Henry's London

Much of the early work on the Stokes’ in England was done by the late Milton Rubincam who died Sept. 9, 1997. In addition to being a descendent of Thomas Stokes, Mr. Rubincam was also past President and Secretary of the National Genealogical Society and a well known expert in the field. Mr. Rubincam wrote two very interesting articles on our Stokes family, “A Little Known Adventure of Thomas Stokes” , include on this web page, which originally appeared in the Genealogical Magazine of New Jersey, and "A Critical Analysis of the Stokes Pedigree" which appeared in the Proceedings of the New Jersey Historical Society, Vol. 59, 1941. What I’ve tried to do is explore some of the material first produced by Mr. Rubincam and add historical material to add context and depth to this story.

I would also like to thank Mrs. Betty D. Morris (maiden name Stokes) who very kindly sent me the material on Robert Stokes in Nichol’s "History of Leicestershire". Mrs. Morris was a member of the Leicestershire Family History Society and I found her address while a member. We were unable to connect our families but I am very appreciative of her help.

Henry Stokes

Henry Stokes was the son of Robert Stokes and his wife Grace, he was probably born in 1619 and was a member of the Baker’s Company of London. I’ve read the various Livery Companies were strict about requiring new apprentices to be 14 years old, the idea being that they would be 21 and eligible to vote when they finished. Henry entered the Baker’s Company on Dec. 31, 1633 (OS ²) suggesting he was born in 1619.

Little is known about Henry’s early life, he was the son of Robert Stokes of Wycomb, Leicestershire, according to the records of the Baker’s Company of London. We don’t know how Henry traveled from Wycomb to London, it is about 100 miles, he may have used public transportation, like a coach, hitchhiked or walked, in either case the trip would be about 3 days. Since Henry was registered on Dec.31 its probably that the date of Henry’s departure was determined by Christmas. In those days Christmas wasn’t the family event we know today but rather a holiday were the lesser well off were able to eat and drink at the expense of the better off. In the 17th century only the better off had the opportunity to eat to their hearts content, and it doesn’t seem likely that Henry would miss out on that opportunity before leaving.

Henry was admitted to the Bakers Company on Dec. 31, 1633 (OS²). To see Henry's papers, click here.. He was first apprenticed to Christopher Taylor and then something must have happened to Christopher since he was transferred to George Darby before ending his apprenticeship and becoming a freeman of the company.

Henry lived on Wentworth St.

According to the records of the London/Middlesex Quarterly Meeting of Friends Henry’s wife was Elizabeth but we don’t know her maiden name. Henry, at some point became a Quaker but we don’t know exactly when. It is said that the Quaker movement in London was begun in in 1654 when Howgill and Burrough took rooms at the Bull & Mouth Inn in London, and started preaching the Quaker faith. It is thought to be the first Quaker meeting in London and probably the meeting Henry attended, we know his son Thomas was arrested there. I believe it was the only meeting in London at the time of Henry’s death. Other meetings sprang up in London after the great fire of 1666. The Records of the London/Middlesex Meeting of Friends records don’t show what meeting Henry attended when he died and I assume that is because there was only one meeting.

Henry is identified in the records of the Baker’s Company as a biscuit (cracker) baker; one of the uses for biscuits was to send on board ship to feed the crew. Biscuits lasted longer than bread and so were ideal for use aboard ship, one London Museum has a biscuit dated to 1784..

Beginning about 1615, the area around east of the Tower of London (see map) became an active port for the city of London. It's possible that Henry moved to the eastern suburbs of London to avoid the higher taxes in the city as well as to sell his biscuits to the ever increasing shipping business. A history of Lower Shadwell identifies biscuit bakers as one of those groups moving to the East of London area about 1640 to take advantage of the shipping business³

Henry Stokes died on the Plague on 4/24/1665 (Old Style)². At the time of his death there was little plague in his neighborhood. Daniel DeFoe, in his Journal of the Plague Year, 1665 (page 26) notes that by the week of July 4, 1665 there had only been one death in Stepney, and that must have been Henry's death. The Spittlefields area was hit hard in September but not in June, it's very possible that Henry contacted the plague while visiting his son in Newgate Prison.. (See Thomas for details)

The incubation period for the plague is from 36 hours to six days. The early symptoms were headache, feverish shivering and sneezing. The buboes that gave the plague its name (Bubonic Plague) developed on the second day, then the blood that filled the buboes would turn black as it decayed giving the disease its alternate name, the Black Death. Death usually followed in a few days. Henry died early in the plague and before the practice of locking the family up for 30 days in their house, often ending in their death. London put this policy into effect on July 1st, Henry lived in the eastern suburbs of London in Middlesex County and it instituted the practice in September when the plague became common in Henry’s area but by that time Henry died (June 21st) it had hardly appeared there yet..

