|
JosephSmithSr.
So shall it be with my father: he shall be called a prince over his posterity, holding the keys of the patriarchal priesthood over the kingdom of God on earth, even the Church of the Latter Day Saints, and he shall sit in the general assembly of patriarchs, even in council with the Ancient of Days when he shall sit and all the patriarchs with him and shall enjoy his right and authority under the direction of the Ancient of Days. |
BRADLEY, William III
1619 - 1691 (71 years) 
Submit Photo / Document
Set As Default Person 
-
Name BRADLEY, William Suffix III Birth 4 Sep 1619 Coventry, Warwickshire, England 
Christening 8 Jul 1621 York, Yorkshire, England Gender Male Death 29 May 1691 New Haven, New Haven, Connecticut, United States Burial Aft 29 May 1691 Center Church, New Haven, Connecticut, British Colonial America WAC 9 Jul 1930 ALBER [1] _TAG Reviewed on FS Headstones 
Submit Headstone Photo Person ID I27314 Joseph Smith Sr and Lucy Mack Smith Last Modified 19 Aug 2021
Father BROADLEY, Daniell , b. 26 Jan 1589, Bingley, Yorkshire, England Bingley, Yorkshire, Englandd. Nov 1641, Bingley, Yorkshire, England (Age 52 years) Mother WADDINGTON, Joanna , b. 1594, Bingley, Yorkshire, England Bingley, Yorkshire, Englandd. Jan 1683, Bingley, Yorkshire, England (Age 89 years) Marriage 1618 Coventry, Warwickshire, England Family ID F14790 Group Sheet | Family Chart
Family 1 PRICHARD, Alice , b. 1624, Milford, New Haven, Connecticut, United States Milford, New Haven, Connecticut, United Statesd. 5 Oct 1692, New Haven, Connecticut, British Colonial America (Age 68 years) Marriage 18 Feb 1645 Springfield, Hampden, Massachusetts, United States 
Children5 sons and 4 daughters Family ID F14819 Group Sheet | Family Chart Last Modified 24 Jan 2022
Family 2 BURR, Mary , b. 23 Mar 1749, Fairfield, Fairfield, Connecticut, United States Fairfield, Fairfield, Connecticut, United Statesd. 20 May 1784, Westport, Fairfield, Connecticut, United States (Age 35 years) Marriage 18 Feb 1645 Springfield, Hampden, Massachusetts, United States Family ID F14781 Group Sheet | Family Chart Last Modified 24 Jan 2022
-
Photos 
At least one living or private individual is linked to this item - Details withheld.
-
Notes - Personal History
of
William Bradley
William Broadley was born 27 Jan 1609/1610 in Shipley (Bradford), Yorkshire, England. He was christened 8 Jul 1621 at St. Michel, Shipley, Yorkshire, England and emigrated in 1637/1638 to America. He was a member of the Davenport-Eaton founding expedition of New Haven, CT.
William married 1, 2, 3, 4 Alice Pritchard daughter of Roger Pritchard and Frances on 15 Feb 1644/1645 in Springfield,
Massachusetts, USA. Alice was born about 1620 in England or Wales. She died 5, 6 on 5 Oct 1692 in New Haven,
Connecticut, USA.
They had the following children:
1. Joseph Bradley
2. Martha Bradley
3. Abraham Bradley
4. Isaac Bradley
5. Mary Bradley
6. Benjamin Bradlee
7. Esther Bradley, b 29 Sep 1659 in New Haven, CT
8. Nathaniel Bradley
9. Sarah Bradley
Radley The first mention of the name in England was in 1183, at the feast of St. Cuthbert in Lent, when Lord Hugh, Bishop of Durham, caused all the revenues of his district to be described. The Survey of Bolton (Burke) mentions in Washington Roger de Bradley as holding forty acres at Bradley and rendering half marc besides forest service. The Heralds visitation for the county of York, 1563-64, in the Normanton pedigree, mentions the marriage of Arthur Normanton to Isabel, daughter of Sir Francis Bradley. This would be in the early part of the fourteenth century. Burke gives fifteen coats-of-arms to the Bradleys, many of them being variations of the same coat, having a boar's head, etc. Probably all were derived from the same family.
The first Bradleys in the United States are said to have come from the market town of Bingley, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, about twelve miles northeast of Leeds on the river Aire. The town of Bradley (or Broadlea) was about seven miles to the north of Bingley. The name Bradley is Anglo-Saxon, meaning a broad field or pasture.
The father of the American pioneer of the family is not known, nor is the name of his first wife. Their son, William Bradley, according to tradition handed down in different branches of the family, was a friend of Cromwell, and the "History of Bingley, England," states that he was a major in the parliamentary army, and removed to New Haven, United States of America. He was the first of the family to come to Connecticut and sojourned for a time in Branford and Guilford, later removing to New Haven, where he took the oath of fidelity in August, 1644. He later lived in North Haven and had large landed interests there. He located on the west side of East (Quinnipiac) river, about nine miles north of New Haven, and soon gained possession of the cotters one hundred and eighty-nine acres in addition to his other lands. Thorpe's "History of North Haven" states that he was the first landowner in the village.
William Bradley (1619-1691)
From England to Connecticut
taken from “Moving with the Frontier:
The Bradley Family of America 1644-1948
In Three Biographies”
by Stuart V. Bradley, Jr.
June 1976, p. 4-19
William Bradley was born around the year 1620; the place is not known. The Mayflower had set sail that year and emigration had begun in earnest. It had been seventeen years since Queen Elizabeth’s death and James Stuart, the sixth King James of Scotland, traveled south to receive the crown as James I of England. After a long and trying rule over Scotland, he looked forward to the throne of England as a form of retirement, and in many respects he did not make a strong effort to learn about the English institutions of law and government. The twenty-year-old Prince Charles had grown up with little regard for these institutions and with a strong conviction that he was divinely ordained to rule the realm unhindered. This realm consisted of some 4Y2 million people in England and Wales with 300,000 of them in the city of London.
The unruly and comparatively sparsely settled North was beginning to reverse the trend of lawlessness and fortifications that had grown up during the many Scottish invasions. Prices continued to rise because of the glut of precious metals from the New World, but wages often stayed the same, thus hitting the poor the hardest. It had been ten years since the last major outbreak of the plague when the theatres of London had to be closed and there was much concern about the number of “sturdy beggars” and unemployed wanderers there were in the countryside. Each county sought to discourage these wanderers from settling in their districts because the poor rates had become burdensome. The price of land was very high and a large part of it was used for sheep farming to supply the fairly prosperous woolen and cloth industry. Europe was increasingly caught up in what was to become the Thirty Years War, but England was for the moment at peace, and the economy was in a period of growth.
