Notes
Thomas Lloyd (Loyd)
PROVINCIAL COUNCIL: Phila. Co. 1684-86; Bucks Co. 1689-90
bapt. 17 Feb. 1640, at Dolobran, Monts., Wales. arr. 20 Aug. 1683, from
Welshpool, Monts., Wales. d. 10 Sept. 1694. Father: Charles Lloyd
(1613-1657). Mother: Elizabeth Stanley (Lloyd). m. (1) 1665 Mary Jones (d.
1683); children: Hannah, m. (1) John Delavall*, (2) Richard Hill*; Rachel,
m. Samuel Preston*; Mordecai; John; Mary, m. Isaac Norris*; Thomas;
Elizabeth; Margaret; Deborah; Samuel. m. (2) 1684 Patience Wilson
(Gardiner) (Story) (d. 1724). Offices: Pa./LC: master of the rolls,
1683-94; keeper of the great seal, 1684-94; commissioner of property,
1684-86; president of the Provincial Council, 1684-87, 1690; commissioner
of state, 1688; deputy governor, 1691; Pa.: deputy governor, 1692; Phila.
Co.: JP, 1690.
Thomas Lloyd, a Welsh gentleman and physician, was the most influential
Quaker politician in Pennsylvania during its first decade. A domineering
and controversial personality, Lloyd served variously as president,
commissioner of state, and deputy governor. Although excluded from the
Provincial Council during the tenure of Governor John Blackwell, Lloyd
exercised at that time perhaps his greatest power.
Lloyd was born in Montgomeryshire, Wales, into a gentry family which,
contrary to the great majority of the Welsh gentry, sided with Parliament
and the religious Independents during the Commonwealth. Like his two older
brothers, Lloyd attended Jesus College, Oxford, where he studied law and
medicine. By his senior year, Lloyd held Quaker sympathies, but kept them
secret, perhaps fearing he would be victimized as other Quakers had been
by
both the town magistrates and the "wild and ungodly Scholars." Learning
that his eldest brother Charles, a recent Quaker convert, had been
imprisoned in Wales for his beliefs, Lloyd returned home from Oxford in
1663 to visit him. Lloyd's decision to fully embrace Quakerism, which
happened during or soon after meeting with his brother in Welshpool jail,
must have been wrenching, since it meant abandoning the high social
standing and political influence to which his family had long been
accustomed. Members of the Lloyd family had served as county magistrates
for at least five generations and had long been among the prominent and
influential families in the county.
Lloyd achieved a measure of success when, with Welsh Quaker leader Richard
Davies, he visited county justices in an effort to secure the release of
his brother and other Quakers. The meeting led to the transfer of the
prisoners to a "sweet, convenient" house just outside the town and freedom
to move about the town, provided they remained away from their homes and
returned to their new quarters at night. Despite the ban, Charles Lloyd
was
able, with Thomas Lloyd, to hold Quaker meetings at the family estate of
Dolobran Hall, which Charles had inherited in 1657.
Although Thomas Lloyd probably never acquired a degree, he was a
practicing
physician with both poor and prosperous patients, many of whom were
Anglicans. He appears to have moved several times while in Wales, but he
always remained within the vicinity of Welshpool. In 1665 he was
imprisoned
for refusing to take the oath of allegiance; that same year, however, he
married Mary Jones, a fellow member of Shropshire Monthly Meeting. Lloyd's
specific period in prison is unclear, but he probably remained a prisoner
technically until formally released in 1672 by Charles II's general
pardon.
Lloyd was outspoken in his advocacy of Quaker beliefs and opposition to
persecution. Shortly after becoming a ministering Quaker in 1663, he
disrupted services in a local Anglican church, delivering "a few very
seasonable Words" to the parishioners. In 1676 Lloyd suffered the
distraint
of livestock worth £16 because he opted to lecture a justice and his party
on true religion rather than depart an illegal meeting when ordered. In
1677, on behalf of local Welsh Friends, Lloyd travelled to London after a
magistrate, irritated at Quaker refusal to swear the oath of allegiance,
had threatened to execute them by means of the obsolete writ de heretico
comburendo which had been last enforced under Mary Tudor. Lloyd and lawyer
Thomas Corbet lobbied against the law with several members of Parliament;
whether the result of their efforts or not, the writ was abolished during
that session. The same year Lloyd also assisted the London Meeting for
Sufferings in lobbying prominent non-Quakers on behalf of toleration.