As far as is known, the children of Henry and Elizabeth Stokes were Thomas, born 1643 (see Northampton Twp. tax list), John, born 1751 (see his death in London Middlesex Quarterly Meeting of Friends ) and Mary who married Samuel Lovett, I’m still trying to document Mary’s date of birth and death.. Almost certainly there were other children probably a Henry, Robert and Elizabeth, but since these names don’t show up in the record of the London/Quarterly Meeting of Friends so its not likely any of these died of the plague.

Elizabeth Stokes

Elizabeth, the wife of Henry is the remaining unknown factor in this period; we don’t know her maiden name. I had come across a Henry Stokes and Elizabeth Green who had married April 22, 1641 but Cousin Joan Leavitt checked this and found that this Henry was a gunsmith and not a baker, so it was not our Henry. After Henry’s death she must have kept the business running and that is probably why a certificate was issued by the court of the Baker’s Company regarding John Stokes. John and Elizabeth requested the certificate, probably because there was concern that since Henry had died when John was 14 he couldn’t have instructed John and there was concern that John’s right to be a member of the company would be challenged. At this time Thomas was already in West Jersey.

I had also speculated that because John Stokes had a relationship with William Harris of Rhode Island, perhaps John's mother was related to Harris. This doesn't appear to be the case. I've heard from Randy Harris, a descendant of Harris, who told me William Harris was from Kent, not London, and he didn't have a sister named Elizabeth. There doesn't appear to be a family connection. Having thought about this, one would have expected Harris, in his letter to his wife, or John, in his letter to members of the Harris family, would have mentioned this if there was a family connection.

After Henry's death Elizabeth must have kept the business running (as books on the Livery Companies suggest) and that is probably why a certificate was issued by the court of the Baker's Company regarding John Stokes. John and Elizabeth request the certificate, probably because there was concern that since Henry had died when John was 14, he couldn't have instructed John and there was concert that John's right to be a member of the company would be challenged. Keep in mind this would have occurred Keep in mind that this occurred in 1680, Thomas, a member of the Baker's Company who might confirm John's apprenticeship, was already in North America.

Elizabeth, after a long widowhood, married John Miller on 9-2- 1693.(O.S.) While we have to wonder why Elizabeth waited 28 years after Henry’s death to remarry, she is identified in the London/Middlesex Quarterly Meeting as being of Winfred (a variation of Wentworth) Street and also the widow of Henry. She died as Elizabeth Miller on 11-26-1699 (O.S 1), at age 77. Wife of John Miller. Buried in Checker Ally (The Quaker Burail Ground for Women). This gives Elizabeth a date of birth of 1622.

Thomas Stokes

Thomas was born in 1643 (see the census for Northampton Twp. on this web page), where Thomas gives his age as 66 in 1709), this is contrary to the generally accepted date of about 1640

.

According to British History On-line, Thomas was arrested on Dec. 25, 1664 (a Sunday) for attending a Quaker meeting at the home of Thomas Beanes. At this meeting only four men were arrested because these four had been arrested previously on this charge. There were about 20 people who attended the meeting. Thomas was arrested for violating the Conventicle Act of 1664⁷ which forbade religious services in homes or on private property by unrelated persons.

The trial of the four was held on Jan. 11, 1665 and they were sentenced to 7 years hard labor in Jamaica. In 1665 Jamaica wasn't a tourist destination; it was a tropical climate that, for Northern Europeans, introduced a whole host of new diseases for those living there. These Quakers were being sent there as punishment and I expect a good number of the Northern Europeans who were sent there died as a result of disease. Fortunately, Thomas never got to Jamaica since his ship was captured by the Dutch, who was at war with England. See A Little Known Adventure of Thomas Stokes for details.