It was sometime around this year 1620 that William Bradley was born into a staunch nonconformist family. There is no evidence or record of his birth in Bingley, Yorkshire, where first mention of him is made. This is not surprising as his family were dissenters from the Anglican Church and their children would not have been christened at the local parish.
There is some strong evidence that both William and Francis, the founder of the Fairchild, Connecticut branch of the family were related to the Bradley family of Coventry, Warwickshire, England. William Camden’s Visitation of the County of Warwick has set down the lineage and coat of arms of the Bradley family there. The arms were described as “Gules - a chevron argent between three boar’s heads or.” A silver tankard bearing these arms was found around 1800 in the possession of Sally Beecher, daughter of Eliphalet Beecher and Sarah Bradley, youngest daughter of old Stephen Bradley of New Haven, half brother to William.
The lineage at the time of visitation was set down as follows:
William Bradley, of Sheriff-Hutton, in Co. York
William Bradley, of City of Coventry, Co. Warwick = Agnes Margate
(1) Francis Bradley, eldest son, md. Francisca Watkins
(a) Francis Bradley, son and heir, aged 24 in 1619, born 1595
(b) Anna Maria
(2) Thomas Bradley, 2nd son, md. Maria Cotes
(3) William Bradley, 3rd son, md. Johanna Waddington, and had
(a) Anna
(b) Magdalena
(c) Elizabeth
(d) Letticia
(e) infant boy born Sept. 1, 1619
Joseph Philo Bradley, justice of the Supreme Court appointed by President Grant in 1870, was descended from Francis Bradley of Fairfield and in his family history made the following arguments for the relationship of the Coventry Bradley’s. He felt that William, born around 1585, and Francis, born in 1595, as uncle and nephew were the fathers of William of New Haven and Francis of Fairfield because of:
1. The family names
2. The arms which have been claimed by the family in the United States
3. The fact that William and Francis of Connecticut were followers and adherents to Theophilus Eaton and Rev. John Davenport. The significance of this circumstance arises from the fact that William and Francis of Coventry and Eaton and Davenport were all originally Coventry boys almost of the same age, and no doubt brought up in the congregation of Eaton's father in Coventry. Their ages were as follows:
William Bradley, born about 1585 to 1590
Theophilus Eaton, born 1592
Francis Bradley, born 1595
John Davenport, born 1597
As Theophilus Eaton became a very wealthy merchant, and they were all Puritans, William Bradley and Francis Bradley would be very likely to place their sons with him or under his auspices in London.
William Bradley of New Haven must have been born about 1620. He may have been the very child born September 1, 1619 when the heraldic visitors were going their rounds.
Francis Bradley of New Haven must have been born about 1625. He may have been placed with Eaton whilst a mere boy.
Other supporting evidence is:
(4) As the only son and heir of the fist marriage it makes more sense that upon his father's death, William in New Haven felt responsible for the care of his father's second wife and her children.
(5) William was reputed to have been a friend of Oliver Cromwell and a Major in the Parliamentary Army. Being Cromwell’s junior by at least twenty years and having left the country about the age of 24 make it seem necessary that he have the connections of a respected and fairly well-to-do family as Cromwell spent most of those years in and around London. Passage to the colonies and provisions for the immediate establishment of a farm were beyond the means of most common men in England and William had not time to accumulate that much money on his own.
(6) Since Burke’s Armory lists fifteen coats of arms for the Bradley name and Camden’s Visitation was not published until 1877, it seems highly unlikely that the coat of arms had been copied or borrowed in the 18th century by Stephen's granddaughter.
The fact remains that William left England as a resident of Bingley, West Riding, Yorkshire and the only suggestion of a connection with Yorkshire is through the first William Bradley of Sheriff-Hutton which is forty miles to the east. Possibly, William's father removed to Bingley when he married his second wife, Elizabeth. If there is this connection with the Coventry Bradley’s then this would take the family back to approximately 1530.
Let us briefly consider the origin and early history of the name Bradley. The name originally was a place name referring to a wide “leah” or meadow and the Yorkshire Domesday book of 1086 refers to three such places: Bradelei, Bradeleia and Bradelie. In the parish registers this name was as frequently spelled Broadley as it was Bradley. From a designation of place such as John of Bradley it evolved into a family name. The will of one William Bradley of York was recorded in the County York December 1, 1467.
The earliest reference to William Bradley in England places him in the market town of Bingley in the West Riding of Yorkshire. This reference is from Ancient Bingley by J. Horsfall Turner and reads:
Broadley. One of the noblest Nonconfonnist families of Bingley bore this name, and their descent may be traced in the Parish Registers. It was occasionally spelt Bradley, and one of them Major William Bradley, of Cromwell's army, is traditionally said to have emigrated to New Haven, Conn. About 1643.
Bingley is situated 14 miles northwest of Leeds, six miles northwest of Bradford and 212 northwest of London. Spread out along the north bank of the River Aire, it was the market center for the surrounding area which at that time in Stuart England was predominantly the West Riding woolen industry. Much of the work of this industry was carried on in the farmhouses and cottages and the primary beneficiary of the dissolution of the Monasteries was the Halifax “clothiers” that then obtained much of these church lands for sheep farming. The other chief beneficiary was the yeomanry and farmers. Bingley was not spared the conflicts and disputes of these two groups over enclosures of land.
The terrain of the town is hilly as it rises from the river to the moors. The Bingley Parish Church of All Saints was built in Norman times, but has survived to the present time. The King appointed the Vicars that served that Church in William's time. This countryside along with the rest of England was still very much plagued by the Black Death. There were three major outbreaks during William’s life there - in 1625, 1630 and 1636-1637 that together took over 50,000 lives according to records. The parish registers of Bingley record that 25 persons died of the plague between July 6 and November 22, 1631 and were not buried in the Church yard, while sixteen names were listed in the register of regular burials for the same time period. The huts that the ill were confined to were known as pesthouses and in Barnsley. West Riding the Court Sessions made other orders to prevent the spread of the plague, such as the following
by one of which it was sought to restrain sellers of ale and beer, who offered liquid refreshment for sale “in the open street to passengers and travelers, traveling on the high road between Dorcaster and Wentbrigg, to the great danger of infecting the inhabitants there with the contagion of the plague now in this dangerous time of sickness and visitation, because they entertain and discourse with all manner of passengers and travelers,
wanderers and idle beggars.” As nonconformists, William and his family were required to pay a tax for nonattendance of Anglican worship services.
