Henry Willis d. 1794 – A Missing Child of Joshua Willis

I recently vowed (again) to get rid of paper by consolidating miscellaneous notes into my “county data tables.” That is where I keep records of pertinent genealogical documents and events.

Almost immediately, some notes from Sandra Willis’s website (here) related to Caroline County, Maryland caught my eye.[1] Her abstracts of estate inventories included the following:

Henry Willis – 1 Feb 1794[2]

John Willis – administrator

Kin listed – Joshua Lucas, Deborah Lucas

Total Inventory – £240/2/0

Further, Sandra’s abstracts of guardian bonds had this information:

9 Jun 1795 – Nancy Willis orphan daughter of Henry Willis – bound to Rhoda Willis. Rhoda Willis made guardian of Nancy Willis[3]

11 Aug 1795 – Rhoda Willis, widow of Henry Willis deceased, guardian to Nancy Willis daughter of Henry Willis – Valuation of lands called “Painter’s Range” containing 222 acres – deduct ¾ for other 3 children (not named).[4]

These cryptic entries show that a Henry Willis died intestate in early 1794, based on the date of the estate inventory.[5]Henry left a widow and one minor child, Nancy, who inherited a one-fourth interest in a tract of land called “Painter’s Range.”

The entries are intriguing. John Willis, administrator of the estate, and Deborah (Willis) Lucas, kindred, were both children of Joshua Willis, a successful planter in Caroline County, Maryland. Also, the land called “Painter’s Range” was connected to Joshua Willis. Henry Willis seems to have been a relative. Was he also Joshua Willis’s child? Initially, I did not think so. An earlier article on the heirs of Joshua Willis found  here established that Joshua had eleven children at the time he died. None of them were named Henry. This led to a series of questions. The answers established — spoiler alert here — that Henry was indeed a son of Joshua Willis. Here are the questions and answers.

How many children did Henry and Rhoda Willis have?

Answer – One.

The guardian bond abstract states there were four children. However, Henry had married “Rhody” Batchelor in Caroline County, Maryland on 12 June 1793.[6] They had only been married about six or seven months when he died. At his death, his wife Rhoda probably was pregnant with their only child, Nancy, who was born in the spring or summer of 1794. If there were other children in the household, they were not Rhoda’s.

Why did Nancy get only one-fourth of the real estate?

Answer – There are a couple of ways this could have happened.

As Henry’s child, Nancy was entitled to his property under the laws of intestate distribution. She would receive less that 100 percent of his property if there were other equal heirs at law — that is, siblings or half-siblings. She clearly was the only child of Henry and Rhoda. Moreover, the 1790 census shows Henry alone, without any children or an earlier wife. If Henry had any children born between 1970 and Nancy’s birth, there should be a record of a guardianship similar to Nancy’s. There is no such record. We can rule out half-siblings.

However, there is another possibility. Nancy would only get a fraction of the land if she were Henry’s sole heir AND he only owned or was entitled to that fraction. That begs the next question.

 Did Henry own “Painter’s Range?”

Answer – No.

There is no record that Henry Willis ever purchased any land, either alone or with partners, much less land called “Painter’s Range.” Instead, the record shows Joshua Willis Sr. purchased 393 acres of land by that name in 1778.[7] There is no record of Joshua selling it before he died in about 1795. Over his lifetime, Joshua acquired more than twelve hundred acres of land in Caroline and Dorchester Counties. He still possessed most of it at his death.

In about 1790, Joshua made a will, which unfortunately has been lost.[8] The earlier article on the heirs of Joshua Willis covered in detail the various documents proving that Joshua made a will devising specific tracts of land. That article also concluded that Joshua had a total of eleven children, none named Henry.

Was that earlier article wrong?

Answer – No and Yes.

No, because the earlier article correctly identifies eleven of Joshua’s children based on the documents underlying that analysis.

Yes, because it missed the documents related to Henry, his widow and daughter, plus land that Joshua clearly owned and almost certainly devised to someone in his will.

What gift of land in Joshua’s will could prove Henry was his son?

Answer – See Occam’s Razor.

The simplest answer is most likely correct. Joshua’s 1790 will most likely devised 222 acres of “Painter’s Range” jointly to his four eldest sons in fee simple, with the common proviso that should any die without heirs, their share would revert to the other devisees.[9] Those sons would include Joshua Jr., Charles, and Thomas, plus Henry Willis.[10] Henry died in early 1794, and his only heir – the afterborn child, Nancy, automatically became an heir under Joshua’s will under the law of intestate descent and distribution.

