Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Jeffrey Manning, poss son of John Manning, any new information?
847 views
Skip to first unread message
sangreel
Sep 13, 2013, 9:52:38 PM9/13/13
to
I have been spending some time researching the line of Jeffrey Manning husband to
Hepzibah Andrews (Heiress).
Here is some of the information I have gathered about J. Manning:
[Research Notes: Please note that the connection to John and Abigail Manning is unproven to my standards. I will cont. to research this family line as time permits. I have kept the line past jeffrey Manning, in mt gedcom, as shown for the information contained within. I can NOT claim the line from Abigail Maverick until this issue is resolved. MDAW]
Notes:
The genealogical and biographical history of the Manning families of New England
By William Henry Manning
Page 805
133 JEFFREY MANNING was in Piscataway township New Jersey as early as 1676 in which year he purchased land He was one of three commissioners to lay out land grants 1682 and was marshal of the first County Court of Middlesex held at Piscataway 1683 He d in 1693 He was the ancestor of a family that has been large and influential in and beyond NJ and Is evidently extensive to the present day Mr OB Leonard of Plainfield NJ has collected the records of many descendants Jeffrey m Hepsibah dau of Joseph Andrews of Hlngham Mass and granddau of Sir Thomas Andrews Lord Mayor of London
As to the possibility that Jeffrey was related to one of the Manning families of New England read what is said in the sketch of Capt Nicholas Manning 2 of the Salem Ipswich family
Jeffrey's children were
1 John b about 1670 m Elizabeth Dennis and had ch 1 Gershom b 1694
2 Elizabeth b 1695
3 John b 1697
4 Mary b 1700
5 Ephraim b 1701 m Elizabeth dau of Benjamin Fitz Randolph She was a sister of Nathaniel Fitz Randolph who born 1703 Nov 11 at Princeton NJ is believed to have been the same man of his name mentioned in the sketch of Capt Nicholas Manning 2 of the Salem Ipswich family
6 Ruth b 1703
7 Martha b 1705
II Benjamin b about 1674 m Ann Blackford
III James b about 1676 m Christiana Laing
Ch
1 James b 1700
2 Margaret b 1701
3 Ebenezer b 1703
4 Isaac b 1705
5 Nathaniel b 1707
IV Elizabeth m Thomas Fitz Randolph
V Joseph b about 1678 m Temperance Fitz Randolph
Ch
1 Joanna b 1705
2 Trustrum b 1710
3 Mary b 1712
4 Elizabeth b 1718
5 Eunice b 1715
6 Rachel b 1715
7 Jtffrey b 1719
8 Grace b 1721
9 Ruth b 1726
http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA805#v=onepage&q=jeffrey&f=false
***
The genealogical and biographical history of the Manning families of New ...
By William Henry Manning
Sketch of Capt Nicholas Manning 2 of the Salem Ipswich family as noted above:
Pages 670 -
The chief interest in the affair lies in the fact that as we know that Capt Nicholas Manning married a daughter of John Mason and that there was a Thomas Manning who in 1767 claimed land at Sheepscot as an heir of John Mason it would at first seem to be proved positively that Captain Manning's son John had left children or that Nicholas himself had children by his second wife But there is a check to this assumption On or ...
[Chap An obsolete term for purchaser]
....near page 27 of the History of Ancient Sheepscot in a copy of one of Capt Manning's surveys is mention of John Manning's lot and on or about page 40 the historian says John Manning lived near the common at Sheepscot He married John Mason's daughter.
If this is correct we are introduced in the person of this John Manning to a man new to the researches of this volume and of whom there is no previous or subsequent sign and if there was such a man it may have been from him not from Nicholas Manning that Thomas Manning of Moreland was descended But was there such a man The author of Ancient Sheepscot was an able man an antiquarian and a conscientious recorder but it is no discredit to his memory to suggest that he may have made an error Capt Manning evidently secured all the land he could at Sheepscot
His son John was then advancing toward his majority. Did the father secure a lot for the son and was it the son who figured at Sheepscot Was the historian misled by finding a John Manning among John Mason's heirs into believing that there was a John Manning who married one of Mason's daughters This seems a reasonable theory yet it cannot be affirmed that the historian was wrong when he said there was such a marriage In preparing his history he had the use of manuscript papers which had descended through various families of other names
Since his decease several persons including the present writer have tried to find these papers One item of information is that it is supposed they are destroyed but at present this cannot be determined To gain light on the mysteries here presented the State Papers of Maine and Massachusetts the deeds of Lincoln county and the deeds wills and court records of York county have been searched in vain Thomas Manning of Moreland was either a descendant of Nicholas Manning or else there was a mysterious John Manning of Sheepscot from whom Thomas descended Which York County Deeds xn 184 and xx 163 show that 1719 Dec 4 Nicholas Manning sold to his son John of Boston certain lands at Sheepscot This sale was not recorded at the county registry but is mentioned in the above deeds It seems that the conveyance from father to son was of 5000 acres or more Of this area John sold 1500 acres 1 721 May 1 to John Oulton and Cornelius Waldo both of Boston and the remaining half 1500 acres 1725 Aug 24 to Job Lewis These lands are described in John's deeds as chiefly a tract Nicholas had received by patent from John Palmer Esq of New York by virtue of a warrant from Lieut Gov Dongan 1686 Sep 17 also other tracts formerly the property of John Mason which descended to his daughter Mary wife of Nicholas Manning Reference to the claim of Thomas Manning before given will show that the name of Job Lewis just mentioned also appears in what Thomas claimed In 1767 Thomas was owner of one fourth part of a tract in which Lewis was another owner Was the land sold by John Manning in 1721 and 1725 the last that he and Nicholas owned Or was a part retained and claimed by Thomas in 1767 Or was there a mysterious John Manning and did Thomas claim under his right As if this confusion was not enough another link in the broken chain appears to confront us In the miscellaneous families mentioned in this volume will be found that established in New Jersey by Jeffrey Manning The latter had a grandson Ephraim Manning born 1701 see sketch of Jeffrey's family who married Elizabeth Fitz Randolph born 1708 Dec 31 and this Elizabeth was sister of one Nathaniel Fitz Randolph born 1703 Nov 11 who it is said on excellent authority must have been the same man who figured in the Thomas Manning claim.
Here we have it seems the Mr Fitz Randolph and the Ephraim Manning mentioned in that claim but nowhere in the New Jersey family is there found any Thomas Manning at that period That he was related to the New Jersey race seems almost certain since Ephraim Manning and Nathaniel Fitz Randolph were successively his attorneys and it is almost equally certain that he was not a direct descendant of Jeffrey There are Mannings now living in Center Moreland Pa but repeated efforts to obtain information from them have failed no answer has been made to the compiler's many letters of inquiry From another source conies the information that the ancestors of those now there were from Orange county NY and it is not thought that they are descendants of Thomas Attention may here be directed to the Manning family of Duchess county NY
see miscellaneous families perhaps they were descended from Capt Nicholas but this is a mere conjecture
The important question Did Capt Nicholas have descendants after he and his son John passed away must for the present remain unanswered.
Ch of Nicholas by his first wife Elizabeth all born at Salem
9 Thomas b 1664 May 2 d In six mouths
10 Nicholas b 1665 Sep 15 d 1667 June 16
11 Margaret b 1667 Feb 25 d in a few days
12 John b 1668 May 28
http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA805#v=onepage&q=jeffrey&f=false
Note: Go to page 670.
***
***
http://users.rcn.com/kadekds/Monnettew.html
"First Settlers of Ye Plantations of Piscataway and Woodbridge of Olde East New Jersey",
by Ora Eugene Monnette, 10/9/1995/KDS
Pages: 89-93:
List constructed by Monnette of the first time each person appears in any of the public records associated with Woodbridge and Piscataway (KDS note - evidently does not include oaths, land deeds, etc. that show much earlier dates; also note that Monnette did not indicate in what record and in what context he found these references; also note his list in the next section of the date of the first mention of people in the Woodbridge Town Records).
The list includes:
Mannings -
Jeffrey (1683),
Hepzibah (1692),
John (1694),
Benjamin (1699),
Joseph (1709)
***
New England marriages prior to 1700
By Clarence Almon Torrey, Elizabeth Petty Bentley
Page 485 Geoffrey /Jeffrey Manning Marriage record.
http://books.google.com/books?id=mOgK8dM9qqUC&lpg=PA485&ots=ZgDi8dKGRk&dq=Hepzibah%20Andrews%201645%201691&pg=PA485#v=onepage&q=Hepzibah%20Andrews%201645%201691&f=false
***
http://www.geni.com/people/Geoffrey-Jeffrey-Manning/6000000007602981189
***
History of Middlesex County, New Jersey, 1664-1920, Volume 1
By Harold E. Pickersgill, Lewis Publishing Company
Page 234
Geoffrey Manning, March 28, 1683.
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZT8VAAAAYAAJ&dq=john%20%22Geoffrey%20Manning%22&pg=PA234#v=onepage&q=john%20%22Geoffrey%20Manning%22&f=false
***
Genealogical and memorial history of the state of New Jersey,
edited by Francis Bazley Lee,
Page 1034
http://books.google.com/books?id=S5E-AAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA1034&ots=L8PvJEp0o-&dq=Genealogical%20and%20memorial%20history%20of%20the%20state%20of%20New%20Jersey%2C%20%20edited%20by%20Francis%20Bazley%20Lee%2C%20%20Page%201034&pg=PA1034#v=onepage&q=Genealogical%20and%20memorial%20history%20of%20the%20state%20of%20New%20Jersey,%20%20edited%20by%20Francis%20Bazley%20Lee,%20%20Page%201034&f=false
The Mannings had their early MANNING origin in Germany, and went over in the fourth and fifth centuries from Saxony to England.