The origin of the Congregational name was derived from the 19th article of the Church of England which read: “The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly administered according to Christ’s ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.” These Congregationalists wanted to purify the Church of England by reforms within, hence the name Puritans, which was originally used as a form of abuse by their opponents. At this time, the small Congregations met in each other’s homes and in their worship put a strong emphasis on studying the scriptures and expounding them through the sermon. They earnestly believed in the doctrine of predestination as described by John Calvin in his Institutes of the Christian Religion:
“Predestination, we call the eternal decree of God, by which he has determined in himself; what he would have to become of every individual of mankind. For they are not all created with a similar destiny; but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others.”
Persecution of these nonconformists became more intense under Charles I and William Laud and many chose the route of emigration to the New World. Some historians have gone so far as to credit Laud as “the founder of Anglo-Saxon supremacy in the New World” because his persecution of nonconformists caused so many thousands of Puritans to flee England. William Laud was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury by Charles I in 1633 at the same time he ordered the repainting of the Book of Sports in all the parishes. This Book of Sports described the amusements that could be pursued on Sunday after worship, including such activities as dancing, archery and May-games. This was decreed to be read in all the Churches, but many preachers with Puritan leanings refused and were dismissed.
Along with his nominee, Archbishop Neille of York, Archbishop Laud proceeded to enforce his reforms of the Church. Many of the northerners felt that his great emphasis on display was a return to Catholicism. “Among the Laudian innovations were the introduction of elaborate church furnishings, the provisions to alter rails, the requirement to take communion in a kneeling position and the practice of bowing to the alter.” Many protested and many immigrated to New England. In 1642, representatives of the Yorkshire gentry made a humble petition to the King to “implore your Majesties Concurrence for the propagation of the Protestant Religion, and suppression of Popery” for a “Kingdom divided cannot stand.”
In other parts of England, those who would eventually found the New Haven Colony were engaged in other pursuits. Both John Davenport and Theophilus Eaton were originally from Coventry .John Davenport had bee baptized by Richard Eaton, Vicar of the Holy Trinity Church of Coventry and father of Theophilus Eaton in 1597. John and Theophilus were probably playmates. As they grew up, they pursued different occupations, Eaton as a merchant with international connections and Davenport as a preacher who was so popular that he was elected Vicar at the age of 27 of St. Stephen’s, Coleman Street, London. From that year 1624 unti11633, he increasingly came into conflict with the government over Church practices and control of lay fees for parish preachers that a small group of like-minded men had invested in. During this time also, Davenport had joined Eaton in some investments in New England trading companies. When William Laud was raised to the position of Archbishop of Canterbury, Davenport feared that he might be imprisoned for some of his practices. He went into hiding, resigned and eventually fled to Amsterdam and Rotterdam to continue his preaching there. It is believed that Davenport had become a nonconformist partly due to the urging of John Cotton and Thomas Hooker, the former of which had been hidden by Davenport while he was fleeing his rectorship in Lincoln for New England.
By 1636, persecution had followed him to the Netherlands, so he slipped back to England, only to find that conditions had become worse for Puritans and many of his Coleman Street parish had emigrated. Meanwhile, he had received very encouraging reports from Cotton about conditions in New England and as prospects for business ventures dwindled for Eaton they decided to form a new company and sail for New England. They chartered the Hector and arrived in Boston on July 26, 2637, where Davenport was taken into Cotton’s home as a guest. They found the Massachusetts Bay Colony turbulent over the Hutchinson case and although they received many generous offers of land in or near established colonies, by fall they chose to settle some territory that had been recently explored during the war with the Pequot Indians. After the waiting out the winter, they sailed for Quinnipiac and arrived in the middle of April 1638 on the west end of the grant of Robert Rich, Earl of Warwick. John Davenport wrote to a friend in England saying, “the sight of ye harbour did so please ye Captain of the Ship and all the passengers that he called it Fayre Haven.” The land was purchased from the Indians in exchange for protection and a gift of “Twelve coates of English trucking cloath, Twelve Alcumy spoones, Twelve Hatchetts, twelve hose, two dozen of knives, twelves porengers and four Cases of French knives and sizers.”
Although Henry M. Bradley’s Brief Sketch of some of the Bradley Families in America (1898) states that William Bradley arrived in New Haven on July 16, 1637, it seems highly unlikely, and no other source has been found to back up his claim. There is some slight possibility that William, like many others, returned to England when the Civil War broke out only to return to the New World a few years later. Most evidence suggests, however, that William in his early twenties fought in the Civil War until he emigrated sometime in the spring of 1644. This remains the most difficult question to answer and one is reduced to speculation about why William would choose to emigrate just when the Civil War was beginning to turn in favor of the Parliamentary army.
In the Civil War, Yorkshire for the most part took the side of Parliament and rallied behind Ferdinando, Lord Fairfax from Wharfedale who attracted a following from the Aire valley. The active fighting started for Bingley when troops were recruited for the defense of Bradford in December 1642. The defenders were “armed with clubs, scythes, spits, fails, sickles fastened to long poles, and such like rustic weapons.” The fighting was protracted and difficult in the north such as at nearby Skipton where the castle was under siege by the Royalists for three years until 1645. The uncertainty of the fighting must surely have contributed to William’s decision to emigrate. Although William was reputed to be a friend of Oliver Cromwell’s, Cromwell’s reputation and success were far from secure at that time.
The decisive battle in the north took place in July of 1644 when William Bradley was bearing the shores of the British colonies. The Royalists led by Prince Rupert were engaged in battle by Parliamentary forces led by Fairfax and Cromwell before they had had a chance to rest after a very long and hot march. The only distinguishing difference between the cavalry on either side was a white “favour” worn in the Parliamentary hats. When Fairfax was trapped behind enemy lines, he merely removed the favour from his hat and rode through the lines to safety. Cromwell’s Ironsides, a specially trained double unit of cavalry, were decisive in the victory. By very late evening, the Royalist forces were scattered, the wells had been drunk dry, many men had died from exhaustion, and Rupert escaped by hiding in a bean patch.
The wages of a soldier were not great and passage to America was beyond most people’s means at that time. Leaving at the age of 24 further indicates that William must have come from a prosperous or noble family. At this time passage was £6 with necessary supplies bringing the total outlay to £20, which was quite a considerable amount of money. It caused many to indenture themselves as servants in exchange for the passage. Unlike later immigration to America, the motivating reasons had to be more political and religious than economic. As the English historian G. M. Trevelyan has expressed it:
If proof were needed that Lauds rule was a persecution, it would be found in the fat that many thousand religious refugees of all classes abandoned good prospects and loved homes in England to camp out between the shore of a lonely ocean and forests swarming with savage tribes.