For more on the Conventicle Acts, see here..

Thomas was admitted to the Baker’s Company on July 3, 1667, according to the Baker’s company record, Thomas son of Henry was admitted a freeman “upon sight of his father’s copy” indicating his father was also a baker. According to the London/Middlesex Quarterly Meeting of Friends records, Thomas Stokes married Mary Barnard on 10/30/1668 (OS). Milton Rubincam claims that Mary was the daughter of John Barnard and Frances Munt, and granddaughter of Samuel Munt of Peldon, Essex but I'm beginning to have my doubts. I haven't see any documentation on this claim. Mr. Rubincam claims the got this information from Judge John Clements of Haddonfield, J.J., but Judge Clements doesn't document the claim either. While I have nothing but the highest regard for Dr. Rubincam, I think this may be one issue that got by him. Cousin Joan Leavitt checked the records for London/Middlesex Quarterly Meeting of Friends for a listing for Bernard, in the hope her marriage to Thomas was given and her parent's names would be given but nothing was found. Since the last known location of John and Francis Bernard (based on Samuel Munt's will) was in Essex and since Barnard was a fairly common name we probably need to find more documentation on this.
.

Tradition has Thomas arriving on the ship Kent but the list of passengers shown on this web page ( Passengers on the Ship Kent) is of unknown origin, it came from Salem County Genealogy Data Vol. 1, by H. Stanley Craig but where Craig got the list is unknown. Some research was been done on the passengers of the Kent but they have only identified 33 of the 270 passengers so the lack of inclusion on this list doesn’t mean Thomas wasn’t on the Kent. Because of tradition and the fact that Thomas’ brother-in-law, Samuel Lovett is generally accepted as having been on the Kent, I think it probable Thomas was as well.

One of the little mysteries about the Craig list of those on the Kent is that he shows a Mary Bernard as a passenger. We have to wonder why Mary is listed in her maiden name and not as the wife of Thomas Stokes.

We don’t have a good date of birth for Mary Bernard, her date of burial was on the 18th of the 3rd month (May), 1697 (O.S.) this from the "Genealogical Records of John Wills" ⁵, she probably died a day or two before, this is a correction to a previous date of death of 1699. A tombstone erected for the Stokes family in the Rancocas Burial ground gives some incorrect information for Thomas, this was erected well after their deaths by descendants and Thomas date of birth is incorrect. Early Friends didn’t believe in tombstones they thought them vain, and the information is off by a few years.

In the Trenton deed, John Stokes of Wentworth St. in the Parish of Stepney, in the county of Middlesex, makes over his rights in consideration of 5 shillings of lawful money of England and “the naturell love and affection which I have and do bear unto my loving and naturell brother, Thomas Stokes living at or neare Burlington in West New Jersey”.
The use of the term natural brother may indicate a wrinkle in Thomas parentage. Perhaps future research will turn up something on this.

Thomas died in 1720 at his son Thomas’ house in what is now Cherry Hill Township, Camden County, New Jersey. He is buried at the Rancocas Friends Burial ground. See A Little Known Adventure of Thomas Stokes on this web page for a list of Thomas’ children, including Henry who died in England as a young child.

Mary Stokes Lovett

I have been unable to find a good date of birth and death for Mary, Clair Carr sent me a date of birth of 1655 and a date of death of April 18th, 1714 but wasn’t certain how reliable the information was since it comes from the IGI and is undocumented. Clair has Samuel born 1650 and dying May 29th, 1712. The first solid date we have on Mary is her marriage to Samuel Lovett on 1/15/1673 (OS). In “A Little Known Adventure article by Milton Rubincam he identifies two children of Mary, Nathan, Born I2-I7-1675 (OS) and died two months later and Mary, who died 12-5-1677 at one year. (There must be something wrong with this date since the Lovetts would have been in New Jersey at this time and not on Wentworth St. as Mr. Rubincam claims. This death probably occurred just before their departure to New Jersey). In the U.S. they had Jonathan, born 8/21/1680 (OS)⁶ and Samuel, born 11/5/1682 (OS)⁶ Samuel Lovett died 7/21/1712 (OS)⁶ according to Hinshaw.