Joshua Willis Sr. probably died before 9 Jun 1795, when Rhoda Willis was appointed guardian of Nancy Willis. He definitely died before the 11 Aug 1795 land valuation, because by that time Nancy was clearly entitled to one-fourth of the Painter’s Range acreage.

Did Nancy ever get her share?

Answer – No.

In 1800, Joshua Jr. sold part of Painter’s Range without the participation of any of the other heirs.[11] One way that could legally happen was if the other three heirs sold their interests to Joshua Jr. However, there is no record of a sale to Joshua Jr. from any heir, including from Nancy or her guardian. The other way it could legally happen is if the other heirs all died without leaving an heir of their own. In fact, Charles Willis and Thomas Willis both died without issue before 1800.[12]We can conclude that Nancy had also died before reaching the age of six in 1800.

What have we done here?

Answer – A couple of things.

We have presented reasonably conclusive evidence of another son and a grandchild of Joshua Willis Sr. (which will have no bearing on anyone’s ancestry search because Nancy left no descendants).

And we have proven how easy it is to get led astray from good intentions like eliminating paper and consolidating notes. We did, in fact, get rid of three notes, but it took a week to do so! At the time, however, it was bitterly cold outside, so this was undoubtedly the right and fun thing to do.

One final question.

Was there any happy ending to this sad tale?

Answer – Yes.

In 1796, the widow Rhoda Willis married Allen Parker, who happened to be one of the securities on her guardianship bond in 1795.[13] The 1810 census shows Allen Parker in Caroline County. His household appears to include Rhoda and five children — four sons and one daughter, all under the age of ten.[14]

Good Hunting!

____________

[1] Sandra Willis was a fabulous researcher who abstracted many original documents from court houses and the Maryland State Archives. She took the time to share her research notes in a well-organized website. She also provided in her will that the site be maintained so others could benefit from the work she had done. Check it out.

[2] Caroline County Original Inventories, Box 9450 (1792-1799)

[3] Caroline County Guardian Bonds, Liber JR-B, Folio 243

[4] Caroline County Guardian Bonds, Liber JR-B, Folio 253

[5] If he had made a will, an executor rather than an administrator would have been named to handle the estate.

[6] Sandra’s “Index to Caroline County Marriage Licenses by Henry Downes Cranor” at mdwillis.nabiki.com.

[7] Carolina County Deed Book A:269 – Deed dated 24 Mar 1778, filed 23 Apr 1778 – Robert Lloyd Nicols of Talbot County, merchant, sold to Joshua Willis of Caroline County, planter, for sum of 412 pounds 18 shillings 3 pence all of a tract of land part of “Painter’s Range” lying lately in Dorchester County but now in Caroline County containing 393¼ acres more or less.

[8] Not only is the will lost, but there are no estate inventories, administration bonds, or other usual probate records for Joshua Willis. He owned significant real estate in both Caroline and Dorchester Counties. It is likely that his eldest son, Joshua Jr., was executor of the estate and, living in Dorchester at the time of his father’s death, filed the will for probate in Dorchester out of convenience. Unfortunately, those records were lost in the 1851 fire at the County Court House.

[9] Joshua’s will contained a similar provision regarding land devised to Charles, which descended to his brothers Peter and Thomas after Charles’s death in 1797.

[10] The earlier article lists eleven children in likely birth order.

[11] Carolina County Deed Book G:293

[12] Charles died in Dec 1797 based on an estate inventory dated 30 Dec 1797. A deposition of Captain William Haskins dated 5 Nov 1804 states that Charles and Thomas Willis died without issue before that date. There is no probate record for Thomas Willis, but he must have died prior to the 1800 sale of “Painter’s Range.”

[13] Caroline County Court Bonds, 1785-1892, 243 and 253.

[14] Had Nancy lived, she would have been 16 in that census.

The Heirs of Joshua Willis Sr. – Proved by Petitions, Patents, Depositions, and Deeds

John Willis bought land on Marshy Creek in 1717 in what became Caroline County, MD. One of his sons Joshua was born about 1720 and died in 1797. Joshua left a 1790 will that has not been located. However, several legal documents … petitions, patents, deeds, and depositions … combine to identify accurately Joshua’s children and provide other details about the family. These records emphasize the need in genealogy to “Follow The Land.”