Although it is not known what vessel William Bradley sailed in to America, John Josselyn has left his account of the same voyage across the Atlantic in 1638, which gives an insight into the state of transportation and knowledge of that time. In April of that year, he boarded the New Supply with 48 sailors and 164 passengers, but before the ship left the shores of England, it was stopped and two members of the crew were impressed into the navy. Once out of sight of land, Josselyn’s narrative turns to punishments for offenses on board, deaths from disease and unusual sights on the ocean. One servant was ducked for being drunk on stolen “strong waters” and another was whipped “for filching 9 great Lemmons out of the Chirurgeons Cabin, which he eat rinds and all in less than an hours time.”
Small pox caused several deaths and the burial at sea involved the tying of weights to the neck and feet and firing a cannon when the body is pushed out a porthole. After two weeks, many passengers came down with smallpox and other illnesses. Some of the unusual sights Josselyn records are spouting whales and an iceberg he describes thusly:
The Fourteenth day of June, very foggie weather, we sailed by an Island of Ice three leagues in length mountain high, in form of land, with Bayes and Capes high cliff land, and a River spouting off it into the sea. We saw likewise two or three Foxes, or Devils skipping upon it.
After fishing off the shores of Newfoundland, they passed other ships that gave them news of the colonies, of a general earthquake in New England and the birth of a “monster” in Boston (apparently a physically deformed baby). They arrived in Massachusetts Bay in early July having taken a little over two months for the voyage.
At this point in the narrative, he digresses to give some practical advice to the planter who intends to make the voyage and settle in the New World. The provisions for the standard diet are to include beef or pork, fish, butter, cheese, peas, pottage, water gruel, bisket and beer. For private use he recommends medicines, spices, dried fruit and lemon juice to prevent scurvy. He lists the needs for clothing for of one man which includes “ells of course Canvas to make a bed at Sea for two men, to be filled with straw.” Household implements for a family of six are listed as “one Iron pot, one great copper kettle, small kettle, lesser kettle, one large frying pan, small frying pan, brass morter, a spit, one grid-iron, two skillets, platters, dishes, and spoons of wood.”
He describes Boston as more of a village than a town with no more than thirty houses in all. After paying his respects to Governor Winthrop, he delivered to Mr. Cotton the translation of several psalms into English meter apparently to used as hymns. His narrative goes on to describe his experience while living in Boston for a few months, but none provides as much insight as his story of the beginnings of slavery in the colonies.
The second of October, about 9 of the clock in the morning, Mr. Mavericks Negro woman came to my chamber window, and in her own country language and tune sang very loud and shrill, going out to her, she used a great deal of respect towards me, and willingly would have expressed her grief in English, but I apprehended it by her countenance and deportment, whereupon I repaired to my host, to learn of him the cause, and resolved to intreat him in her behalf; for that I understood before that she had been a Queen in her own countrey, and observed a very humble and dutiful garb used towards her by another Negro who was her maid. Mr. Maverick was desirous to have a breed of Negroes, and therefore seeing she would not yield by persuasion to company with a Negro young man in the house; he commanded him wil’d she nill’d she to go to bed to her, which was no sooner done but she kickt him out again, this she took in high distain beyond her slavery, and this was the cause of her grief
No doubt, William also stopped in Boston and found it a little more built up than did Josselyn six years earlier. At least one genealogist writes that William stayed for a time at both Branford and Guilford before settling in New Haven Colony. The first mention of William Bradley in New Haven Colony records was on August 5th, 1644 when he and twenty seven other men were administered the oath required them to be “true and faithful” and to submit to the laws of the Colony in person and estate and to use their suffrage to the best of good of the commonwealth. This oath had been finalized the previous April and made a requirement for admittance for anyone wishing to live within the Colony.
Almost all of the specific information on William’s life and activities has been gleaned from the proceedings of the General Court of the Colony of New Haven. The General Court was attended by all the householders or free planters, but only those that were Church members and had taken the oath of fidelity and freeman’s charge could vote. Much of the law had been borrowed from John Cotton’s “Moses his Judicials” which was based on the Massachusetts Bay Charter, the common law of England and the Mosaic code. Justice was administered by a court that consisted of those Church members chosen to be the seven pillars of the Church. They in turn chose a magistrate which initially was Theophilus Eaton who is felt to be responsible for the rejection of the use of jury trial in the Colony.
Although the town had set aside town lots for those that would come later, William chose to settle some land at a distance north of the town on the west side of the East River near Cedar Hill. He originally acquired 187 acres in what was known as the “East Farms” and he soon acquired more. His land stretched into what would later be the town limits of North Haven and therefore he is credited with being the first settler there.
It would not be considered wise for a young man of William’s age and occupation to remain unmarried for long. He therefore undertook to negotiate a marriage or have it negotiated for him and on February 18, 1645, he married Alice, the daughter of Roger Princhard of Springfield. After an agreement is reached over the estate and financial considerations the couple is then free to work on their affections towards each other.
Parental consent was legally required for a first marriage, and parental consent usually depended upon the attainment of a satisfactory bargain with the parents of the other part, each side endeavoring to persuade the other to give a larger portion to the young couple.
The Puritans regarded marriage as a civil ceremony to be conducted by a magistrate. This was a direct protest against other churches having marriage as one of the sacraments. The legal obligations were very carefully laid out. A notice of the intention of marriage had to be published three times at the town meetings or lecture, then posted on the Meetinghouse door for a minimum of fourteen days before the ceremony. It was also necessary to have witnesses at the ceremony. The bridegroom was obligated to report the marriage to the town clerk within a month or be fined. Ministers were not given the power to perform marriages until 1686, but the content remained the same.
To obey God, the husband and wife were expected to “love each other above all the world.” However, they were at the same time cautioned to moderation in affections and if death parted the couple it was commonly felt to be a result of too much affection, which might have obscured their primary obligation to God.
Thus when a Lady Mary Vere lost her husband, John Davenport wrote: “The relation which once you had to this earthly husband is ended, and ceaseth in his death, but the relation you have to our heavenly husband remayneth inviolable So that is but a conduit pipe that is broken; the fountaine being still open to you.”
William and Alice’s first child was born the following January and they named him Joseph. In all they were to have four sons and four daughters, all with very Biblically oriented first names: Joseph, Martha, Abraham, Mary , Benjamin, Esther, Nathanial and Sarah, who was born in 1665. This represents twenty years of childbearing and at least thirty-five of child rearing.