In 1681 Thomas and Charles Lloyd agreed to hold a public debate with
Anglican clergy headed by the Bishop of St. Asaph, William Lloyd, a
contest
that lasted two days at the town hall at Llanfyllin, and out of which
Thomas Lloyd emerged as the principal Quaker spokesman. He made the
concluding presentation on the Quaker rejection of the worship, ministry,
and sacraments of the Church of England, at one point apparently refuting
extempore 38 syllogisms on water baptism presented by the Anglicans.
Bishop
Lloyd was alleged to have commented that he had not expected "so much
could
be said by any on that Subject, on so little Warning."
By about 1682 Lloyd had decided to leave for Pennsylvania, perhaps because
of the heightened persecution of Quakers in Montgomeryshire during the
previous few years. Lloyd, "a carfull tender husband," delayed leaving for
the colony until his wife recovered sufficiently from an illness to
undertake the trip. Her health was not assisted by a voyage aboard the
America that was marred by violent storms and by a whale who repeatedly
assaulted the ship. Lloyd himself managed some respite from these travails
by conversing in Latin with the German intellectual and fellow immigrant
Francis Daniel Pastorius,* commencing a friendship which Pastorius later
celebrated in verse. Mary Lloyd, however, died three months after the
August 1683 arrival of the ship in Philadelphia.
A few days before leaving England, Lloyd had acquired from his brother
Charles first purchaser rights to 2500 acres to be surveyed in the Welsh
Tract. Over the next few years, Lloyd roughly tripled the size of his
landholdings, acquiring a 250-acre tract in Philadelphia County, five
properties totaling 1760 acres in Bucks County, seven properties totaling
3500 acres in Sussex County, 80 acres of liberty lands, and at least four
Philadelphia city lots. Lloyd also invested in West New Jersey, acquiring
a
share for a term of years in an island near Burlington, and in 1686 a
500-acre property in Gloucester County for £200.
Lloyd quickly emerged as a leader in Pennsylvania. In October 1683 he was
chosen foreman of the provincial grand jury that indicted Charles
Pickering* on the charge of counterfeiting. Penn appointed Lloyd two
months
later to the important position of master of the rolls, making him
responsible for enrolling laws, commissions, deeds, patents, and other
official documents. Given Lloyd's status as among the highest bred and
best
educated of the colonists, as a substantial landowner, and as a prominent
Quaker, his March 1684 election to a three-year term on the Provincial
Council for Philadelphia County was unsurprising.
From the beginning, Lloyd became extremely active in conciliar affairs.
Along with William Welch* and Thomas Holme,* Lloyd was appointed by
William
Penn to the pivotal committee that drafted bills for the consideration of
the upcoming Assembly. Either Lloyd or Welch prepared the bulk of the
bills, of which 21 were approved by the House. Among the eight committees
on which Lloyd served were those to transcribe and examine the laws and to
receive amendments proposed by the House. Lloyd appears to have been a
controversial figure: along with Holme and Welch, he proposed a bill,
rejected by the Provincial Council after "great debate," for a separate
"Councill for State's Matters," apparently an appointive body responsible
to the governor rather than to the electorate, and drafted a bill,
rejected
by the Assembly, which would have upset the balance of power with the
Lower
Counties by granting separate political representation to the town of
Philadelphia, a development that only became reality well after Lloyd's
death.
As if to demonstrate his loyalty to Penn, Lloyd drafted the unsuccessful
and controversial bill for preserving the governor's person, and he
chaired
the Council's committee of the whole that resolved to continue the excise
tax on liquor for the support of government. In turn, Penn entrusted Lloyd
and William Welch with the task of convincing Governor Thomas Dongan of
New
York to persuade Lord Baltimore to remove armed Maryland intruders from
New
Castle County.
Before departing for England, Penn rewarded Lloyd with a predominant share
of the important provincial offices that he distributed among 11
colonists.
Appointed keeper of the great seal and a commissioner of property, Lloyd
was also chosen for the chief political post, president of the Council.