Joshua acquired during his lifetime several hundred acres of land. He devised all the land he possessed at the time he made his will. Thankfully for us, Joshua did not amend the will to devise the tracts he acquired subsequent to 1790. The tracts not disposed of in the will fell to Joshua’s heirs at law under the law of intestate descent and distribution. This led to petitions, patents, deeds and depositions that identify those heirs. Since the will is lost, those other records relating to two specific tracts of land are the only evidence we have. Luckily, they are all we need.

Willis’s Landing

Joshua acquired land he called Willis’s Landing in two transactions in 1793. On 8 Jan 1793, John Nicolls assigned to Joshua 7½ acres of a 26-acre tract that Nicolls had acquired under a special warrant. Pursuant to a special warrant dated 20 Apr 1793, Joshua surveyed 69 ¾ adjacent acres, and named it Addition to Willis’s Landing. Petitions and subsequent land sales prove that Joshua’s will did not devise these parcels acquired after 1790. Further, his will clearly did not contain a “residuary clause” whereby property not specifically devised or bequeathed would fall to an identified beneficiary. In effect, Joshua’s estate was “intestate” as to this particular land.

Joshua Willis Jr. cited those facts in a petition seeking a patent for the land in the names of the heirs. He showed that his father properly acquired and paid for the tracts and that he died intestate as to those lands, leaving “Elizabeth Everngham, Joshua Willis (your petitioner), Frances Baker, Deborah Lucas, Charles Willis, Peter Willis, Thomas Willis, James Willis, John Willis, Annaretta Fleming, and Mary Willis his only children and heirs at law.” The filing stated that Charles Willis and Thomas Willis had died without issue and that Annaretta also died, leaving Mary Fleming and Robert Fleming her only children and heirs at law. Note that Joshua Sr.’s wife must have predeceased him, otherwise the petition would have named her as an heir.[1]

Joshua Jr. filed this petition on 14 May 1805, and an order issued the same day naming the living heirs. The order called for a patent to be issued to the ten named individuals, with the first eight (the living children of Joshua Sr.) each having an undivided one-ninth interest in the property and Mary Fleming and Robert Fleming to share the remaining ninth.[2]

An earlier deposition also names Joshua’s eleven children and notes that four of the five daughters had married, identifying their husbands:

  • Elizabeth married William Everngham
  • Frances married Charles Baker
  • Deborah married Joshua Lucas
  • Annaretta married Silas Fleming

That deposition also stated that Charles and Thomas Willis had died intestate and without issue, and that Annaretta and Silas Fleming had died leaving children Mary and Robert.[3]

A short aside … Annaretta’s husband made a will dated 1 Feb 1804 naming his brother-in-law Peter Willis executor. This will reveals that Annaretta predeceased Silas because she was not named, as well as the fact that the two Fleming children were minors.[4]

On 17 Jun 1805, the heirs sold Willis’ Landing and recorded the sale in Dorchester County (the tract fell partly in Caroline and partly in Dorchester). The signatories were William Everngham and his wife Elizabeth, Joshua Willis, Frances Baker, Joshua Lucas and his wife Deborah, Peter Willis, and John Willis.[5]

We are missing a few signatories in this list: Frances’ husband Charles Baker; James Willis; the two Fleming children; and Mary Willis. What does this tell us? Likely the following:

  • Frances’s husband Charles Baker must have died before this sale. A husband represented a wife’s interest in legal transactions. Frances would only represent herself if no longer married.
  • James Willis made up for his absence by filing in the Dorchester County Court acknowledging and recording the sale on 9 Dec 1805.[6]
  • Regarding the Fleming minors, we can assume that Peter Willis probably signed on their behalf. I have not found a record of an official guardianship, but the children lived in his household.
  • The mystery is Mary Willis. Where is her signature? I believe that Mary was still a minor at the date of this sale (therefore born after 1784). I find no official guardian appointed, but there is not one for the Fleming children either. The lost will of Joshua Sr. may have designated one of the siblings to be her guardian.

The record related to Willis’s Landing proves the children of Joshua Willis. However, we can learn a bit more by examining the documents surrounding a second tract called Willis’s Luck.

Willis’s Luck

Joshua Sr. acquired 229½ acres he named Willis’s Luck under a special warrant in 1763. He sold 100 acres shortly thereafter, simultaneously buying a small tract named Bank of Pleasure that provided access to Hunting Creek for the larger tract. A 1793 resurvey of his land defined 136½ acres that he called Addition to Willis’s Luck. The resurvey included 25 vacant acres, which turn out to be genealogically significant.

Joshua Sr.’s 1790 will devised Willis’s Luck, Addition to Willis’s Luck, and Bank of Pleasure to his son Charles. Sons Joshua and Peter were contingent beneficiaries and would share the land if Charles died without issue. Several records confirm this provision of the lost will.