William’s name next appears in the town records of December 3rd, 1645, in regard to a dispute between Captayne Turner and Mrs. Stolion over a barter of cloth for some cows. Turner felt Mrs. Stolion’s price was excessive and cited her dealing with William Bradley in which she sold him cloth at 20 shillings per yard that cost her about 12 shillings. In payment she received wheat at 3s.6d. per bushel which she sold then to the baker at 5 shillings per bushel and had William deliver it six months later. Turner went on to cite nine other instances in which he felt she had taken advantage of her customers. The case was referred to the Court of Magistrates. This case gives an excellent view of the scarcity of money in the Colony. In Mrs. Stolion’s various dealings she bartered for cattle, wheat, corn, beaver, wampum and silver. To this can be added English shillings, Dutch guilders, Spanish pieces of eight, wool, peas, beef, pork, bread, brass and iron. The regulations of black and white wampum were especially difficult and all this added up to a very confusing monetary system in which the town government had to intervene to prevent exploitation.
About that time William was appointed along with four others to view the East River for the best place to build a bridge on the way to the Connecticut Colony. Earlier, the town had been undecided whether they should bear the entire cost of the cart bridge or pay £100 towards it, leaving the balance to be paid by those owning land on either side of the river. These owners would be recompensed by having the sole right to the profit for fish taken from the bridge. When their report came in they had chosen a sight 1½ miles above the old passage. They requested £4 10s for the carpenters work and 20s for preparation of the banks. Also, they recommended that a surveyor be sent to layout a road so that the travelers would not damage the farms along the way.
At this time, the local transport and communication was confined to canoes, skiffs, shallops and floats in the water and horseback and carts on the land. It came to the town's attention that some of the canoes were in poor condition and dangerous to use so they appointed viewers in March 1645.
It was ordered that Jasper Craine and Robert Ceely before the next second day, shall view all the cannows belonging to the English about this towne, and marke them with the towns mark all such which they shall approve as fit for the English to use, and no person. ..in this plantation shall lend or use any cannow that is not
so marked by the persons aforesaid, under penalty of 20s. fine.
Six years later, the East River was still a problem.
It was propounded that some safer way might be found out to Connecticote, that the danger of the east river may bee avoided. The new way was desired to be viewed againe; or William Bradley offered to lend his cannow to lye in ye East River, if the Towne will finde ropes to drawe it too & againe. It is left to the Townsmen to consider of and detemin as they see cause.
Another town duty that William was given was that of viewing fences. In 1645, he was viewer of the fences for the farms, in 1660 for the Governor’s quarter and 1661 for the north part. The fences were maintained to protect the planted fields from being damaged by the grazing animals and by town ordinance any damage that occurred would be levied against those that had left their fences in disrepair. The members of the committee of viewers were to walk around their district one-day in the first full week of every month and mark where mending needed to be done and inform the owner of those fences. At the beginning of the year, it was expected that each planter would be on hand to acquaint the viewer with what sections of the fences were theirs and they were also responsible for paying the viewers for their labors.
There was a town duty that only Deacons and Deputies were exempted from. The night watch duty called for four men to meet at the watchtower 1½ hours after sunset with their firearms and pace back and forth the whole night. An officer of the town was required to spot-check them to prevent any sleeping on duty .The planters were required to perform this duty except in a time of danger, then they were to watch at home.
William’s mother died sometime before 1634 when his father remarried. Elizabeth, his second wife, bore him the following children: Ellen, Daniel (born about 1635), Joshua (born about 1637), Nathan (born in 1639) and Stephen (born in 1642). When his father died around the year 1645, he invited his stepmother and half-brothers and sister to come to America and live with him. This they did sometime between 1646 and 1648, according to different sources. A story passed down through Nathan's family and told by his great-grandson Zebul Bradley follows:
“...the said Nathan Bradley was seven years old when he left England; that when the company, with which Elizabeth Bradley and her children were associated, were passing through the streets of London, on the eve of their departure from England, Nathan became separated from the company and lost them. He sat down
on the doorsteps of a house and began to cry. A woman hearing him asked, ‘What is the matter?’ He answered, ‘I have lost my mother.’ She asked, ‘Where were the company to put up a night?’ He replied, ‘At the sign of the White Horse of the Crepplegate.’ She said, ‘I know where that is.’ Thereupon, she told a boy to take Nathan to the inn referred to. When he arrived there, he found his mother weeping, not expecting to see him again."
They all moved in with William and were under his care until Nathan and Stephen grew up to young manhood. It is about this time that William’s probable cousin, Francis Bradley, is mentioned in the town records as being in the employ of Governor Eaton. The reference implies that Francis’ time as apprentice was nearing completion. He
later removed to Branford and then to Fairfield where he took the Freeman’s pledge in 1664.
Alice gave birth to Martha in 1648 and Abraham on October 24, 1650. The following May, William was fined two shillings for neglecting to report the birth of Abraham. Thus at the age of thirty, William found himself the head of a household which included his stepmother who was not much older than himself, his wife, and eight children spanning from Ellen, who was nearing marriageable age, to newly born Abraham. What were the relations and duties between parents and children in this Puritan farming household?
By law, a father was to insure that his children were instructed “in some honest lawful calling, labour or employment, either in husbandry, or some other trade profitable for themselves and the Commonwealth.” Generally, a child was left to play until the age of seven when he or she would start to take a hand in the housework and farm chores. Somewhere between the ages of ten and fourteen, a boy was expected to choose his calling because most apprenticeships lasted seven years and a young man would hope to be on his own at age twenty-one. Not only were the boys sent from home to learn a trade, but also many girls were sent to other households to learn housekeeping. This was beneficial for several reasons.
One writer said that psychologically, this separation of parents and children might have had sound foundation. The child left home just at the time when parental discipline causes increasing friction, just at the time when a child begins to assert his independence. By allowing a strange master to take over the disciplinary function, the parent could meet the child upon a plane of affection and friendliness. At the same time, someone who would not forgive him any mischief out of affection for his person would teach the child good behavior.
The parents were further obligated to insure a good marriage for their children and often saw to it that the young couple started out on a firm economic footing.
William acquired more and more land over the years within what was known as the East Farms because the area bordered on the East River. The original East Farms were granted to David Atwater, Nathaniel Turner, William Potter, Richard Mansfield, Governor Eaton and Francis Brewster, whose land was later acquired by William. There are numerous references in the town records regarding William’s dealings with land. It seems that an Abraham Smith departed the colony and left his land to William, but a few years later it is under consideration whether the land should be taken back again. In 1654, William was reprimanded for neglecting to list in that year's rate three acres of land and three acres of meadow. It “was judged by the Court to be a neglect at best” and “they are to pay double for what they should have paide for them to one rate.” William is also mentioned as coming to the aid of a planter couple who had lost much from fire and he was among those that divided up their farm in order to plant and cultivate it apparently while the couple rebuilt their farmstead.