Penn's decision was unpredictable--Lloyd had only recently been elected to
the Council, he was not as "weighty" a Quaker as James Claypoole* or
Christopher Taylor,* nor nearly as wealthy as another leading Quaker,
Robert Turner,* and he could not boast of familiarity with Penn in England
like Claypoole or Thomas Holme. At age 44 he was among the younger members
of the Council. But Penn was evidently impressed with Lloyd's performance
there, and he probably recognized that Lloyd possessed a rare commodity
for
Pennsylvania, some knowledge of the law. In fact, Lloyd was an eager
student of legal literature, having received in July a packet of law books
concerning "all manner of Precedente" sent by his brother John Lloyd, one
of the six clerks in the Chancery Office. Thus when Penn arrived in
England, he entrusted Lloyd with collecting depositions in New York to
assist with the case against Lord Baltimore. Penn may also have favored
Lloyd because he perceived in him a person who, in some respects,
resembled
himself--a charismatic Quaker aristocrat.
As president, Lloyd chaired the meetings of the Provincial Council. Penn's
commission authorized president and Council to appoint county and
provincial officials and to promulgate bills in his absence, with the
stipulation that he reserved the right to review and veto laws. Since the
president and Council jointly acted as deputy governor, Lloyd had
considerable power, for his approval, as well as that of a majority of the
Council, was needed to promulgate bills and appoint officials. Lloyd,
however, wished to separate and expand his office, often arguing that to
serve as a councilor would be inconsistent with his role as president,
where he represented the governor.
Lloyd's marriage to Patience Story of New York City in December 1684 had
unintended consequences for Pennsylvania's government. Although Patience
Story had initially intended for the couple to settle in Philadelphia, she
became convinced, in Robert Turner's estimation, that the city was not
"suffitient for gaine," and thus persuaded her husband by the fall of 1685
to make their home in New York City. Formerly a conscientious member of
Philadelphia Monthly Meeting, Lloyd now became active instead in Flushing
Monthly Meeting. As for making a living in New York, Lloyd apparently
practiced medicine and engaged in commerce. Lloyd's attendance at the
Provincial Council wavered; from 30 March 1685 to 3 May 1686 (the day
before the Assembly began) he appeared at only 53 percent (35 out of 66)
of
the meetings. Although his attendance improved dramatically to 81 percent
(76 out of 94) from 10 May 1686 to the arrival of Governor John Blackwell
on 18 December 1689, the meetings were held with less frequency,
particularly during the winter months. Interestingly, after Blackwell's
departure and until the Fletcher administration, Lloyd never missed
another
recorded session, although meetings were still irregular. The infrequent
sessions, however, combined with erratic attendance by councilors, may
have
created a power vacuum at the center of government that enabled Lloyd, as
de facto governor, to wield greater authority.
Faced with the persistent maneuvers of the assemblymen to expand their
legislative privileges, Lloyd led the councilors in upholding the
prerogatives established for them in the Frame of Government. In
conferences between the House and Council in the General Assembly of 1686,
that were "wholy mannaged" by Speaker John White* and by Lloyd, the latter
argued strongly against the amendments to the continuation bill which
would
have gained for the Assembly the right to repeal laws on its own
initiative, and thereby subvert the Frame of Government. When the Assembly
persisted, the councilors unanimously agreed to Lloyd's proposal that the
Assembly should be dismissed without enactment of legislation rather then
permit the "unavoydable mischeiff" a lapse in the laws would cause. The
General Assembly then met and agreed with Lloyd's suggestion that the
question of repeal should await Penn's return to the colony. During the
1687 Assembly, with Penn not having arrived, the Council simply failed to
propose new legislation.
Tensions within the Council were overshadowed not only by the chronic
friction with the Assembly over legislative privileges but also by the
uproar surrounding Nicholas More's* lawsuits against the Free Society of
Traders. President Lloyd appears to have commanded a solid Quaker majority
that was rarely challenged, a domination facilitated by the particularly
low attendance by councilors from the Lower Counties. In 1687 Phineas
Pemberton* informed Penn that the Council, since he had returned to
England, "has beene very agreeing and unanimous w[hi]ch has been A great
stay to us."
Nonetheless, the factionalism that later characterized the Council
originated during this period. Lloyd and the Quaker councilors followed
certain policies that rankled the representatives of the Lower Counties:
after August 1684, all Council meetings were held in Philadelphia; in 1685
a law was enacted, with Lloyd's active support, requiring the provincial
justices to hear appeals twice annually in Philadelphia, instead of on
circuit as previously; all the individuals either proposed by Lloyd or
approved by the Council to be provincial justices were Quakers from the
upper counties; and the modest proposal of the 1687 Assembly that at least
one of the five justices should be from the Lower Counties was rejected.
