|
|
- H. Thomas TaftAbt 1671 - Bef 1755
- W. Elizabeth BullardAbt 1680 - Aft 1753
m. Bef 20 Apr 1748
Facts and Events
References
- ↑ Mendon, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records of Mendon, Massachusetts to the Year 1850. (Boston, MA: Wright & Potter, 1920)
p. 501.
TAFT, Elisabeth, w. of Thomas [died] [torn].
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Elizabeth Taft is named in the 1748 will of Eleazer Bullard (Suffolk Probate Vol. 48, p. 364) as a full sister, so a child of Benjamin Bullard and Elizabeth Ellis. In a deed selling the land 20 Nov 1753 (Suffolk Deeds Vol. 89, folio 202), Thomas Taft and Elizabeth Taft of Mendon are among the heirs selling the land.
There is no marriage record for Thomas Taft and Elizabeth. Thomas Taft's first wife Deborah was alive in 1736 when she and Thomas acknowledged a deed conveying land to son Isaac (Worcester Deeds vol. 18, p. 419). Presumably she is the Deborah who died in 1747 per Mendon VRs. Thomas must have married Elizabeth (Bullard) --- by 1748 when Eleazer Bullard named her in his will.
Working backwards, an Elizabeth Bullard m. 1701 Thomas Jones who d. 1734. Thomas Jones probate file starts in 1734 (Middlesex Probate 12947), but there is no further activity until the will is proved in 1746. It is presumed she waited for all the children to reach legal age. Note that Thomas Jones' son Jonathan acts as attorney for Thomas Taft in the 1753 deed referred to above, and other children of Thomas Jones act as witnesses, so although circumstantial, this seems very likely to explain these circumstances.
Thomas Taft's probate (Worcester Probate 58096) is pretty sparse, but what is there shows no sign of a widow, his son Isaac being appointed administrator. It is not known when Elizabeth died. The 1753 deed is, at this point, her last known act.
- ↑ Source:Bullard, Edgar J. Other Bullards, a Genealogy : Supplementary to Bullard and Allied Families, p. 9, shows Elizabeth with a birth of 27 Jan 1681. Since Eleazer is shown with the wrong mother, and there is a recorded birth for Eleazer 31 Jan 1681, this source is presumed to have assumed the 1681 record was a misrecording of Elizabeth. But Eleazer's will clearly indicates he was a child of Elizabeth, and barring the birth of twins four days apart, this source is probably wrong. Combined with typical double-dating practices, which suggest the recorded date was 1681/82, the reasonable conclusion is that Elizabeth's birth was not record and was about 1679-1680, about half way between John and Eleazer. The exact birthplace is unknown, though undoubtedly either Medfield or Sherborn.
|
|