The agricultural products that William probably produced were peas, beans, wheat, Indian corn, hops, fruit, beef, pork and dairy products. The livestock involved a combination of horses, working oxen, cows, sheep, goats and hogs. Any cows or hogs that got loose in the planting fields were picked up and placed in the town pound until the owner paid a fine. Horses were branded and cattle earmarked and the town placed bounties on wolves, bear and foxes to further protect the livestock. The most unusual danger to the crops were the occasional Indian “pawpaws” in the district when they would gather just outside the marketplace. The planters appealed to the chief sachem and no damage was done.
In selling their surplus goods, besides bartering, there were two market fairs every year at New Haven in May and September to sell cattle and other products. The Colony exported much of the agricultural produce to the West Indies where the sugar plantations needed fish and corn to feed the slave labor, and horses to do work. The settlement patterns of the farms followed the rivers, so river transportation could be used in getting the produce to market.
It appears that Joshua Bradley, one of William’s half-brothers, had a propensity for getting in trouble. At the age of fifteen, he and several other boys were called before the Governor and Magistrates and accused of having “had committed much wickedness in a filthy corrupting way one with another.” They were examined individually and their confessed actions “were of such a filthy nature as is not fit to be made known in a publique way.” Their punishment was to be whipped publicly.
Two years later, Joshua again got in trouble, but this time they chose to detail just what his offenses were.
Samuel Marsh complained that Joshua Bradley being keeping cowes came to his house, one Saboth day, and when his wife and hee was come to Towne to ye Meeting, the said Joshua did cary it in a base, filthy, lustfull way toward a daughter of his which he left at home, aboute six years old, pulling her downe, upon ye bedd, kissing of her, laid his legg over her, put his hand upon her bare belly, and when the child gott away, he caught her againe and threw her upon the bedd again, etc.; and when he came home at noone, the said child and another little boye, about foure years old, complained to him that Joshua was naught, and then told him as before; all which the said Joshua owned now before ye Court, though he had impudently denyed it at first, and was sentenced to be severely whipped for these miscarriages, and ye more sharpely because it is a returning to ye same way of filthyness he hath bine formerly corrected for.
The punishments varied from executions for adultery, witchcraft, and acts of “unspeakable filthiness” to banishment or for lesser violations the stocks, pillories, fines, imprisonment, whipping or the humiliation of wearing a halter for a period of time in public.
In the town records of November 1654, appears a dispute over some cut and hewn timber, which William bought from a man whose house had burned down, but who later, bought a house instead of building another one. This lumber was piled up in his ox pasture when a Thomas Johnson cut some of the pieces up and began carrying them away for his own use. William was awarded five shillings in damages. Also that day, William acquired form Mr. Peel, 154 acres of upland and thirty acres of meadow.
It is possible that William desired this timber to add onto his own home. The typical Connecticut house of that time consisted of two rooms separated by the chimney that was placed in the center of the house. In front of the chimney was the entry and staircase, with each of the other three sides containing a fireplace with the back one used for cooking. This hallway in the rear of the house for cooking and dining became overcrowded, so it was common to build a lean-to addition to the back of the house to serve these needs as well as providing more sleeping space. The chimney itself was about ten feet in diameter and made of stone or brick. It was built to support a large beam, known as the summer beam that ran parallel with the front and back of the house and provided the main support for the second floor.
The two large main rooms contained little furniture except for beds that were always ready to accommodate guests or travelers since were very few inns at that time. They also began to use cedar shingles instead of thatch on the roof. The danger of fire was ever present and the town made ordinances about what precautions were required. It was mandatory that each house have its chimney swept once a month in winter and every two months in summer. Ladders and fire hooks must also be readily available to reach and fight any fire on the roof or upper part of the house. They also had an ordinance against the burning of leaves, straw and such within the confines of the town.
The town records also mention other individuals in William’s extended family. William’s stepmother, Elizabeth, known as Widow Bradley, appears in the town records in 1655 when it was ordered that as long as she stays in the town “and is employed as a midwife, wherein she hath bine verey helpful, specially to ye farmes, and doth not refuse when called to it, she shall have a house and home lot, which may be convenient for her, rent free.” Not long after this, she married John Parmalee and moved to Guilford along with Nathan and Stephen. Elizabeth married again after John Parmalee's death in 1663 to John Evarts of Guilford.
William continued to be head of a large household as his own children replaced his half- brothers as they departed his direct care. Let us make a closer look of their daily life. Their regular diet consisted of a porridge for breakfast or dinner made with meat, peas, beans or other vegetables or mush and milk. This usually preceded the rest of the meal as a filler so spare the small amount of meat. The turnip was used more commonly than the potato at that time. Their main beverage was beer. They did not do any cooking on the Sabbath, so it was traditional to put a pot of beans on the fire to slow cook until the family returned after attending church.
Travelers were a very welcome source of news and social interaction. Also, the Sabbath was over at sunset on Sunday, so Sunday evening became the time for social visiting and courting. It was partly as a result of this that bundling developed as a custom, because it would be late at night before a guest might wish to return home. In order to conserve firewood and candles, the courting couple would carry on their conversations under the bedcovers and eventually fall asleep towards morning. As this was done clothed and with others sleeping in the same room, there was no question about bundling being improper.
Compared to England during this time, the people of the colonies were quite healthy. Even though New Haven suffered considerably from an outbreak of malaria in the 1650’s, there was no outbreak of the plague.
As head of the household, William had a very specific and required duty to perform in family worship. Every day was begun and ended with worship that included the reading of Scripture and prayer. Grace was said at every meal with everyone standing behind their chairs with their heads bowed. Saturday was the day of preparations of the Sabbath. All the cooking and cleaning was done and the parlor floor received fresh sand before the Sabbath began at sunset.
The head of the house was also responsible for the education and religious instruction for any other persons under his roof. A servant at that time was anyone who worked for another in any capacity. A person received no prefix to his name until he became a master workman, artisan or husbandman. Then he would be referred to as Goodman and his wife as Goodwife or Goody. A man who employed labor, but did not work with them was referred to with the prefix Mr., William was also know known as Goodman Bradley which meant that the took direct part in the operation of his farm his whole life. Socially, it was not that detrimental to have been a servant because almost everyone had been in his or her youth at least.