Mary is frequently mentioned as a midwife or witness to Quaker births in Burlington. This is referenced in the Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine, "17th Century Birth Records of the Delaware Valley" Vol. 27. I would like to hear from anyone who has additional information on Mary and her husband, Samuel Lovett.

John Stokes

John was born in 1651 and died on 4/21/1709 (OS), he married Ann Barber on 1/1/1676 (OS), Ann died on 12/9/1699 (OS) at age 50. (See London/Middlesex Quarterly Meeting of Friends Records ). The New Jersey Archives, Calendar of Records, Vol. 12, p. 394 show that Thomas Hooten sold to John Stokes 1/32 of a proprietary grant dated Feb. 21, 1678-9. This is the land John sold to his brother Thomas in 1701.
John had four children, two of whom died, they were
John born 5/23/1682 died at age 6 weeks of convulsions.
Ann, born 1/3/1677 died.
Elizabeth, born 2/8/1686
Abigail, born 10/7/1687

Its possible that Elizabeth and Abigail lived to adulthood. I’ll need to check the records of London/Middlesex Quarterly meeting of Fiends for later dates to confirm.

On March 7th, 1680 a certificate was presented by John Stokes and his mother Elizabeth which states that John was instructed in “the art and mystery of baking” by his father and mother. I’d assume this certificate was generated because John was 14 in 1665, when his father died and so was probably primarily instructed by his mother. Apparently John and Elizabeth were concerned that someone might challenge John’s right to be a baker. Because John and Thomas were the sons of a baker they didn’t follow normal procedure for admission to the company. They were not apprenticed and wouldn’t appear in the records as apprentices, they were instructed by their father. Thomas’ admission shows this difference, he is admitted to the company “by sight of his father’s copy” Consequently, there wouldn’t be a way of proving their right to be a Baker except by having their mother or brother testify in front of the Baker’s court. Since Thomas was already in America the only person who could affirm to this fact was John’s mother and the certificate was filed because John could be challenged if something happened to Elizabeth. (For more information see Milton Rubincam’s "A Critical Analysis of the Stokes Pedigree" in Proceedings of the New Jersey Historical Society, Vol. 59, 1941, p.96)

A John Stokes, who was obviously a Quaker, shows up in Besse⁴ as having had goods seized on 5 occasions for not supporting the armed bands or militia. John goods were seized twice in 1686, once in 1687, and twice in 1688. There is no reference to Winfred or Wentworth St. that would clearly identify this as our John Stokes but it seems likely.

John appears to have had a relationship with William Harris of Rhode Island⁸, who was an early settler of Providence and founder of Cranston, R.I. There were apparently problems about these settlements and William had to make several trips to London. In 1680 Harris was kidnapped and held for ransom by Algerian pirates, he wrote to his wife, telling her, concerning some papers “I prey they may be sent to ‘the signe of the peele’ in wentworth street neere spittle fields in London to John Stokes, living there, to remain there for me.” John Stokes wrote a letter to Howlong Harris, daughter of William, telling her of her father's capture. After his release Harris returned to John Stokes' house, he died there a few days later.

This is the first reference I’ve seen to John’s business being called “The Sign of the Peele (the wooden tool used to baker’s to remove goods from the oven). Its unclear if the business had that name when Henry operated it. In addition, why would a Rhode Island Baptist have as a friend, a Quaker living in London, was there a family connection ? I've heard from Randy Harris who is a descendant of this family and he says that William Harris was from Kent and that Harris didn't have a sister named Elizabeth so it wouldn't seem the family connection isn't the case. Its possible that Henry or his son John had a relationship with Harris because they had provided him biscuits for a sea voyage.

It would appear that John’s home was unaffected by the Great Fire of London in 1666, that was restricted largely to the area inside the old city walls.

There are a number of areas that warrant future research on our Stokes family, additional information on Mary Bernard’s family, the maiden name of Elizabeth, the wife of Henry Stokes and her family.

The British Maritime Museum has removed their recipe for Biscuits but the ingredients were stone ground flour, water and salt which were mixed into a stiff dough and baked in a hot oven for 30 minutes and then left to harden and dry. The museum has several examples of ships biscuits in the collection including one dating from 1784.