William Markham* and Robert Turner each came to dislike and distrust
Lloyd,
skirmishing with him over the appointment of officials. After Lloyd "moved
hard" in support of the unpopular James Claypoole for the office of
register general, Turner argued against the nomination, only to be
undercut
when Penn decided in favor of Claypoole. Markham, as provincial secretary,
was angry with Lloyd's effort "to Make a partie" to oust him out of the
clerkship of the Provincial Court, a position Markham argued was his by
right of the secretary's office. Upon encountering some opposition in the
Council, however, Lloyd retreated and permitted the provincial justices to
make their own choice of clerk.
The only major challenge to Lloyd's leadership was sparked by Christopher
Taylor, an elderly and eminent Quaker minister who argued that Lloyd's
tenure as president ceased when his term as councilor expired in March
1687. In turn, Lloyd insisted that his commission was indeterminate. The
impasse continued despite "great Disputes" between the two men, and even
after Taylor completed his term, many councilors shared Taylor's
conviction. William Markham, despite his own problems with the president,
urged Penn to recommission Lloyd before his term expired to avoid a
fundamental schism in the colony.
Penn, however, chose a different route. As early as April 1686, in a
carefully phrased plea, Penn showed his concern over Lloyd's residing in
New York: "I am glad thou affordest the Province thy presence sometimes,
tho it is greivous to me to think I should be disapointed, but if it be
for
thy good, I desire to be contented." Again in September 1686 Penn
commented: "I hope Patience will, for my sake, & w[hi]ch is more, for the
truths, give thee up sometimes." By November 1686 his confidence in
Lloyd's
leadership had also eroded, as seen in a letter that month to the
president; Penn lamented that he would pay at least £100 to find a man who
would, in a true Christian spirit, "stand up for our good beginnings, &
bring a savour of righteousness" to the colony. Apparently Lloyd was not
that man, having failed in Penn's view to heal the political divisions in
the colony. The proprietor made that clear several months later by
lecturing Lloyd about the need for magistrates to be reconcilers, rather
than the chronic quarrelers they were in Pennsylvania. Yet Penn retained
more faith in Lloyd than in any other leader in the colony, the reasons
for
which remain something of a mystery.
In the 29 months since Penn returned to England, Lloyd sent at least 9
letters to him. Although the letters are apparently not extant, their
contents can be surmised to some degree. Lloyd must have expressed
considerable sympathy for at least some of Penn's goals for the province
and persuaded Penn that he was working to accomplish those ends. Lloyd
appears to have written at length about animosities in the province, and
to
have portrayed himself as a shrewd peacemaker, since the proprietor
praised
Lloyd on two occasions for following a sober and expedient policy in
working to resolve conflicts. Like Penn, Lloyd complained about the
financial burden that his commitment to Pennsylvania entailed,
specifically
the cost of having to maintain a residence in Philadelphia and to travel
back and forth to New York. In November 1686 Penn rather deviously assured
Lloyd of recompense as long as he either appeased or punished such
wrongdoers as John White and Patrick Robinson.*
Penn was alarmed, however, by reports of Lloyd's behavior from Markham,
who
was both a persistent critic of Lloyd and a potential political rival. The
communications from Markham contained much veiled but pointed criticism of
Lloyd's leadership of the Council, but what troubled Penn most was
Markham's description of Lloyd's behavior in the legal dispute between
Nicholas More and the Free Society of Traders. Sitting in a "Great Arme
Chear" reserved for him in Philadelphia County court, Lloyd had
interrupted
and quarreled with More in an undisguised, but futile, attempt to
influence
the jury into deciding in favor of the Free Society. Lloyd then, during a
Council meeting, assisted the president of the Free Society, Benjamin
Chambers, in preparing his petition for the right to appeal to the
Provincial Court. Lloyd and the Council proceeded to overrule the county
court's rejection of Griffith Jones* as security in the prosecution of the
appeal. Observing that "both More and Lloyd have parties" arrayed against
each other, Markham warned that the situation posed a grave threat to
proprietary government if Penn did not return shortly to the colony or
otherwise appoint someone to govern "with out passion Favour or
affection."