The first of the name mentioned in the county of Kent was Ranulph de Manning, or Manheim, Lord of Manheim, who married the aunt of King Harold.
Simon de Manning, son of Ranulph, possessed lands at Downes, in Kent, and was knighted in the Second Crusade.
He was Lord of Betiad (now Downe), and the first of the English barons to take up the Cross and go with King Richard (Coeur de Lion) to the Holy Wars, n90 A. D.
He was the ancestor of the line of Mannings of Downe and Cootham who were knights-marshal of the households of England's sovereigns for nearly four hundred years.
The 'old manor house of this progenitor was an entailed estate, and is still in the Manning family.
[THIS NEXT PART IS IN ERROR ABOUT SIR. HENRY MANNING MARRING A BRANDON. IT WAS HUGH MANNING WHO MARRIED MARGARET THE YOUNGER.]
??? Sir Henry Manning, knight-marshal to Henry VII., about A. D. 1500, married Eleanor Brandon, daughter of Sir William Brandon, aunt of the Duke of Suffolk, who was the husband of Mary, Queen Dowager of France, sister of Henry VIII., and grandmother of Lady Jane Grey.
Sir Harry's grandson, John Manning, son of Hugh, had a grant of a large part of the possessions of the Earl of Desmond, in Ireland, and joined the Earl of Essex about 1600, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, in an expedition to Ireland. (From "History of the Mannings "). This John Manning was the English ancestor of the family hereinafter mentioned.
According to Burke's Peerage a coat-of arms was granted in 1577 to Manning, of Downe, county Kent. It appears the same in various branches of the family—a cross, with four trefoils; but the crests slightly varying— an eagle head on a crown with two feathers. Motto: "Malo mori quam foedari"—"I would die rather than be disgraced."
(I) The earliest of the name on record as coming to America was John Manning, then twenty years of age, who sailed from London, England, for New England, in the ship "Globe," in August, 1635. In 1640 he was on record in Boston with his wife Abigail, and laid the foundations for a large line of descent. Many of the name took part in the colonial wars, the revolution, the war of 1812, the war of the rebellion, and the late war with Spain, and bore themselves most creditably. The different branches of the family also embrace among their number some of the most distinguished names on the pages of New Jersey history, including many scholars.
(II) Jeffrey, son of John Manning??, is said to have emigrated from New England to New Jersey about 1671, and was living in Piscataway township in 1676, and died in 1693. In 1682 he was one of three commissioners who laid out extensive land grants in Piscataway, Middlesex county, and the following year was marshal of the first county court of Middlesex county, which was held at Piscataway. In landed estate, Jeffrey Manning and his children were among the largest and most successful citizens of the county.
He married Hepzibah, daughter of Joseph Andrews, of Hingham, Massachusetts, granddaughter of Sir Thomas Andrews, Lord Mayor of London.
Children of Jeffrey and Hepzibah (Andrews) Manning :
John, born about 1670, married Elizabeth Dennis;
Benjamin, born about 1674, married Ann Blackford;
James, born about 1676, married Christiana Laing;
Elizabeth, married Thomas Fitz Randolph; and Joseph.
The Thomas family, of which Mrs. Manning was a member, were formerly natives of Devonshire, England, which was also the ancestral home of some of the Mannings. Among the descendants of Jeffrey Manning was Dr. James Manning, founder and first president of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
(II) Joseph, fourth son of Jeffrey and Hepzibah (Andrews) Manning, was born about 1678, at Piscataway, New Jersey, and died in 1728. He and his brothers were among the early settlers who successfully petitioned the royal powers for relief from the oppressive jurisdiction of the proprietors. He married, in 1802, Temperance, daughter of John and Sarah (Bonham) Fitz-Randolph, and
Their children were:
Joanna, born about 1705, married Mr. Campbell; Trustrum;
Mary, born 1712; Elizabeth, 1713;
Eunice, 1715; Rachel, 1717;
Jeffrey, 1719;
Grace, 1721, married Daniel Cooper;
and Ruth, born 1726.
Genealogical and Memorial History of the State of New Jersey ...
edited by Francis Bazley Lee
Page 1034
http://books.google.com/books?id=S5E-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA1034#v=onepage&q=Jeffrey,%20son%20of%20John%20Manning&f=false
http://www.ebooksread.com/authors-eng/francis-bazley-lee/genealogical-and-memorial-history-of-the-state-of-new-jersey--volume-4-fee/page-38-genealogical-and-memorial-history-of-the-state-of-new-jersey--volume-4-fee.shtml
Here is some of the information I have gathered about J. Manning supposed father, John Manning:
Research Notes:
******************
The genealogical and biographical history of the Manning families of New ...
By William Henry Manning
Page 803-4
132 JOHN MANNING Capt an early resident and prominent figure in New York City was probably the same man as the subject of the previous sketch His career on land was as striking as on water He was witness to an Indian deed in 1664 one of the commissioners of Esopus 1669 sheriff of New York 1667 72 and was commonly known as Captain Manning
He was in favor with Gov Lovelace and during the temporary absence of the latter from the city was often placed in command of Fort James He was thus in command in 1673 when a hostile Dutch force appeared in the neighboring waters and demanded a surrender After some parley the fort was delivered up to the enemy a serious loss to the English Capt Manning soon sailed for England to explain the matter to the King At that time he was still a sheriff as appears by steps taken by the authorities to pitch upon a anew Sheriff for Long Island East Riding He left divers debts and bills and proceedings were begun to wind up his estate On the voyage to England his wife died
He appeared before the King and the Duke of York who exonerated him deciding that Fort James could not have been held with so small a force but he did not find such clemency on his return to New York Citizens who had suffered financial losses by reason of the surrender clamored for satisfaction and Capt Manning was put on trial on charges of treason and cowardice Of the first he was acquitted but was adjudged guilty of cowardice and sentenced to have his sword broken over his head and to be forever debarred from holding public office
Modern writers incline to pronounce the sentence severe and unjust and agree with the royal powers that the strength of the Dutch was not to be defied However the citizens of that day had suffered money loss a victim was wanted they found one
After this Capt Manning retired to an island owned by him and situated in the waters of the East River where he passed his remaining years entertaining freely and probably enjoying himself quite as well as in his days of power
He died later than 1685 It is not known that he left children of his own and his island passed into the hands of Mary Manningham said to have been a daughter of his wife by a former marriage
She m 1676 Apr 26 Robert Blackwell whose name became permanently fixed upon the estate that had been Manning's and which is now widely known as Blackwell's Island being the seat of many of the corrective institutions of New York county
An attempt has been made to connect Capt John of New York by inference with Capt John Manning of Boston, No 23,
The known facts are decidedly against the theory and indeed seem to render it impossible. Con't below:------>>
[See: http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA780#v=onepage&q=capt.%20john&f=false
23 JOHN MANNING a merchant was in Boston as early as 1641 in which year he joined the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company He was appointed ensign in a few years and later the Boston town records always call him Captain though the source of this title docs not appear His wife Abigail d 1644 June 25 after which he m 2d Ann dau of Richard Parker a merchant of Boston
The suggestion has been advanced that Capt John was related to William Manning the founder of the Cambridge family but has not the support of one known fact John was one generation the younger and if of radically near relationship would naturally be a son of William but this idea is too improbable to be entertained William gave his property by will to his wife and at her death it was to pass to certain of his heirs and the final disposition as he plainly indicated was governed by the financial circumstances of those he left behind him it being his purpose to distribute his money according to the needs of his descendants Unless the writer greatly mistakes the condition of Capt John's business in the later years of his life his children had been left not only fatherless but heirs only to a seriously embarrassed probably wrecked estate as will appear later If William had been grandfather to these children he would in their financial difficulties have been far more likely to aid them than to set his money aside to enable another grandchild to learn a trade Possibly John was nephew to William but if so it is peculiar that not one document has been found to show business or other association between the two families.
The writer does not believe there was any near relationship between them.]
--------------->> CON'T: The writer who advances the theory vide Appleton's Cyclopedia of Am Biography seems to base his suggestion upon a statement which may be quoted from his article on John of New York as follows His employment in New York came through the recommendation of Samuel Maverick who in a letter of 16 Sept 1663 to the Earl of Clarendon lord high chancellor of England commended Manning as one who hath many years been a commander under Maj Gen Morgan who hath given him a large and ample certificate which he will show you He is well known and beloved in New England
The present writer supposes this Samuel Maverick to be the same who had dwelt at Noddle's Island East Boston and perhaps the same of the name who was commissioner in New York and his first mentioned residence together with the statement that Manning was well known in New England might seem to bear out the inference but all further facts are against it According to Lamb's History of New York Capt John of the latter place had formerly commanded a trading vessel between New Haven and New York from which we may well believe he was the Capt John mariner of the previous sketch see 131 in which case he had been navigating the coast waters during a period beginning as early as 1663 We have seen that he sailed to Virginia as well as New York and Connecticut and in par suing his sea ventures governed it would seem in his choice of ports solely by the advantageous circumstances of the hour he would naturally include Boston as a port and may thus have met Mr Maverick or the latter may have seen him in New Haven Again he is not mentioned as one well known in Boston but in New England Other reasons exist for believing that John of New York and John of Boston were entirely different persons
---> First the wife of John of New York died at sea in 1673 whereas the wife of John of Boston continued to reside In Boston until her death at a date later than 1687
---->Secondly John of New York died after 1685 and the wife of John of Boston had married 2d William Gerrish before 1676 Aug 18
---->Thirdly John of New York had many years been a commander under Maj Gen Morgan
The most careful search has failed to discover any such high military officer in the Colonies at that period and the only one known to history was in England being Sir Thomas Morgan who followed the calling of arms from at least 1645 to 1667 and was during the final years of his service Major General of the English troops and lie it must have been it seems who was alluded to in Samuel Maverick's letter
John of Boston arrived in the Colony in 1640 and engaged as a merchant and was following that peaceful calling at a time it would seem when John of New York was serving in the English army as a commander under Gen Morgan John of Boston associated himself with the local militia and was styled captain in 1655 but had previously been plain Mr Manning Moreover John of New York appears to have been a sea captain as early as 1653 and John of Boston was certainly a merchant later than that date and finally to assume that the two were one would necessitate the as sertion that John and Ann of Boston husband and wife had each taken a new matrimonial partner while the other was living
http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA805#v=onepage&q=capt.%20john&f=false
***
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/NYALBANY/2007-04/1177161881
The Manning name is usually English or Irish.
