Person:Martha Mead (4)

Watchers
Browse
m. Abt 1620
  1. Mary Mead1621/22 -
  2. Joseph Mead1624 - 1690
  3. _____ MeadBef 1626 - 1626
  4. Martha Mead1632 - 1675
  5. John Mead1634 - 1699
m. Bef Oct 1654
  1. Bethia Richardson
Facts and Events
Name Martha Mead
Gender Female
Birth? 8 Nov 1632 Lydd, Kent, England
Marriage to Thomas Williams
Marriage Bef Oct 1654 Stamford, Fairfield, Connecticut, United Statesto John Richardson
Death? 1675 Stamford, Fairfield, Connecticut, USA

Martha was said to have been an epileptic. In 1653 she married JohnRichardson, about whom there is practically nothing in the records. Heknew that she was pregnant before their marriage, and when the time camefor her to give birth, he took her away to Roxbury, MA to avoid scandal.The baby died a month thereafter. Who was the sneaky one who found outand leaked the news in Stamford? This wrongdoing was considered seriousenough for New Haven to handle. Joseph Mead (Martha's brother) explainedabout her fits, and Martha herself said that when she was at her mastershouse, she happened to have a fit and came to only to find Joseph Garnseyin the room. There was also a John Ross in the house.. Martha claimedthat she was taken advantage of while unconscious and therefore did notknow the father's name. Several goodwives-- Knapp, Stuckey, Buxton, Webb,and Emory--testified about her fits. They also admitted that she liedabout ever having had the baby. The court didn't buy Martha's story. Theyconsidered it nonsense. The men concurred that a s-xual act involved somereaction, particularly a reaction of pleasure. Punishment should havebeen a severe whipping, but since Martha was pregnant again, she wasfined ten pounds, which, of course, her brother and husband wereresponsible for. The death of the baby in Roxbury aroused suspicion, butJoseph said he would present proper documents to prove that the death wasa natural one. Though this case is handled or at least written up, in avery cut-and-dried fashion, one can draw questioning inferences from it.Martha was evidently a servant as she refers to being in her master'shouse. Were many girls so employed? Both her family and her husbandwholeheartedly supported her. Was it to protect themselves also fromscandal? Did they know the true facts or did they honestly believe her?The full weight of the Puritan Law stands on this case , but once againwe see the court members ready to be lenient. We also get a glimpse ofMartha's lady supporters, how they defended her, and how they may haveenjoyed their moment in an almost gossipy way.