charles County in Maryland May 30th 1740
pr Mathew Stone Register
Charles County I hereby certifie that Mr. Mathew Stone Register of Durham Parish came before me one of his Lordships Justices for Charles County in Province of Maryland and made oath on the Holy Evangelist that the above Certificate is a true copy Taken from the Register Book belonging to Durham Parish. Given under my hand 30th day of May 1740. Thos. Stone
At Court held for Stafford County 15th June 1759 On motion of Roht. Doyne its ordered that the Dep of FRANCIS HAMERSLEY Gent together with Certificate of Mathew & Thomas Stone to be Recorded; the Court being satisfied they are genuine. Test Henry Tyler Clk
=== contributed by Linda Reno
5/24/1757: Deed between Robert Doyne of Charles County in the Province of Maryland, Gent., grandson and heir-at-law of Robert Brent, Sr. of Stafford Co., deceased. And whereas Robert Brent departed this life leaving only one son named Richard and two daughters named Elizabeth and Ann and son Richard and daughter Ann are since dead without heirs and Elizabeth did intermarry with Jesse Doyne of Charles County in the Province of Maryland, father of Robert Doyne, party to these presents, and since is dead leaving issue--two sons, of which Robert Doyne is the eldest. Fairfax County Deed Book, 1755-1757, Page 467-470. From: SSAntient@aol.com (by way of Carol Mitchell), 6/1/1998.
===
http://image.lva.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/GetLONN.pl?first=8&last=&g_p=G2&coll ection=NN Grant
Title Brent, Robert.
Publication 2 October 1694.
Other Format Available on microfilm. Northern Neck Grants, reels 288-311.
Note Location: Westmoreland County.
Description: 200 acres escheat land. Formerly belonging to Thomas Dickeson.
Source: Northern Neck Grants No. 2, 1694-1700, Page 8 (Reel 288).
===
Contributed by: James Hughes
Note: http://lvaimage.lib.va.us/cgi-bin/GetLONN.pl?first=83&last=86&g_p=G2&colle ction=NN Grant
Title Brent, Robert.
Publication 28 November 1694.
Gen. note Northern Neck Grants No.2, 1694-1700, Page 83-86, fragment.
Other Format Available on microfilm. Northern Neck Grants, reels 288-311.
Note Location: Westmoreland County.
Description: 300 acres escheat land. Butting eastwardly and southerly upon Nominy River, westerly upon the land of Richard Hawkins, northerly upon a small creek called Kings Creek.
Source: Northern Neck Grants No. 2, 1694-1700, Page 83-86 (Reel 288).
|
Early Colonial Settlers of Southern Maryland and Virginia's Northern Neck Counties
Abt 1651 - 1696 (~ 45 years)