There was a very famous man named Captain John Manning, he was the Comander in Chief of Fort Albany in 1664, when the English 'waltzed in' and took control from the Dutch.
This John Manning was rebuked for handing over the 'keys' to the city without a wimper. He was punished by having his sword broke over his head, and never allowed to hold office.
But through some hook or crook, he managed to be given the small island next to Manhattan, which today is a residential community, it is known today as FDR Island, for the former President, but back then it was Manning's Island.
Capt. John Manning married Abigail Maverick, and their descendants formed the "Jeffrey Manning" family line of Piscataway, New Jersey.
***
Appletons' cyclopaedia of American biography, Volume 4
edited by James Grant Wilson, John Fiske
Page 192
MANNING, John, soldier, b. in England; d. probably in New York, after 1686.
He is thought by some to be the same Capt. John Manning who was in Boston about 1650, and to have been of the family of William Manning, merchant, of Cambridge and Boston. His employment in New York came through the recommendation of Samuel Maverick, who, in a letter of 16 Sept., 1668, to the Earl of Clarendon, lord high chancellor of England, commended Manning as one "who hath many years been a commander under Maj.-Gen. Morgan, who hath given him a large and ample certificate, which he will shew you. ... He is well known and beloved in New England, and will be fit for any employment in the militia." He came to New York in 1664, and in the same year accompanied the expedition for the reduction of Fort Orange, where he attended and was a witness to the first treaty that the English concluded with the Five Nations, and after the surrender of the place was left in charge of the fort. He was high sheriff of the city of New York from 1667 till 1672, in 1669 was a member of the commission that was sent to Esopus to regulate the affairs of that district, was judge of the court for the West Riding of Yorkshire, and acted as high sheriff of Yorkshire from 1671 to 1673.
He enjoyed the confidence of Gov. Lovelace, served as a member of his council, and when the governor was called to any distance from the city, Fort James and public affairs were placed in Manning's charge.
While he was thus in command, in 1673, the Dutch fleet arrived and demanded the surrender of the fort, which, after some resistance, was given up.
He sailed for England, waited on the king and Duke of York, and explained to them the particulars of the surrender, on hearing which the king turned to the duke and said: "Brother, the ground could not be maintained with so few men." He returned to New York with Gov. Andros, and was soon afterward tried by court-martial on charges of treachery and Cowardice. He was acquitted of the former but found guilty of cowardice, and on 5 Feb., 1675, sentenced to have his sword broken over his head and rendered incapable of again holding office under his majesty, which sentence would scarcely seem justified from the facts of the surrender. He retired to the island that had been granted to him in 1688, then called " Manning's island," but since well known as Blackwell's island, where he was acoustomed to entertain his friends.
http://books.google.com/books?id=q54LAAAAMAAJ&dq=Maverick%20%22john%20manning%22&pg=PA193#v=onepage&q=Maverick%20%22john%20manning%22&f=false
***
Any help would be much appreciated.
Michael D. Allen - Warner
Hepzibah Andrews (Heiress).
Here is some of the information I have gathered about J. Manning:
[Research Notes: Please note that the connection to John and Abigail Manning is unproven to my standards. I will cont. to research this family line as time permits. I have kept the line past jeffrey Manning, in mt gedcom, as shown for the information contained within. I can NOT claim the line from Abigail Maverick until this issue is resolved. MDAW]
Notes:
The genealogical and biographical history of the Manning families of New England
By William Henry Manning
Page 805
133 JEFFREY MANNING was in Piscataway township New Jersey as early as 1676 in which year he purchased land He was one of three commissioners to lay out land grants 1682 and was marshal of the first County Court of Middlesex held at Piscataway 1683 He d in 1693 He was the ancestor of a family that has been large and influential in and beyond NJ and Is evidently extensive to the present day Mr OB Leonard of Plainfield NJ has collected the records of many descendants Jeffrey m Hepsibah dau of Joseph Andrews of Hlngham Mass and granddau of Sir Thomas Andrews Lord Mayor of London
As to the possibility that Jeffrey was related to one of the Manning families of New England read what is said in the sketch of Capt Nicholas Manning 2 of the Salem Ipswich family
Jeffrey's children were
1 John b about 1670 m Elizabeth Dennis and had ch 1 Gershom b 1694
2 Elizabeth b 1695
3 John b 1697
4 Mary b 1700
5 Ephraim b 1701 m Elizabeth dau of Benjamin Fitz Randolph She was a sister of Nathaniel Fitz Randolph who born 1703 Nov 11 at Princeton NJ is believed to have been the same man of his name mentioned in the sketch of Capt Nicholas Manning 2 of the Salem Ipswich family
6 Ruth b 1703
7 Martha b 1705
II Benjamin b about 1674 m Ann Blackford
III James b about 1676 m Christiana Laing
Ch
1 James b 1700
2 Margaret b 1701
3 Ebenezer b 1703
4 Isaac b 1705
5 Nathaniel b 1707
IV Elizabeth m Thomas Fitz Randolph
V Joseph b about 1678 m Temperance Fitz Randolph
Ch
1 Joanna b 1705
2 Trustrum b 1710
3 Mary b 1712
4 Elizabeth b 1718
5 Eunice b 1715
6 Rachel b 1715
7 Jtffrey b 1719
8 Grace b 1721
9 Ruth b 1726
http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA805#v=onepage&q=jeffrey&f=false
***
The genealogical and biographical history of the Manning families of New ...
By William Henry Manning
Sketch of Capt Nicholas Manning 2 of the Salem Ipswich family as noted above:
Pages 670 -
The chief interest in the affair lies in the fact that as we know that Capt Nicholas Manning married a daughter of John Mason and that there was a Thomas Manning who in 1767 claimed land at Sheepscot as an heir of John Mason it would at first seem to be proved positively that Captain Manning's son John had left children or that Nicholas himself had children by his second wife But there is a check to this assumption On or ...
[Chap An obsolete term for purchaser]
....near page 27 of the History of Ancient Sheepscot in a copy of one of Capt Manning's surveys is mention of John Manning's lot and on or about page 40 the historian says John Manning lived near the common at Sheepscot He married John Mason's daughter.
If this is correct we are introduced in the person of this John Manning to a man new to the researches of this volume and of whom there is no previous or subsequent sign and if there was such a man it may have been from him not from Nicholas Manning that Thomas Manning of Moreland was descended But was there such a man The author of Ancient Sheepscot was an able man an antiquarian and a conscientious recorder but it is no discredit to his memory to suggest that he may have made an error Capt Manning evidently secured all the land he could at Sheepscot
His son John was then advancing toward his majority. Did the father secure a lot for the son and was it the son who figured at Sheepscot Was the historian misled by finding a John Manning among John Mason's heirs into believing that there was a John Manning who married one of Mason's daughters This seems a reasonable theory yet it cannot be affirmed that the historian was wrong when he said there was such a marriage In preparing his history he had the use of manuscript papers which had descended through various families of other names
Since his decease several persons including the present writer have tried to find these papers One item of information is that it is supposed they are destroyed but at present this cannot be determined To gain light on the mysteries here presented the State Papers of Maine and Massachusetts the deeds of Lincoln county and the deeds wills and court records of York county have been searched in vain Thomas Manning of Moreland was either a descendant of Nicholas Manning or else there was a mysterious John Manning of Sheepscot from whom Thomas descended Which York County Deeds xn 184 and xx 163 show that 1719 Dec 4 Nicholas Manning sold to his son John of Boston certain lands at Sheepscot This sale was not recorded at the county registry but is mentioned in the above deeds It seems that the conveyance from father to son was of 5000 acres or more Of this area John sold 1500 acres 1 721 May 1 to John Oulton and Cornelius Waldo both of Boston and the remaining half 1500 acres 1725 Aug 24 to Job Lewis These lands are described in John's deeds as chiefly a tract Nicholas had received by patent from John Palmer Esq of New York by virtue of a warrant from Lieut Gov Dongan 1686 Sep 17 also other tracts formerly the property of John Mason which descended to his daughter Mary wife of Nicholas Manning Reference to the claim of Thomas Manning before given will show that the name of Job Lewis just mentioned also appears in what Thomas claimed In 1767 Thomas was owner of one fourth part of a tract in which Lewis was another owner Was the land sold by John Manning in 1721 and 1725 the last that he and Nicholas owned Or was a part retained and claimed by Thomas in 1767 Or was there a mysterious John Manning and did Thomas claim under his right As if this confusion was not enough another link in the broken chain appears to confront us In the miscellaneous families mentioned in this volume will be found that established in New Jersey by Jeffrey Manning The latter had a grandson Ephraim Manning born 1701 see sketch of Jeffrey's family who married Elizabeth Fitz Randolph born 1708 Dec 31 and this Elizabeth was sister of one Nathaniel Fitz Randolph born 1703 Nov 11 who it is said on excellent authority must have been the same man who figured in the Thomas Manning claim.