Markham further informed Penn that Lloyd justified his intervention in the
courtroom on the grounds of an expansive, even exalted understanding of
the
powers inherent in his position as keeper of the great seal. Lloyd
evidently believed that he was akin to the Lord High Chancellor of
England,
also keeper of the great seal, who presided over the equity court of
Chancery. Given the equitable jurisidiction of Pennsylvania's county
courts, Lloyd viewed himself as empowered therefore to preside over those
courts, a right he claimed when More's trial was held in Philadelphia
County court. Lloyd also claimed the right to preside over the Provincial
Court, telling the justices in September 1686 that "there would never be a
good Decorum untill he satt there as Chancellor, and they as Masters of
Chancery, for his assistants." He added that "he did not think to doe it
at
this time."
Lloyd's partisan and interventionist role in the controversy between More
and the Free Society may have been the catalyst that finally prompted
Penn's decision to change the form of government by replacing the system
of
president and Council with a five-man deputy governor. Yet Penn in an
ambiguously-worded comment in a January 1687 letter to James Harrison* the
month before the commission was sent, indicated that if Lloyd "had kept
his
place, he might have prevented much of these things." Precisely what Penn
meant by "kept his place" is difficult to determine; he may have been
commenting on Lloyd's arrogant claims for expanded rights as president and
chancellor or simply on Lloyd's residential shift from Philadelphia to New
York. Penn's commission, in fact, appeared to confirm both possibilities.
On the one hand, by appointing Lloyd, More, Claypoole, Turner, and John
Eckley* as commissioners of state Penn hoped to "Ballance factions" in
order to "quiet things" until he returned to the colony. In particular,
Penn's scheme was designed to mend the dispute between the factions led by
Lloyd and More, since as the second man named in the commission, More
would
have presided over the Council during Lloyd's frequent absences. On the
other hand, Penn declared that the new commission was also issued to
insure
that "there may be a more Constant residence of the honorary & Governing
part of the Goverm[en]t."
Lloyd and those with whom he consulted decided to ignore the commission
and
retain the old form of government, with Lloyd continuing as president. The
entire Council, however, was not informed of the commission, since William
Clark,* a regular attender, was evidently kept in the dark. Yet according
to Penn, he received separate letters from President Lloyd, Arthur Cook,*
James Harrison, and Phineas Pemberton assuring him that "all is well,
truth
in authority in the Government, & better then when I left the place." None
of them, however, had mentioned the continuation of Lloyd as president.
Penn was skeptical of the good news, since he was receiving contrary
reports from other Quaker leaders, although they, too, had not revealed
the
failure to comply with his commission. Although certainly an independent
and disobedient act, the noncompliance by Lloyd and his compatriots was
not
necessarily disloyal to Penn, since the sharing of power by such proud and
temperamental individuals as Lloyd, More, Claypoole, and Turner could only
have worked to the detriment of Penn's oft-repeated goal of political
harmony in the colony. His utopian scheme was an unworkable arrangement.
Lloyd also had to contend with Penn's instructions to the commissioners.
Previously, Lloyd and the Council had selected which of Penn's commands
they chose to implement. That selectivity was due in part to Penn's
tendency to write to them almost as equals and to couch his instructions
simply as advice. While respecting his occasional recommendations for
office and his concerns that the Assembly's privileges not be extended,
Lloyd and the Council had not implemented such requests as proposing a new
coinage bill or shutting down the caves of Philadelphia. Nor had they
satisfactorily responded to Penn's letter to Lloyd sent in September 1686
requesting payment of the money pledged in the voluntary subscription of
1684, and also desiring a temporary annulment of the laws followed by
reenactment with alterations, a maneuver to keep the provincial laws
largely intact while satisfying the demand that they be reviewed by the
Privy Council within five years. But when Penn changed the form of
government, he also abandoned the gentle approach as impractical and
issued
instead abrupt commands to the commissioners of state that were to be
obeyed, including the temporary annulment and reenactment of the laws.
In April 1687 Lloyd and the Council voted unanimously against a temporary
annulment of the laws, at least until they heard further from Penn.
Presumably the Council feared that by permitting the Assembly to review
and
reenact the laws, as would have been necessary after an annulment, the
House would inevitably have pressed for an expansion of its rights. Lloyd
and the Council evidently hoped that the matter could be delayed until
Penn's return to the colony.