William and his family made an early start Sunday to travel the distance to the Congregational Church in New Haven. There were drummers that announced the services with a “first and second drum.” The families traveling from the farms usually arrived at the first drum and retired to their “Sabbath-day houses.” These were huts near the meetinghouse where the travelers would keep their horses and warm up around a fire. They also left their lunches and traveling coats there before going to the services and it was also where they retired for the intermission between the two lengthy services.
The main seats in the meetinghouse were assigned, but not to anyone below the status of Goodman. The second drum announced that all should come and take their seats and the drummers would not stop until most were inside. The soldiers were given their own bench near the door in case of an emergency and women and children were kept away from the exit.
The seating arrangement was recorded in the town records. In 1655, William was placed in the fourth row of the cross seats at the upper end and John Allen, the husband of William’s half-sister, Ellen, was in the second row against the soldier seats. The men and women were separated and Goody Bradley was in the sixth row of the long seats for the women. The seating was changed in 1661 and William was placed in the fifth row of long seats for men, with John Allen in the ninth, and Sister Allen and Sister Parmalee sat together in a short seat near the wall.
Sunday worship was also a social time when the minister made announcements of intended marriages and prayer requests for the sick and those on a journey. There were also days set aside for “extraordinary humiliation” that became just like the Sabbath. During the week there were neighbors' meetings for prayer and Bible study.
The meetinghouse in New Haven was a building fifty-foot square with a tower and turret, and casement windows with glass panes. The platform on the roof was the town's watchtower. Inside there was a large and a small gallery with a high pulpit and stairs in the front. The building erected in 1640 was always in need of repairs, so a new structure was built in 1670.
The Church was an “association of saints” and each was expected to be able to point to his conversion, when the Spirit came to him, and before being admitted to a church he would have to describe the experience in some detail to the other members, in order to persuade them that he was, in truth, a saint.
Once this was done, then all children of the family would be made members until they reached maturity when they would be considered on their own merits. The Biblical basis of this was the family of Abraham with which God made his Covenant.
William was chosen as one of the townsmen or Selectmen for thirteen of the years between 1656 and 1680. Among the many town and legal duties was the duty to regularly inspect families to see if the parents were providing the proper instruction for their children. In the probate of wills, law that the executor and at least two honest persons draw up the inventory of all things included in the estate and deliver it to the town official required it. William served in this capacity many times as is shown in the town records.
The eldest half-brother, Daniel, drowned while attempting to cross the river on horseback in December 1658. Daniel died intestate, so the court appointed an administrator that was to post a bond and see to the payment of debts. William Bradley and John Allen presented the inventory of Daniel’s estate, amounting to £44-10s-9d, less a debt as yet unsettled, but plus the riding clothes “carryed away by the horse when was drowned, not yet come to hand.” The court ordered that the remaining estate be divided among the relatives with only a half share going to William, as he was a half-brother.
As early as 1643, the town ordered that all the males between the ages of 16 and 160 be numbered and supplied with
a good gun or muskett, a pound of good powder, 4 fathom of match for a match-lock, and 5 good flints, fitted for every fire lock, and 4 pound of pistoll bulletts, or 24 bullets fitted to their guns, and so continue furnished from time to time…
It has been calculated that the militia represented about 75% of this alarm class, those males age 16 to 60. The general training of the militia took place six times a year. It was an event like the market fairs and women and children came to watch the “Manoeuvres of the soldiers, and the games of cudgel, back sword, fencing, running, leaping, wrestling, stoolball, nine-pins and quoits.” They were also required to view their arms four times per year.
William was chosen to serve in a small troop for the public service in 1656. He was assigned the keeping of a horse for use in time of danger as well as taking care of three Indian coats and one case of pistols.
The New Haven Colony had enjoyed relative freedom in their common sense of purpose with England during the Interregnum (rule of Cromwell's Parliament); however, all this changed with the restoration of Charles II in 1660. First news came that several old friends of Davenport and former residents of New Haven that returned had been executed. The regicide fugitives Edward Whalley and William Goffe were turned away from Massachusetts Colony, but were accepted and hid from the agents of the King in New Haven and Milford. The situation was made more difficult by men who refused to obey the laws of the Colony because they did not come from England. It was a chance to dissent from theocratic leadership and it caused the breaking up of the jurisdiction.
Thus New Haven lost out in requests for a Royal Charter and the Colony of Connecticut to the east absorbed New Haven into its jurisdiction and Charter in 1664.
The rigid limitation of the franchise, confined as it was to church members only, and the refusal of the leaders to allow in any degree a liberalizing of the system ...alienated many of its people.
The laws and court decisions then were decided in Hartford. The General Court of legislature consisted of a lower house of Deputies and the upper house of Assistants or Magistrates, but they voted in one body. William was elected Deputy from New Haven for the first time in May 1675 and again in five of the years to 1683. Before each session, the inhabitants of a town elected the Deputies at a town meeting. The Magistrates and the Governor were elected by the “Admitted freemen” of the Colony or those 21 years of age with a personal estate of £30.
The two sessions per year were in May and October. They were granted
the supreme power of the Commonwealth to make and repeal laws, admit freemen, dispose of public land, inflict punishments for crimes and misdemeanors, and deal with any other matter that concerns the good of this Commonwealth.
However, most of their legislation was started by petition and was concerned with the distribution of land between the towns and the settlement of boundary disputes.
William lived past the age of seventy and died in 1681, followed by his wife, Alice, a year later. He left a will dated June 22, 1683 recorded on page 110 in Book 2 of the New Haven Probate Records. The inventory of his estate was made in May 1692. William’s eight children all survived to have children of their own.