Here we have it seems the Mr Fitz Randolph and the Ephraim Manning mentioned in that claim but nowhere in the New Jersey family is there found any Thomas Manning at that period That he was related to the New Jersey race seems almost certain since Ephraim Manning and Nathaniel Fitz Randolph were successively his attorneys and it is almost equally certain that he was not a direct descendant of Jeffrey There are Mannings now living in Center Moreland Pa but repeated efforts to obtain information from them have failed no answer has been made to the compiler's many letters of inquiry From another source conies the information that the ancestors of those now there were from Orange county NY and it is not thought that they are descendants of Thomas Attention may here be directed to the Manning family of Duchess county NY
see miscellaneous families perhaps they were descended from Capt Nicholas but this is a mere conjecture
The important question Did Capt Nicholas have descendants after he and his son John passed away must for the present remain unanswered.
Ch of Nicholas by his first wife Elizabeth all born at Salem
9 Thomas b 1664 May 2 d In six mouths
10 Nicholas b 1665 Sep 15 d 1667 June 16
11 Margaret b 1667 Feb 25 d in a few days
12 John b 1668 May 28
http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA805#v=onepage&q=jeffrey&f=false
Note: Go to page 670.
***
***
http://users.rcn.com/kadekds/Monnettew.html
"First Settlers of Ye Plantations of Piscataway and Woodbridge of Olde East New Jersey",
by Ora Eugene Monnette, 10/9/1995/KDS
Pages: 89-93:
List constructed by Monnette of the first time each person appears in any of the public records associated with Woodbridge and Piscataway (KDS note - evidently does not include oaths, land deeds, etc. that show much earlier dates; also note that Monnette did not indicate in what record and in what context he found these references; also note his list in the next section of the date of the first mention of people in the Woodbridge Town Records).
The list includes:
Mannings -
Jeffrey (1683),
Hepzibah (1692),
John (1694),
Benjamin (1699),
Joseph (1709)
***
New England marriages prior to 1700
By Clarence Almon Torrey, Elizabeth Petty Bentley
Page 485 Geoffrey /Jeffrey Manning Marriage record.
http://books.google.com/books?id=mOgK8dM9qqUC&lpg=PA485&ots=ZgDi8dKGRk&dq=Hepzibah%20Andrews%201645%201691&pg=PA485#v=onepage&q=Hepzibah%20Andrews%201645%201691&f=false
***
http://www.geni.com/people/Geoffrey-Jeffrey-Manning/6000000007602981189
***
History of Middlesex County, New Jersey, 1664-1920, Volume 1
By Harold E. Pickersgill, Lewis Publishing Company
Page 234
Geoffrey Manning, March 28, 1683.
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZT8VAAAAYAAJ&dq=john%20%22Geoffrey%20Manning%22&pg=PA234#v=onepage&q=john%20%22Geoffrey%20Manning%22&f=false
***
Genealogical and memorial history of the state of New Jersey,
edited by Francis Bazley Lee,
Page 1034
http://books.google.com/books?id=S5E-AAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA1034&ots=L8PvJEp0o-&dq=Genealogical%20and%20memorial%20history%20of%20the%20state%20of%20New%20Jersey%2C%20%20edited%20by%20Francis%20Bazley%20Lee%2C%20%20Page%201034&pg=PA1034#v=onepage&q=Genealogical%20and%20memorial%20history%20of%20the%20state%20of%20New%20Jersey,%20%20edited%20by%20Francis%20Bazley%20Lee,%20%20Page%201034&f=false
The Mannings had their early MANNING origin in Germany, and went over in the fourth and fifth centuries from Saxony to England.
The first of the name mentioned in the county of Kent was Ranulph de Manning, or Manheim, Lord of Manheim, who married the aunt of King Harold.
Simon de Manning, son of Ranulph, possessed lands at Downes, in Kent, and was knighted in the Second Crusade.
He was Lord of Betiad (now Downe), and the first of the English barons to take up the Cross and go with King Richard (Coeur de Lion) to the Holy Wars, n90 A. D.
He was the ancestor of the line of Mannings of Downe and Cootham who were knights-marshal of the households of England's sovereigns for nearly four hundred years.
The 'old manor house of this progenitor was an entailed estate, and is still in the Manning family.
[THIS NEXT PART IS IN ERROR ABOUT SIR. HENRY MANNING MARRING A BRANDON. IT WAS HUGH MANNING WHO MARRIED MARGARET THE YOUNGER.]
??? Sir Henry Manning, knight-marshal to Henry VII., about A. D. 1500, married Eleanor Brandon, daughter of Sir William Brandon, aunt of the Duke of Suffolk, who was the husband of Mary, Queen Dowager of France, sister of Henry VIII., and grandmother of Lady Jane Grey.
Sir Harry's grandson, John Manning, son of Hugh, had a grant of a large part of the possessions of the Earl of Desmond, in Ireland, and joined the Earl of Essex about 1600, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, in an expedition to Ireland. (From "History of the Mannings "). This John Manning was the English ancestor of the family hereinafter mentioned.
According to Burke's Peerage a coat-of arms was granted in 1577 to Manning, of Downe, county Kent. It appears the same in various branches of the family—a cross, with four trefoils; but the crests slightly varying— an eagle head on a crown with two feathers. Motto: "Malo mori quam foedari"—"I would die rather than be disgraced."
(I) The earliest of the name on record as coming to America was John Manning, then twenty years of age, who sailed from London, England, for New England, in the ship "Globe," in August, 1635. In 1640 he was on record in Boston with his wife Abigail, and laid the foundations for a large line of descent. Many of the name took part in the colonial wars, the revolution, the war of 1812, the war of the rebellion, and the late war with Spain, and bore themselves most creditably. The different branches of the family also embrace among their number some of the most distinguished names on the pages of New Jersey history, including many scholars.
(II) Jeffrey, son of John Manning??, is said to have emigrated from New England to New Jersey about 1671, and was living in Piscataway township in 1676, and died in 1693. In 1682 he was one of three commissioners who laid out extensive land grants in Piscataway, Middlesex county, and the following year was marshal of the first county court of Middlesex county, which was held at Piscataway. In landed estate, Jeffrey Manning and his children were among the largest and most successful citizens of the county.
He married Hepzibah, daughter of Joseph Andrews, of Hingham, Massachusetts, granddaughter of Sir Thomas Andrews, Lord Mayor of London.
Children of Jeffrey and Hepzibah (Andrews) Manning :
John, born about 1670, married Elizabeth Dennis;
Benjamin, born about 1674, married Ann Blackford;
James, born about 1676, married Christiana Laing;
Elizabeth, married Thomas Fitz Randolph; and Joseph.
The Thomas family, of which Mrs. Manning was a member, were formerly natives of Devonshire, England, which was also the ancestral home of some of the Mannings. Among the descendants of Jeffrey Manning was Dr. James Manning, founder and first president of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
(II) Joseph, fourth son of Jeffrey and Hepzibah (Andrews) Manning, was born about 1678, at Piscataway, New Jersey, and died in 1728. He and his brothers were among the early settlers who successfully petitioned the royal powers for relief from the oppressive jurisdiction of the proprietors. He married, in 1802, Temperance, daughter of John and Sarah (Bonham) Fitz-Randolph, and
Their children were:
Joanna, born about 1705, married Mr. Campbell; Trustrum;
Mary, born 1712; Elizabeth, 1713;
Eunice, 1715; Rachel, 1717;
Jeffrey, 1719;
Grace, 1721, married Daniel Cooper;
and Ruth, born 1726.
Genealogical and Memorial History of the State of New Jersey ...
edited by Francis Bazley Lee
Page 1034
http://books.google.com/books?id=S5E-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA1034#v=onepage&q=Jeffrey,%20son%20of%20John%20Manning&f=false
http://www.ebooksread.com/authors-eng/francis-bazley-lee/genealogical-and-memorial-history-of-the-state-of-new-jersey--volume-4-fee/page-38-genealogical-and-memorial-history-of-the-state-of-new-jersey--volume-4-fee.shtml
Here is some of the information I have gathered about J. Manning supposed father, John Manning:
Research Notes:
******************
The genealogical and biographical history of the Manning families of New ...