Notes
¹ For more information on these church records see Family History Library Catalog Title, Bishop's transcripts, 1607-1831 Church of England. Chapelry of Wycomb and Chadwell (Microfilm of original records at the City Museum and Art Gallery, Leicester.) Wycomb and Chadwell is a chapelry in the parish of Rothley. FHL British Film 590863 Item 2.

²In 1665 the British operated under the Julian calendar where March was the first month of the year so Henry's death on 4/24/1665 would be the fourth month or June 24, 1665. A second problem was an 11 day gap between the calendar and the real world. See below. Its generally thought best to report these dates as they are found and simply mark them as OS for old style or Julian calendar. There is no real need to convert these dates to the modern calendar and if we do future researchers will be confused by multiple dates of death.

The calendar change was first proposed by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582 and became known as the Gregorian calendar, replacing the older Julian calendar which had become out of synch with the actual seasons. Over hundreds of years the small inaccuracies in the length of the day had resulted in the calendar's inaccuracies. The Pope was interested in making sure that Easter, then the most important date in the Christian calendar, was celebrated on the correct date. Generally Catholic countries made the change earlier than non-Catholic countries.

When the British adopted the Gregorian calendar, by act of Parliament, on September 2, 1752 there was an 11 day gap and so the next day, normally Sept. 3, became Sept. 14.1752. The British were slow to adopt it because of their opposition to Roman Catholicism, they didn't want to seem that they were taking direction from the Pope.. Different countries adopted to this change at different times, the British changed to it in 1752 while the Russians didn't adopt the new calendar until 1918. During the Napoleonic Wars the Austrian army had planned to meet the Russian Army for a large battle against Napoleon. The joint battle never took place because the Russians showed up 11 days late since they were operating under the Julian calendar.

It was often thought in both Britain and in its North American colonies that someone's date of death was predetermined by God who had this date written in his book. Many thought that, by act of Parliament, their lives would be 11 days shorter. I've never heard anyone cite this as a reason for the American Revolution but it certainly seems more unsettling than having British troops quartered in your house or paying a tax on tea. For more information on the calendar change see Milton Rubincam's Pitfalls In Genealogical Research, Ancestry Publishing, Salt Lake City, 1987.

³ "In 1615 there were but ten ships of more than 200 tons belonging to the Port of London, while in 1640 there were a hundred ships of sail capable of being converted into men-of-war, besides which a hundred ships had been added to the navy. In a few years houses and streets came into existence and were occupied by boat-builders, sail-makers, mast-makers, riggers, biscuit-bakers, coopers, ships' chandlers, anchor-smiths, besides others engaged in marine occupations?
Source History of Shadwell This is from "The Copartnership Herald", Vol. II, no. 23 (Christmas 1932-January 1933)

⁴ See, An Abstract of the Sufferings of the People call'd Quakers for the Testimony of a Good Conscience, by Joseph Besse, vol. II (1738), pp. 323-325. (the pagination may differ in later editions).

⁵National Genealogical Society Quarterly, Vol. 42 #2, 1954)

⁶American Encyclopedia of Quaker Genealogy, Vol. 2, Burlington Monthly Meeting, Page 179

⁷ For information on the Conventicle Acts click here.
In addition, two Conventicle Acts (in 1664 and 1670) forbade religious services in homes where five or more people sixteen years of age or over and not of the same family were present.

The statutory penalty for repeated conviction under these laws was transportation, but it was easier to prescribe such a penalty than to have it carried out. It was not easy to find captains willing to use their ships for this purpose; partly perhaps through a revulsion against the harshness of the penalty, but also through a shortage of shipping. Consequently, few if any Friends were transported.

⁸References to William Harris and John Stokes can be found in the “Harris Papers”, published by the Rhode Island Historical Society in 1902 as Collections of the Rhode Island Historical Society, Volume X. This includes a letter from John Stokes to Howlong Harris, daughter of William, informing her of her father’s capture. William Harris was later redeemed but died at the home of John Stokes in 1681.

To the Descendents of Thomas Stokes index page

To the Quakers of Shoreditch Page