Source:
1. Families of Ancient New Haven by Donald Lines Jacobus, (1923). FHL 973 D25 aga.
2. The Bradley Family of America, by Stuart V. Bradley, Jr. FHL 929.273, A.#1 838.
3. Camden's Visitations of Warrwick Co., England. FHL 942/B4 V12, p.1619.
Notes for William BRADLEY From A Compilation of Descendents of Roger Prichard: The Bradley family was from West Riding, Yorkshire, England, and were staunch Cromwell men. Sir William's title and the right to bear arms were conferred by Henry VIII. [Since Henry VIII died in 1547 and Sir William was born in 1597, this conferrence must have been to his father or grandfather.] He was an officer in the Parliamentary Army. After his wife died, Sir William entrusted his eldest son, William, to Theophilus Eaton, William Davenport, and a small band of dedicated men to sailed to the New World in 1638 to found a new colony [New Haven].William came to the colonies with his step-mother, who later married John Parmlee then John Evarts, both of Guilford, CT. (NEHGR 51:134)William was on the Board of Selectmen 1656-1680; Deputy to the Conn. General Assembly. Children of mentioned in his will: Joseph, Abraham, Benjamin, Nathaniel, Martha, Mary, Esther. . .Savage's: WILLIAM, New Haven, m. 18 Feb. 1645, Alice Prichard, perhaps d. of Roger of Springfield, had Joseph, bapt. 4 Jan. 1646; Martha, 8 Oct. 1648; Abraham, b. 24 Oct. 1650, Mary, 30 Apr. bapt. 1 May 1653; Benjamin, 8, bapt. 12 Apr. 1657; Esther, 29 Sept. bapt. 25 Nov. 1659; Nathaniel, b. 26 Feb. 1661; and Sarah, 21, bapt. 25 June 1665. He d. 1691, made his will 22 June 1683, in wh. he ment. all the s. d. Munson, wh. was Martha, w. of Samuel, m. 26 Oct. 1665; Mary, w. of Samuel Todd, m. 26 Nov. 1668; and d. Brockett; wh. was Sarah, m. 23 May 1682; Esther d. prob. unm. Mr. Porter thinks, this William was br. of Daniel by an elder w. of their f. and that he and other ch. were brot. by their mo. a wid. wh. was a midwife at N. H. in 1655.298 <../fg_src.html>
1316–1317. William Bradley was born in Bingley (Minden-Bradley?), Yorkshire, England, on Saturday, September 4, 1619, and died on May 29, 1691. Alice Prichard of New Haven, Connecticut was born about 1624, and died in 1692. They were married in Springfield, Massachusetts, on Tuesday, February 18, 1645. She took the name Alice Bradley. He is the son of William, (Sir) and Joanna (Waddington) Bradley <2632.htm>. She is the daughter of Roger and Frances (_____) Prichard <2634.htm>. They had eight children:
i. Joseph Bradley was baptized in New Haven Colony on January 4, 1645, and died in 1705. He married Silence Brockett on 25 Oct 1667.
ii. Martha Bradley was born in New Haven Colony in October, 1648, and died in 1692-3. She married Samuel Munson on 26 Oct 1665; her second marriage was to Eliasaph Preston; her third marriage was to Daniel Sherman, widower of Abiah Street <2654.htm>. Very much more information on the Munson family is available in The Munson Record; A Genealogical and Biographical Account of Captain Thomas Munson and His Descendants, by Myron A. Munson, M.A., 1895
iii. Abraham Bradley was born in New Haven Colony on October 24, 1650, and died on October 19, 1718. He married Hannah Thompson on 25 Dec 1673.
iv. Mary Bradley was born in New Haven Colony on April 30, 1653, and died on September 26, 1724. She married Samuel Todd, son of Christopher and Grace (Middlebrook) Todd <1332.htm> [#1332/3], on November 26, 1668. Among their children was Abigail who married John Gilbert. (Read about the early New Haven Gilbert family <../misc-htm/Gilbert,NewHavenFamily.htm> which is separate and distinct from the main Gilbert line of this genealogy.)
v. Benjamin Bradley was born in New Haven Colony on April 8, 1657, and died in 1728. He married Elizabeth Thompson on October 29, 1677. She was the daughter of John and Ellen (Harrison) Thompson, born June 3, 1657, in New Haven and died on November 3, 1718, in New Haven. He married a total of three times. His second wife was Mary Sackett, daughter of John and Agnes (Tinkham) Sackett <1330.htm>, another line in this genealogy.
vi. Hester Bradley was born in New Haven Colony on September 29, 1659. She died young.
vii. Nathanial Bradley <658.htm> [#658]: He was born in New Haven Colony on February 26, 1660/1, and died on August 17, 1743.
viii. Sarah Bradley was born in New Haven, Connecticut Colony, on June 21, 1665. She married Samuel Brockett on 23 (or 21) May 1682.
William Bradley was unmarried when his mother died. He joined Theophilus Eaton, William Davenport, and a dedicated group who sailed to Boston Harbor in 1638. They were supported by the Warwick Patent:
In June, 1638, the Company of Lords and Gentlemen all grantors of the Warwick Patent made John Winthrop, Jr., governor for them of the jurisdiction of Connecticut and sent him with a large amount of money and a great army of carpenters, masons, gardeners, and experienced engineers to found a settlement at the mouth of the Connecticut River with proper accommodations for themselves, but more especially to construct such houses as might be fit to receive gentlemen of quality presently come from England.
The construction of the settlement took three years. In 1641, Eaton, Davenport, Rev. Peter Prudden, the young William Bradley, and others finally reached New Haven. Bradley took the oath of fidelity on August 5, 1644.
Some interesting reading on the Warwick Patent and the history of the settlement of the mouth of the Connecticut River is available at the Old Saybrook <***********************************> Web site.
Note: This genealogy originally included Isaac Bradley as a son between Joseph and Martha. However, the author has removed that entry until its correctness can be established.
Sources:
Jacobus, Donald Lines, Families of Ancient New Haven, vol. II, p. 261; vol. VII, p. 1611 (Sherman).
Pritchard, Jacob L., M.D., A Compilation of Some of the Descendants of Roger Prichard c1600–1671, 1953
Munson, Myron A., M.A.,; The Munson Record; A Genealogical and Biographical Account of Captain Thomas Munson and His Descendants, 1895
Mormon family record sheet, including reference to: Conn N2b vol. 2, p. 261; Genesis of the White Family, p. 207–8.
Walter Gilbert: 3941 Perry Hall Road; Perry Hall, Maryland, USA; 21128-9751; 410-256-7560E-mail meLast modified 12/12/2003 06:24:16
- Personal History
-
Sources - [S64] The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, International Genealogical Index.
WILLIAM BRADLEY; Male; Birth: 04 SEP 1619 Bingley, Yorkshire, England; Death: 29 MAY 1691; Baptism: 28 AUG 1965; Endowment: 12 NOV 1965 IFALL; Sealing to Parents: 20 APR 1988 OGDEN; WILLIAM BRADLEY / JOANNA WADDINGTON; Father: WILLIAM BRADLEY; Mother: JOANNA WADDINGTON; Batch Number: 5002392; Sheet: 18; Source Call No.: 1396484 Type: Film
Form submitted to request LDS temple ordinances.
Search performed using PAF Insight on 26 Aug 2004
- [S64] The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, International Genealogical Index.
This site powered by The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding v. 14.0.3, written by Darrin Lythgoe © 2001-2024.
Maintained by Michael A. Kennedy.