By William Henry Manning
Page 803-4
132 JOHN MANNING Capt an early resident and prominent figure in New York City was probably the same man as the subject of the previous sketch His career on land was as striking as on water He was witness to an Indian deed in 1664 one of the commissioners of Esopus 1669 sheriff of New York 1667 72 and was commonly known as Captain Manning
He was in favor with Gov Lovelace and during the temporary absence of the latter from the city was often placed in command of Fort James He was thus in command in 1673 when a hostile Dutch force appeared in the neighboring waters and demanded a surrender After some parley the fort was delivered up to the enemy a serious loss to the English Capt Manning soon sailed for England to explain the matter to the King At that time he was still a sheriff as appears by steps taken by the authorities to pitch upon a anew Sheriff for Long Island East Riding He left divers debts and bills and proceedings were begun to wind up his estate On the voyage to England his wife died
He appeared before the King and the Duke of York who exonerated him deciding that Fort James could not have been held with so small a force but he did not find such clemency on his return to New York Citizens who had suffered financial losses by reason of the surrender clamored for satisfaction and Capt Manning was put on trial on charges of treason and cowardice Of the first he was acquitted but was adjudged guilty of cowardice and sentenced to have his sword broken over his head and to be forever debarred from holding public office
Modern writers incline to pronounce the sentence severe and unjust and agree with the royal powers that the strength of the Dutch was not to be defied However the citizens of that day had suffered money loss a victim was wanted they found one
After this Capt Manning retired to an island owned by him and situated in the waters of the East River where he passed his remaining years entertaining freely and probably enjoying himself quite as well as in his days of power
He died later than 1685 It is not known that he left children of his own and his island passed into the hands of Mary Manningham said to have been a daughter of his wife by a former marriage
She m 1676 Apr 26 Robert Blackwell whose name became permanently fixed upon the estate that had been Manning's and which is now widely known as Blackwell's Island being the seat of many of the corrective institutions of New York county
An attempt has been made to connect Capt John of New York by inference with Capt John Manning of Boston, No 23,
The known facts are decidedly against the theory and indeed seem to render it impossible. Con't below:------>>
[See: http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA780#v=onepage&q=capt.%20john&f=false
23 JOHN MANNING a merchant was in Boston as early as 1641 in which year he joined the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company He was appointed ensign in a few years and later the Boston town records always call him Captain though the source of this title docs not appear His wife Abigail d 1644 June 25 after which he m 2d Ann dau of Richard Parker a merchant of Boston
The suggestion has been advanced that Capt John was related to William Manning the founder of the Cambridge family but has not the support of one known fact John was one generation the younger and if of radically near relationship would naturally be a son of William but this idea is too improbable to be entertained William gave his property by will to his wife and at her death it was to pass to certain of his heirs and the final disposition as he plainly indicated was governed by the financial circumstances of those he left behind him it being his purpose to distribute his money according to the needs of his descendants Unless the writer greatly mistakes the condition of Capt John's business in the later years of his life his children had been left not only fatherless but heirs only to a seriously embarrassed probably wrecked estate as will appear later If William had been grandfather to these children he would in their financial difficulties have been far more likely to aid them than to set his money aside to enable another grandchild to learn a trade Possibly John was nephew to William but if so it is peculiar that not one document has been found to show business or other association between the two families.
The writer does not believe there was any near relationship between them.]
--------------->> CON'T: The writer who advances the theory vide Appleton's Cyclopedia of Am Biography seems to base his suggestion upon a statement which may be quoted from his article on John of New York as follows His employment in New York came through the recommendation of Samuel Maverick who in a letter of 16 Sept 1663 to the Earl of Clarendon lord high chancellor of England commended Manning as one who hath many years been a commander under Maj Gen Morgan who hath given him a large and ample certificate which he will show you He is well known and beloved in New England
The present writer supposes this Samuel Maverick to be the same who had dwelt at Noddle's Island East Boston and perhaps the same of the name who was commissioner in New York and his first mentioned residence together with the statement that Manning was well known in New England might seem to bear out the inference but all further facts are against it According to Lamb's History of New York Capt John of the latter place had formerly commanded a trading vessel between New Haven and New York from which we may well believe he was the Capt John mariner of the previous sketch see 131 in which case he had been navigating the coast waters during a period beginning as early as 1663 We have seen that he sailed to Virginia as well as New York and Connecticut and in par suing his sea ventures governed it would seem in his choice of ports solely by the advantageous circumstances of the hour he would naturally include Boston as a port and may thus have met Mr Maverick or the latter may have seen him in New Haven Again he is not mentioned as one well known in Boston but in New England Other reasons exist for believing that John of New York and John of Boston were entirely different persons
---> First the wife of John of New York died at sea in 1673 whereas the wife of John of Boston continued to reside In Boston until her death at a date later than 1687
---->Secondly John of New York died after 1685 and the wife of John of Boston had married 2d William Gerrish before 1676 Aug 18
---->Thirdly John of New York had many years been a commander under Maj Gen Morgan
The most careful search has failed to discover any such high military officer in the Colonies at that period and the only one known to history was in England being Sir Thomas Morgan who followed the calling of arms from at least 1645 to 1667 and was during the final years of his service Major General of the English troops and lie it must have been it seems who was alluded to in Samuel Maverick's letter
John of Boston arrived in the Colony in 1640 and engaged as a merchant and was following that peaceful calling at a time it would seem when John of New York was serving in the English army as a commander under Gen Morgan John of Boston associated himself with the local militia and was styled captain in 1655 but had previously been plain Mr Manning Moreover John of New York appears to have been a sea captain as early as 1653 and John of Boston was certainly a merchant later than that date and finally to assume that the two were one would necessitate the as sertion that John and Ann of Boston husband and wife had each taken a new matrimonial partner while the other was living
http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA805#v=onepage&q=capt.%20john&f=false
***
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/NYALBANY/2007-04/1177161881
The Manning name is usually English or Irish.
There was a very famous man named Captain John Manning, he was the Comander in Chief of Fort Albany in 1664, when the English 'waltzed in' and took control from the Dutch.
This John Manning was rebuked for handing over the 'keys' to the city without a wimper. He was punished by having his sword broke over his head, and never allowed to hold office.
But through some hook or crook, he managed to be given the small island next to Manhattan, which today is a residential community, it is known today as FDR Island, for the former President, but back then it was Manning's Island.
Capt. John Manning married Abigail Maverick, and their descendants formed the "Jeffrey Manning" family line of Piscataway, New Jersey.
***
Appletons' cyclopaedia of American biography, Volume 4
edited by James Grant Wilson, John Fiske
Page 192
MANNING, John, soldier, b. in England; d. probably in New York, after 1686.
He is thought by some to be the same Capt. John Manning who was in Boston about 1650, and to have been of the family of William Manning, merchant, of Cambridge and Boston. His employment in New York came through the recommendation of Samuel Maverick, who, in a letter of 16 Sept., 1668, to the Earl of Clarendon, lord high chancellor of England, commended Manning as one "who hath many years been a commander under Maj.-Gen. Morgan, who hath given him a large and ample certificate, which he will shew you. ... He is well known and beloved in New England, and will be fit for any employment in the militia." He came to New York in 1664, and in the same year accompanied the expedition for the reduction of Fort Orange, where he attended and was a witness to the first treaty that the English concluded with the Five Nations, and after the surrender of the place was left in charge of the fort. He was high sheriff of the city of New York from 1667 till 1672, in 1669 was a member of the commission that was sent to Esopus to regulate the affairs of that district, was judge of the court for the West Riding of Yorkshire, and acted as high sheriff of Yorkshire from 1671 to 1673.
He enjoyed the confidence of Gov. Lovelace, served as a member of his council, and when the governor was called to any distance from the city, Fort James and public affairs were placed in Manning's charge.
While he was thus in command, in 1673, the Dutch fleet arrived and demanded the surrender of the fort, which, after some resistance, was given up.
He sailed for England, waited on the king and Duke of York, and explained to them the particulars of the surrender, on hearing which the king turned to the duke and said: "Brother, the ground could not be maintained with so few men." He returned to New York with Gov. Andros, and was soon afterward tried by court-martial on charges of treachery and Cowardice. He was acquitted of the former but found guilty of cowardice, and on 5 Feb., 1675, sentenced to have his sword broken over his head and rendered incapable of again holding office under his majesty, which sentence would scarcely seem justified from the facts of the surrender. He retired to the island that had been granted to him in 1688, then called " Manning's island," but since well known as Blackwell's island, where he was acoustomed to entertain his friends.
http://books.google.com/books?id=q54LAAAAMAAJ&dq=Maverick%20%22john%20manning%22&pg=PA193#v=onepage&q=Maverick%20%22john%20manning%22&f=false
***
Any help would be much appreciated.
Michael D. Allen - Warner
Douglas Richardson
Sep 14, 2013, 3:06:23 PM9/14/13
to
On Friday, September 13, 2013 7:52:38 PM UTC-6, sangreel wrote:
> [THIS NEXT PART IS IN ERROR ABOUT SIR. HENRY MANNING MARRING A BRANDON. IT WAS HUGH MANNING WHO MARRIED MARGARET THE YOUNGER.]
>
> ??? Sir Henry Manning, knight-marshal to Henry VII., about A. D. 1500, married Eleanor Brandon, daughter of Sir William Brandon, aunt of the Duke of Suffolk, who was the husband of Mary, Queen Dowager of France, sister of Henry VIII., and grandmother of Lady Jane Grey.
> [THIS NEXT PART IS IN ERROR ABOUT SIR. HENRY MANNING MARRING A BRANDON. IT WAS HUGH MANNING WHO MARRIED MARGARET THE YOUNGER.]
>
> ??? Sir Henry Manning, knight-marshal to Henry VII., about A. D. 1500, married Eleanor Brandon, daughter of Sir William Brandon, aunt of the Duke of Suffolk, who was the husband of Mary, Queen Dowager of France, sister of Henry VIII., and grandmother of Lady Jane Grey.
> Michael D. Allen - Warner
Dear Michael ~
Hugh Manning may have married a Margaret Brandon, and left issue. But she was not the aunt of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, as you think.
On the death of Charles Brandon's son and heir, Henry Brandon, in 1551, the heirs of Charles Brandon's five aunts were assigned various shares of the Brandon estates. The Manning family is not included among the heirs.
Charles Brandon did have an aunt, Margaret Brandon, who married Sir Gregory Lovell, died 1507, but she can't possibly have married Hugh Manning.