  • On 28 Feb 1799, Joshua Jr. sold to Peter Willis 150 acres, part of Bank of Pleasure and part of Addition to Willis’s Luck. The record states this was half the land that fell to them at the death of their brother Charles.[7]
  • On 7 Aug 1804, Joshua Jr. sold to Peter Willis 150 acres, parts of Bank of Pleasure, Willis’s Luck, and Addition to Willis’s Luck. This record recites that the land fell to Joshua by the demise of his brother Charles.[8]

Charles clearly received this land through the will, and when he died without children, Joshua and Peter inherited under the terms of the will. Absent such a contingency provision, the death of Charles would have entitled all his heirs — his siblings — to a share of the land. An 1800 petition confirms those facts but with an interesting twist. The vacant land added through the 1793 resurvey was notcovered by Joshua Sr.’s prior ownership of the tracts. The will could not devise those added acres. Here we go with another petition, since these “intestate” acres descend to Joshua Sr.’s heirs at law.

In 1800, Joshua Willis and Peter Willis petitioned for a patent related to the vacant land. They cited their father’s acquisition and patent history of the tract. They specifically stated their father Joshua made his will in 1790. They stated that the land was devised to their brother Charles and fell to them divided equally should Charles die without issue. Finally, they noted that the vacant land added to the tract in 1793, subsequent to the date of the will, was not covered by the devise of land in that document. The estate was intestate as to that extra 25 acres. They therefore asked that a patent issue for that land in the name of the heirs at law. On 10 Dec 1800, the Chancellor of Maryland ordered the patent issued as requested, which happened on 20 Feb 1801.[9]

Nine years later the heirs sold that small acreage for $87. William Everngam and his wife Elizabeth, Deborah Lucas, Peter Willis, James Willis, John Willis, and Matthew Hardcastle and his wife Mary signed the 25 Jan 1810 deed of sale. The deeds and petition related to Willis’s Luck reveal some details about these people other than just their names:

  • Charles Willis obviously died before the first sale from Joshua Jr. to Peter in February 1799.
  • In the 1810 sale, only six of the nine shares appear to be represented. The three missing shares are as follows:
    • Joshua Willis did not participate in the 1810 sale. Joshua must have died before 1810 and left no issue, or he transferred his interest to one of the other heirs. There is no record of a conveyance from Joshua to an heir or anyone else. Since there is no such record, Joshua must be deceased.
    • Frances Willis Baker did not participate and was likely also dead.
    • The Fleming children did not sign. If alive, they must still be minors and therefore born after 1789. In that case, Peter still represented them.
  • Mary Willis was by then married to Matthew Hardcastle.[10]Her absence as a signatory on the 1805 sale of Willis’s Landing established she was born after 1784. She might have married Hardcastle as early as age 16, which would mean she was born by 1790, when her father wrote his will. I put her likely birth range at 1785-1789.

It would have been nice if Joshua Sr.’s 1790 will survived and had been updated over time to cover all his property. Had that occurred, however, we might not be privy to these additional details about this family. The lesson, as always, is “Follow The Land.

[1]Joshua outlived two wives, Susannah LNU, mother of his first three children, and Deborah Greenhawk whom he married 20 May 1774.

[2]Maryland State Archives Online, Dorchester County Circuit Court, Patented Certificates, MSA_S1196_3662

[3]This deposition by Captain William Haskins states the will was made in 1797. The petition seeking a patent in the name of Joshua’s heirs at law filed in 1800 gives the date as 1790. The earlier date is correct based on the subject matter of the petition, that is, to provide proper title to lands acquired in 1793. If the will were made in 1797, it likely would have devised those lands making the new patent unnecessary.

[4]Keddie, Leslie and Neil, Caroline County, Maryland, Register of Wills, 1800-1806, Liber JR Bi, Transcript& Liber LR C, i,(The Family Tree Bookshop, 2001), 48.

[5]Maryland State Archives online, Dorchester County Land Records, MSA_CE 46-48,(Liber HD No. 23: 181

[6]IdatHD 23:183

[7]Leonard, R. Bernice, Caroline County Maryland Land Records, Volume F, 1797-1799, (St. Michaels, MD: Helen E. Seymour), F:448.

[8]Leonard, Volume I, 1804-1809, I:090.

[9]Maryland State Archives Online, Caroline County Circuit Court, Patented Certificates, MSA_S1192_18.

[10]Marriage records indicate she married in Caroline County on 17 Sep 1806.