In December 1687 Penn informed Lloyd that he had granted his request to be
discharged from the government. Although Penn had become highly suspicious
that Lloyd had failed to comply with the commission, he nonetheless
expressed his sorrow that his "esteemed Friend," a person so "young, &
active, & Ingenious," should seek a dismissal. Yet Lloyd continued to act
as president of the Council, and when Penn's commission was finally
implemented in February 1688, with Arthur Cook and John Simcock* replacing
More and Claypoole, the intrepid Lloyd took his seat as commissioner of
state. Whether Lloyd had formally requested a dismissal from government is
unclear. Perhaps Penn misinterpreted one of his laments about the burden
and charge of government, or possibly such ardent supporters as Phineas
Pemberton and Arthur Cook persuaded Lloyd to change his mind. Lloyd
reportedly was "very un-easy & dis-satisfyed" by his recent correspondence
with Penn about his demotion from president to commissioner of state,
Lloyd
feeling "eclipsd" by the other commissioners. Lloyd was also vexed by
Penn's demand for official communications from the commissioners of state,
instead of contradictory private letters, arguing that as "Cheiff in
Authority," his many letters to Penn should be considered as official
government correspondence. In the past, Penn had considered that method
sufficient.
Penn still retained a remarkable faith in Lloyd, and in March 1688, with
Pennsylvania still suffering political turmoil, he beseeched Lloyd "by all
that is reverent, tender, & friendly" to accept the position of deputy
governor for the sake of "that poor Province." Penn then received,
however,
a letter from Lloyd requesting a dismissal from government; whether the
letter was written before or after Lloyd received Penn's offer to be
governor is not known. Lloyd and some of his supporters had previously
urged Penn to appoint a deputy governor, so there may have been a
misunderstanding between the two men, Penn perhaps thinking that Lloyd
wished dismissal from all governmental service, while Lloyd simply wanted
to resign as a commissioner of state. Certainly, Lloyd's behavior when
Governor John Blackwell arrived suggests a jealous leader deprived of
power. In any event, in July 1688 Penn appointed Blackwell governor of
Pennsylvania, although the old commission continued in force until the new
governor's arrival in December.
William Markham, who still referred to Lloyd as "President," left little
doubt in his letters to Penn in 1688 that despite the power-sharing
arrangement, it was Lloyd who governed, or more accurately in Markham's
estimation, misgoverned. Markham described Lloyd as overbearing and
haughty, and also as manipulative, often evading responsibility by failing
to sign documents after persuading others to append their signatures on
the
pretense that he would sign later.
{-- cut out portion --}
Generally speaking, Lloyd's support came from those provincial leaders,
that also included Caleb Pusey,* Phineas Pemberton, and Isaac Norris,* who
were most sympathetic to Penn and his interests, indicating that while
Lloyd charted an independent course for the colony he was unassociated
with
disloyalty to the proprietor. Since Lloyd presented himself as loyal,
albeit misunderstood, his supporters were able to follow his lead while
maintaining their allegiance to Penn.
Stricken with "a malignant fever" on 5 September 1694, Lloyd died five
days
later. His will, written on the day of his death and probated on 22
October, divided his estate among his wife, Patience, and seven children,
and named as executors his wife, son Mordecai, son-in-law Isaac Norris,
and
kinsman David Lloyd. The will also stipulated that five slaves and their
offspring be hired out to provide a steady source of income for his wife
and children.
In December 1694 Patience Lloyd complained against David Lloyd at
Philadelphia Monthly Meeting for his handling of the estate. At the heart
of this lengthy and bitter dispute, in which the widow, with the support
of
Arthur Cook, threatened to sue, was her anger over the insistence by
co-executors Isaac Norris and David Lloyd that little money, if any, would
remain once all the estate's debts were satisfied. In 1701 Penn assisted
Patience Lloyd, probably in compensation for Thomas Lloyd's political
services, by providing her with an annual pension of £10. Penn was
unforgiving toward her husband, however, blaming Lloyd as late as 1705 for
proprietary financial woes by his having "complimented some few selfish
Spirits" in allowing the repeal of the 1683 law for an excise tax on
liquor
"without my final consent." In 1716 Lloyd's estate had still not been
completely settled. No inventory of the estate has been found.
The Big GEDCOM / Revision 2.0 - created on
Wed Jul 23 22:15:36 1997
/ Copyright ©1996-1997 Descendants of Edward Ball of New Jersey Interest Group.
If you have a connection, correction or question, please email: The Big gEDcom@bigfoot.com /
GED2HTML v2.5b (4/12/96)