It is not necessary to perpetuate a myth.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
sangreel
Sep 14, 2013, 8:06:43 PM9/14/13
to
Dear Richard,
You have NO proof that the Margaret The Younger as mentioned in the will of her father, did not in fact marry Hugh Manning. As Hugh Manning's wife appears to have died prior to the death of Henry Brandon, [as shown by her mothers will] son of Charles Brandon, I would be surprised if Hugh manning or his children were in fact mentioned. It is also, as YOU well know, not uncommon for collateral lines to leave nothing to extended family, not even a mention.
The Charles Brandon was raised up by King Henry VIII. His descendants ran in the higher circles of society... the Mannings were from Kent and not courters. So I ask you again, WHAT proof do you have that Margaret "the Younger" Brandon did not in fact marry Hugh Manning?
It is not necessary to perpetuate a myth, Richard. As the college of arms UK accepts this connection, who are you to call it a myth when you show NO proof that the marriage did not in fact take place?
Michael Allen - Warner
You have NO proof that the Margaret The Younger as mentioned in the will of her father, did not in fact marry Hugh Manning. As Hugh Manning's wife appears to have died prior to the death of Henry Brandon, [as shown by her mothers will] son of Charles Brandon, I would be surprised if Hugh manning or his children were in fact mentioned. It is also, as YOU well know, not uncommon for collateral lines to leave nothing to extended family, not even a mention.
The Charles Brandon was raised up by King Henry VIII. His descendants ran in the higher circles of society... the Mannings were from Kent and not courters. So I ask you again, WHAT proof do you have that Margaret "the Younger" Brandon did not in fact marry Hugh Manning?
It is not necessary to perpetuate a myth, Richard. As the college of arms UK accepts this connection, who are you to call it a myth when you show NO proof that the marriage did not in fact take place?
Michael Allen - Warner
sangreel
Sep 14, 2013, 8:17:18 PM9/14/13
to
Now Richard, do you have any information about the opening question I asked? Jeffrey Manning. His family line. Information beyond what I posted. That is the subject, not the Hugh Manning and Margaret "The Younger" Brandon question, That is for another thread and has been covered before and we all know your view..... no matter how wrong you might be!
:) Smile and the world smiles with you.
Michael Allen-Warner
:) Smile and the world smiles with you.
Michael Allen-Warner
sangreel
Sep 14, 2013, 8:30:15 PM9/14/13
to
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=D980490
The Will of William Brandon, I have a copy in my file, he names TWO Margaret's, one "The Elder" the other "The Younger". Order it. Then order the will of William Brandon's wife...or just Google Book it.
Compare dates. Why did his wife not mention the younger Margaret? Any chance she may have been DEAD?
Or... did William makeup having a 2nd daughter by the name of Margaret..... and if we take this one step further... what chance is there that a younger daughter would have been married to a old land owning family entitled to their own coat of arms and all the prestige that goes along with that? I mean really... a younger daughter.... please I beg you, show me PROOF that Margaret the younger did not in fact marry Hugh Manning. Not your opinion, that means nothing to me without proof. No offence meant, but that is how it is.
Michael Allen - Warner
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 5:06:43 PM UTC-7, sangreel wrote:
The Will of William Brandon, I have a copy in my file, he names TWO Margaret's, one "The Elder" the other "The Younger". Order it. Then order the will of William Brandon's wife...or just Google Book it.
Compare dates. Why did his wife not mention the younger Margaret? Any chance she may have been DEAD?
Or... did William makeup having a 2nd daughter by the name of Margaret..... and if we take this one step further... what chance is there that a younger daughter would have been married to a old land owning family entitled to their own coat of arms and all the prestige that goes along with that? I mean really... a younger daughter.... please I beg you, show me PROOF that Margaret the younger did not in fact marry Hugh Manning. Not your opinion, that means nothing to me without proof. No offence meant, but that is how it is.
Michael Allen - Warner
On Saturday, September 14, 2013 5:06:43 PM UTC-7, sangreel wrote:
sangreel
Sep 14, 2013, 8:50:41 PM9/14/13
to
Richard, As you opened the door, in legal terms I have the right to explore this subject even though it has been flogged to death. After this post, god willing I shall ask the readers if they can help with jeffrey Manning's assent. Okey Dokey shall we start?
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=D980490
The Will of Sir. William Brandon. [In: Manning / Brandon Research File]
Description:
Based upon the will of Sir. William Brandon, he had another daughter that is not cited in your list of children.
Sir William Brandon's will was composed in 1475, before the marriage of his youngest daughters.
He mentions Mary, Anne, Margaret the elder, Margaret the younger, and Katherine.
Daughters Eleanor and Elizabeth are not mentioned as they were already married.
The will of Elizabeth (Wingfield) Brandon mentions daughters Elizabeth Leventhorp, Anne Sydney, Eleanor Glemham, Margaret Lovel, Katherine Gourney.
The younger Margaret is not mentioned, possibly because she was already deceased or disowned.
Hugh Manning and his wife only had two sons and no other children,[Hastings states they also had another son] possibly indicating that she died shortly after the birth of her second son, c. 1480. (cf. NEHGR 51:3, p. 404).
Further,The Brandons, in The New England Historical and Genealogical Register, 1949, Vol. Cill,ps. 102-107, communicated by the Committee on English and Foreign Research, G. Andrews Moriarty, AM., LL.B., F.AS.G., F.S.A, gives "an account of the immediate descendants of Sir William Brandon". I include an entry on page 104, "He (Sir William Brandon) married, prior to January 1462, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Robert Wingfield of Lethringham, co. Suffolk, and died in 1491 (WedgwoodHist. of the ParI. Biog. 1439-1509, pp. 102-103).
Evidently, Sir William Brandon had recorded two wills in the P.C.C.
The first, located in P.P.C. 46 Milles, was dated 10 June 1475, was proved 13 July 1491. On page 104, Moriarty writes, "Sir William Brandon. ..Wishes my place in Southwark to be sold and the money divided among my daughters, Mary, Anne, Margaret the elder, Margaret the younger and Katherine, if they do marry." The executors were wife Elizabeth and Sir Robert Wingfield The second will, located in P. C. C. 7 Dogett, was dated 09 April 1491 and proved 17 Nov. 1491.
In Sir William Brandon's second will, he speaks to where he wanted to be buried, to the High Altar of St. George the Martyr at Southwark, personalty to wife Elizabeth, to nuns at Bungay, to church of St. Thomas at Bungay, to pray for the souls of his father and mother,and to land and manor rights.
The executors were Elizabeth and Robert Mosley. Named in the probate are: John Ryding; John Gurney; John Leventhorpe; John Hardy; and Hugh John [Manning?]
The will of Dame Elizabeth Brandon was proved 08 May 1497, and located in Testa. Vetusta, vol. n, p. 432. In it, Elizabeth speaks to where she wants to be buried, land and manor rights; and, names her children: son, Sir Robert Brandon; son, Sir Thomas Brandon; daughter, Elizabeth Leventhorp; daughter, Eleanor Glemham; daughter, Anne Sydney; daughter, Dame Margaret Lovell; daughter, Katherine Gourney; remainder to the right heirs of Sir William Brandon."
The two youngest daughters, Mary and Margaret, as mentioned in Sir Knight William Brandon's first will, are not specifically mentioned.
On page 106, the author further reports, "Dugdale in the Baronage (vol. n, p.300) gives inq. p.m. taken 2 Elizabeth (1559/1560) after the failure of the issue male, by his third wife, Katherine Willoughby, of Charles Brandon,
Duke of Suffolk It was found that his heirs were the descendants of his grandfather, Sir William Brandon, as, by doctrine of possessio fratris, his daughters by his other wives were excluded.
POSSESSIO FRATRIS. The brother's possession. This is a technical phrase which is applied in the English law relating to descents. By the common law, the ancestor from whom the inheritance was taken by descent, must have had actual seisin of the lands, either by his own entry, or by the possession of his own, or his ancestor's lessee for years, or by being in the receipt of rent from the lessee of the freehold. But there are qualifications as to this rule, one of which arises from the doctrine of possesio fratris. The possession of a tenant for years, guardian or brother, is equivalent to that of the party himself, and is termed in law possessio fratris. Litt. sect. 8 Co. Litt. 15 a; 3 Wils. 516 7 T. R. 386 2 Hill Ab. 206.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Possessio+fratris
So there is no hindrance to Margaret "The Younger Brandon", having married Hugh Manning and the Manning family not having been mentioned in a will also has no standing as far as the genealogical question raised.
Sir William Brandon and Elizabeth Wingfield, his wife, had issue:
i. Sir William;
ii. Sir Robert;
iii. Sir Thomas;
iv. Elizabeth;
v. Anna;
vi. Margaret "The Elder";
vii. Eleanor;
viii. Katherine;
ix. Mary;
x. Margaret "The Younger";
xi. Anne."
NOW can we get back to Jeffrey Manning and his assent as I asked in the opening thread?
Michael Allen-Warner
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=D980490
The Will of Sir. William Brandon. [In: Manning / Brandon Research File]
Description:
Based upon the will of Sir. William Brandon, he had another daughter that is not cited in your list of children.
Sir William Brandon's will was composed in 1475, before the marriage of his youngest daughters.
He mentions Mary, Anne, Margaret the elder, Margaret the younger, and Katherine.
Daughters Eleanor and Elizabeth are not mentioned as they were already married.
The will of Elizabeth (Wingfield) Brandon mentions daughters Elizabeth Leventhorp, Anne Sydney, Eleanor Glemham, Margaret Lovel, Katherine Gourney.
The younger Margaret is not mentioned, possibly because she was already deceased or disowned.
Hugh Manning and his wife only had two sons and no other children,[Hastings states they also had another son] possibly indicating that she died shortly after the birth of her second son, c. 1480. (cf. NEHGR 51:3, p. 404).
Further,The Brandons, in The New England Historical and Genealogical Register, 1949, Vol. Cill,ps. 102-107, communicated by the Committee on English and Foreign Research, G. Andrews Moriarty, AM., LL.B., F.AS.G., F.S.A, gives "an account of the immediate descendants of Sir William Brandon". I include an entry on page 104, "He (Sir William Brandon) married, prior to January 1462, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Robert Wingfield of Lethringham, co. Suffolk, and died in 1491 (WedgwoodHist. of the ParI. Biog. 1439-1509, pp. 102-103).
Evidently, Sir William Brandon had recorded two wills in the P.C.C.
The first, located in P.P.C. 46 Milles, was dated 10 June 1475, was proved 13 July 1491. On page 104, Moriarty writes, "Sir William Brandon. ..Wishes my place in Southwark to be sold and the money divided among my daughters, Mary, Anne, Margaret the elder, Margaret the younger and Katherine, if they do marry." The executors were wife Elizabeth and Sir Robert Wingfield The second will, located in P. C. C. 7 Dogett, was dated 09 April 1491 and proved 17 Nov. 1491.
In Sir William Brandon's second will, he speaks to where he wanted to be buried, to the High Altar of St. George the Martyr at Southwark, personalty to wife Elizabeth, to nuns at Bungay, to church of St. Thomas at Bungay, to pray for the souls of his father and mother,and to land and manor rights.
The executors were Elizabeth and Robert Mosley. Named in the probate are: John Ryding; John Gurney; John Leventhorpe; John Hardy; and Hugh John [Manning?]
The will of Dame Elizabeth Brandon was proved 08 May 1497, and located in Testa. Vetusta, vol. n, p. 432. In it, Elizabeth speaks to where she wants to be buried, land and manor rights; and, names her children: son, Sir Robert Brandon; son, Sir Thomas Brandon; daughter, Elizabeth Leventhorp; daughter, Eleanor Glemham; daughter, Anne Sydney; daughter, Dame Margaret Lovell; daughter, Katherine Gourney; remainder to the right heirs of Sir William Brandon."
The two youngest daughters, Mary and Margaret, as mentioned in Sir Knight William Brandon's first will, are not specifically mentioned.
On page 106, the author further reports, "Dugdale in the Baronage (vol. n, p.300) gives inq. p.m. taken 2 Elizabeth (1559/1560) after the failure of the issue male, by his third wife, Katherine Willoughby, of Charles Brandon,
Duke of Suffolk It was found that his heirs were the descendants of his grandfather, Sir William Brandon, as, by doctrine of possessio fratris, his daughters by his other wives were excluded.
POSSESSIO FRATRIS. The brother's possession. This is a technical phrase which is applied in the English law relating to descents. By the common law, the ancestor from whom the inheritance was taken by descent, must have had actual seisin of the lands, either by his own entry, or by the possession of his own, or his ancestor's lessee for years, or by being in the receipt of rent from the lessee of the freehold. But there are qualifications as to this rule, one of which arises from the doctrine of possesio fratris. The possession of a tenant for years, guardian or brother, is equivalent to that of the party himself, and is termed in law possessio fratris. Litt. sect. 8 Co. Litt. 15 a; 3 Wils. 516 7 T. R. 386 2 Hill Ab. 206.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Possessio+fratris
So there is no hindrance to Margaret "The Younger Brandon", having married Hugh Manning and the Manning family not having been mentioned in a will also has no standing as far as the genealogical question raised.
Sir William Brandon and Elizabeth Wingfield, his wife, had issue:
i. Sir William;
ii. Sir Robert;
iii. Sir Thomas;
iv. Elizabeth;
v. Anna;
vi. Margaret "The Elder";
vii. Eleanor;
viii. Katherine;
ix. Mary;
x. Margaret "The Younger";
xi. Anne."
NOW can we get back to Jeffrey Manning and his assent as I asked in the opening thread?
Michael Allen-Warner
sangreel
Sep 15, 2013, 9:34:10 PM9/15/13
to
Dear Mr. Richardson,
After reviewing my posts I see that I have addressed my posts to: "Richard". That was an inadvertent error. I am sorry as that was disrespectful. It was late and I did not notice my error until today. My apologies. I enjoy a good debate, heated or otherwise, on genealogical issues as they can hopefully lead to more information being shared, but to misstate a persons name is just wrong and is disrespectful. It shall not happen again.
As to the Manning / Brandon issue. There must be a record of the marriage of Hugh Manning and his wife. I am now researching the manors owned by the Manning family and their many branches, and as there are quite a few in many areas of England this effort may take a while. I ask myself if the family was devout Catholic as the reformation was in full swing at the time in question and many families "disowned" or just ignored family members in order to protect themselves.
Questions I am currently researching:
*Where are the Catholic records from that time period in question being kept..if at all?
*Where was the marriage of Hugh manning carried out?
*As Sir. Charles Brandon had many "aunts" which branch of the family tree could this person be from?
*What were the dates of the actual Visitation that show this connection carried out?
*Why does the UK College of Arms accept this connection?
*What information do they have that we do not have access to?
*Could this "aunt" be from a connecting line that was not in fact a Brandon?
*What solid proof is there that rules out Margaret "the younger" Brandon?
*As Margaret "the younger" Brandon was noted in Wm Brandon's will, but not in her mothers will, along with one of her sisters.. and if Hasted is correct, one of her sons, why?
*When did Hugh Manning and his wife die?
* The Visitation Pedigrees that show the Manning / Brandon connection.... who gave this information to the person recording the pedigrees for the King of Arms and what date was each pedigree recorded? [that is listed above...I am old forgive me if I repeat myself]
* Where are the records kept for the areas and time periods that encompassed the life of Hugh Manning and his father, John Manning kept? ie: Teddington Manor, Parish of Downe, Parish of St. Mary Cray... [The monuments from 1100 to 1640 appear to have been destroyed at the time of rebuilding the present church in the year 1650] ...Parish of Cowdham, Halsted and The Hundred Of Westerham, Westerham being in the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the diocese of Rochester, and deanery of Mailing....etc. Cardinal Manning wrote, in 1884, as follows: "As to the family in England there were three branches, one in Kent, a second in Sussex, and a third in Norfolk." He leaves out the London branch.
See: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/search.aspx?query=%22Hugh+manning%22
* I have seen references to holdings in other areas such as Middlesex...how does one isolate these holdings if they in fact existed?
* What were the Brandon family holdings? [They may hold the information, yea or nay as to a marriage of Hugh Manning to a Brandon daughter or relative]
Downe.—John Manning was of Cowdham, and died in the 14th year of King Henry IV [A.D. 1412], " leaving John Manning, his son, who by Juliana, daughter and heir of Richard Brockhill, had Hugh Manning of St. Mary's Cray, who married the daughter of Sir William Brandon, by whom he had two sons, of whom Richard, the youngest, settled at St. Mary's Cray, where his posterity continued until within these few years;" and John, the eldest, married Agnes, daughter of John Petley, of Downe, "who, on the division of the inheritance of the Petley heirs became entitled to the manor of Downe-court. He died possessed of it in the 35th year of King Henry VIII [1543], and lies buried with Agnes his wife in this church.
http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&dq=brandon%20%22St.%20Mary%20Cray%22&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q=brandon%20%22St.%20Mary%20Cray
*What about the "3rd son" as mentioned by Hasted?
Hugh and his wife may have died early and that helps explain the lack of records for them. St. Mary's Cray, with its church dedicated to Saint Mary, lies five miles NNE of Downe, Kent. Within this church lies Hugh Manning and his wife and several more generations of this family. There is a mural monument for one of the Mannings and a fine brass memorial to Richard Manning, and his wife Rachel, he the grandson of Richard, son of Hugh. It would seem that the records for their death should be locatable. But... their marriage? It would be great if some DNA could be extracted from Hugh and his wife if they are in fact in repose within the church.
I consider the wills of Wm Brandon and his wife Elizabeth's to be primary sources and the Visitation Pedigrees to be secondary sources, along with the other printed histories used to show the connection, most of these family history pedigrees being taken from the visitation Pedigrees, [Kent, London...etc] so how do we sift through the evidence to arrive at an acceptable solution?
I don't give a hoot if the line connects to royalty as I have many accepted lines that do, but this is a mystery that has become a sort of crusade to me
along with the Agnes Dymoke and Richard Eaton questions I have raised before. I know the truth is there but finding it has turned into a horror as far as the research is concerned.
Jeffrey Manning's line I will see solved. He was a wealthy person in the colonies and seems to have just popped up without a linage, and as I see it the research may yield much information and open lines up for further study.
I want proof... not conjecture and theory. I can accept proof based upon primary sources. If Hugh Manning did NOT marry a daughter of Wm Brandon....that is OK by me, just give me proof if you or any other researcher has it.
Michael Allen - Warner
After reviewing my posts I see that I have addressed my posts to: "Richard". That was an inadvertent error. I am sorry as that was disrespectful. It was late and I did not notice my error until today. My apologies. I enjoy a good debate, heated or otherwise, on genealogical issues as they can hopefully lead to more information being shared, but to misstate a persons name is just wrong and is disrespectful. It shall not happen again.
As to the Manning / Brandon issue. There must be a record of the marriage of Hugh Manning and his wife. I am now researching the manors owned by the Manning family and their many branches, and as there are quite a few in many areas of England this effort may take a while. I ask myself if the family was devout Catholic as the reformation was in full swing at the time in question and many families "disowned" or just ignored family members in order to protect themselves.
Questions I am currently researching:
*Where are the Catholic records from that time period in question being kept..if at all?
*Where was the marriage of Hugh manning carried out?
*As Sir. Charles Brandon had many "aunts" which branch of the family tree could this person be from?
*What were the dates of the actual Visitation that show this connection carried out?
*Why does the UK College of Arms accept this connection?
*What information do they have that we do not have access to?
*Could this "aunt" be from a connecting line that was not in fact a Brandon?
*What solid proof is there that rules out Margaret "the younger" Brandon?
*As Margaret "the younger" Brandon was noted in Wm Brandon's will, but not in her mothers will, along with one of her sisters.. and if Hasted is correct, one of her sons, why?
*When did Hugh Manning and his wife die?
* The Visitation Pedigrees that show the Manning / Brandon connection.... who gave this information to the person recording the pedigrees for the King of Arms and what date was each pedigree recorded? [that is listed above...I am old forgive me if I repeat myself]
* Where are the records kept for the areas and time periods that encompassed the life of Hugh Manning and his father, John Manning kept? ie: Teddington Manor, Parish of Downe, Parish of St. Mary Cray... [The monuments from 1100 to 1640 appear to have been destroyed at the time of rebuilding the present church in the year 1650] ...Parish of Cowdham, Halsted and The Hundred Of Westerham, Westerham being in the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the diocese of Rochester, and deanery of Mailing....etc. Cardinal Manning wrote, in 1884, as follows: "As to the family in England there were three branches, one in Kent, a second in Sussex, and a third in Norfolk." He leaves out the London branch.
See: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/search.aspx?query=%22Hugh+manning%22
* I have seen references to holdings in other areas such as Middlesex...how does one isolate these holdings if they in fact existed?
* What were the Brandon family holdings? [They may hold the information, yea or nay as to a marriage of Hugh Manning to a Brandon daughter or relative]
Downe.—John Manning was of Cowdham, and died in the 14th year of King Henry IV [A.D. 1412], " leaving John Manning, his son, who by Juliana, daughter and heir of Richard Brockhill, had Hugh Manning of St. Mary's Cray, who married the daughter of Sir William Brandon, by whom he had two sons, of whom Richard, the youngest, settled at St. Mary's Cray, where his posterity continued until within these few years;" and John, the eldest, married Agnes, daughter of John Petley, of Downe, "who, on the division of the inheritance of the Petley heirs became entitled to the manor of Downe-court. He died possessed of it in the 35th year of King Henry VIII [1543], and lies buried with Agnes his wife in this church.
http://books.google.com/books?id=9W4bAQAAMAAJ&dq=brandon%20%22St.%20Mary%20Cray%22&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q=brandon%20%22St.%20Mary%20Cray
*What about the "3rd son" as mentioned by Hasted?
Hugh and his wife may have died early and that helps explain the lack of records for them. St. Mary's Cray, with its church dedicated to Saint Mary, lies five miles NNE of Downe, Kent. Within this church lies Hugh Manning and his wife and several more generations of this family. There is a mural monument for one of the Mannings and a fine brass memorial to Richard Manning, and his wife Rachel, he the grandson of Richard, son of Hugh. It would seem that the records for their death should be locatable. But... their marriage? It would be great if some DNA could be extracted from Hugh and his wife if they are in fact in repose within the church.
I consider the wills of Wm Brandon and his wife Elizabeth's to be primary sources and the Visitation Pedigrees to be secondary sources, along with the other printed histories used to show the connection, most of these family history pedigrees being taken from the visitation Pedigrees, [Kent, London...etc] so how do we sift through the evidence to arrive at an acceptable solution?
I don't give a hoot if the line connects to royalty as I have many accepted lines that do, but this is a mystery that has become a sort of crusade to me
along with the Agnes Dymoke and Richard Eaton questions I have raised before. I know the truth is there but finding it has turned into a horror as far as the research is concerned.
Jeffrey Manning's line I will see solved. He was a wealthy person in the colonies and seems to have just popped up without a linage, and as I see it the research may yield much information and open lines up for further study.
I want proof... not conjecture and theory. I can accept proof based upon primary sources. If Hugh Manning did NOT marry a daughter of Wm Brandon....that is OK by me, just give me proof if you or any other researcher has it.
Michael Allen - Warner
sangreel
Sep 15, 2013, 9:48:37 PM9/15/13
to
I meant to include this nugget in my prior posting, so here it is:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=22260&strquery=%22Hugh%20manning%22
TEDDINGTON was a berewick of Staines,
From 1373 the demesnes and rectory were leased by the abbey. The leases were for terms of years and do not seem to have remained in one family. During the 15th century a money rent replaced the barley rents paid under the earlier leases. (fn. 13,W.A.M. 27188 and later manorial accts. (see p. 72, n. 84).) In 1518 the abbey leased the demesnes and rectory to Hugh Manning for 30 years and he was in occupation when the King acquired the manor. (fn. 14, S.C. 6/Hen. VIII 2101, m. 7d.)
How and under what circumstances did King Henry VIII acquire the manor? Was the Manning Family, Hugh Manning, Catholic?
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=22260&strquery=%22Hugh%20manning%22
TEDDINGTON was a berewick of Staines,
From 1373 the demesnes and rectory were leased by the abbey. The leases were for terms of years and do not seem to have remained in one family. During the 15th century a money rent replaced the barley rents paid under the earlier leases. (fn. 13,W.A.M. 27188 and later manorial accts. (see p. 72, n. 84).) In 1518 the abbey leased the demesnes and rectory to Hugh Manning for 30 years and he was in occupation when the King acquired the manor. (fn. 14, S.C. 6/Hen. VIII 2101, m. 7d.)
How and under what circumstances did King Henry VIII acquire the manor? Was the Manning Family, Hugh Manning, Catholic?
Matt Tompkins
Sep 16, 2013, 6:07:59 AM9/16/13
to
On Monday, September 16, 2013 2:48:37 AM UTC+1, sangreel wrote:
> I meant to include this nugget in my prior posting, so here it is: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=22260&strquery=%22Hugh%20manning%22 TEDDINGTON was a berewick of Staines, From 1373 the demesnes and rectory were leased by the abbey. The leases were for terms of years and do not seem to have remained in one family. During the 15th century a money rent replaced the barley rents paid under the earlier leases. (fn. 13,W.A.M. 27188 and later manorial accts. (see p. 72, n. 84).) In 1518 the abbey leased the demesnes and rectory to Hugh Manning for 30 years and he was in occupation when the King acquired the manor. (fn. 14, S.C. 6/Hen. VIII 2101, m. 7d.) How and under what circumstances did King Henry VIII acquire the manor? Was the Manning Family, Hugh Manning, Catholic?
The answer to the first question is in the previous paragraph: "In 1536 the abbey granted Teddington and other lands to Henry VIII in exchange for properties formerly belonging to Hurley Priory (Berks.)." This was not a voluntary act on the abbey's part, but a preliminary stage in its dissolution. What the abbey got in return for giving the king Teddington and a few other prime Middlesex properties was the return of the lands of its subordinate priory of Hurley in Berkshire, which had just been dissolved.
> I meant to include this nugget in my prior posting, so here it is: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=22260&strquery=%22Hugh%20manning%22 TEDDINGTON was a berewick of Staines, From 1373 the demesnes and rectory were leased by the abbey. The leases were for terms of years and do not seem to have remained in one family. During the 15th century a money rent replaced the barley rents paid under the earlier leases. (fn. 13,W.A.M. 27188 and later manorial accts. (see p. 72, n. 84).) In 1518 the abbey leased the demesnes and rectory to Hugh Manning for 30 years and he was in occupation when the King acquired the manor. (fn. 14, S.C. 6/Hen. VIII 2101, m. 7d.) How and under what circumstances did King Henry VIII acquire the manor? Was the Manning Family, Hugh Manning, Catholic?
That Hugh Manning was the lessee of the manor from the abbey is unlikely to provide any indication of his religious tendencies - it was common for gentry of all beliefs to take leases of monastic properties, purely as business propositions.
Matt Tompkins
sangreel
Sep 16, 2013, 7:13:03 PM9/16/13
to
Matt,
Thank you for clearing that issue up. That takes one more thing off my research "plate". It is little things like this that help me in my search. again, Thank you,
Regards,
Michael Allen-Warner
ps: I have been re-looking at prior postings made about the Manning / Brandon issue and I see that Mr. Richardson has made some very valid points in the past. I will make sure to chart them and get back to the group. MDAW
Thank you for clearing that issue up. That takes one more thing off my research "plate". It is little things like this that help me in my search. again, Thank you,
Regards,
Michael Allen-Warner
ps: I have been re-looking at prior postings made about the Manning / Brandon issue and I see that Mr. Richardson has made some very valid points in the past. I will make sure to chart them and get back to the group. MDAW
manni...@gmail.com
Jan 6, 2014, 1:43:37 PM1/6/14
to
On Friday, September 13, 2013 7:52:38 PM UTC-6, sangreel wrote:
ellen.sti...@gmail.com
Jan 23, 2014, 3:47:33 PM1/23/14
to
On Friday, September 13, 2013 9:52:38 PM UTC-4, sangreel wrote:
> I have been spending some time researching the line of Jeffrey Manning husband to
>
> Hepzibah Andrews (Heiress).
>
>
>
> Here is some of the information I have gathered about J. Manning:
>
> [Research Notes: Please note that the connection to John and Abigail Manning is unproven to my standards. I will cont. to research this family line as time permits. I have kept the line past jeffrey Manning, in mt gedcom, as shown for the information contained within. I can NOT claim the line from Abigail Maverick until this issue is resolved. MDAW]
Here is new information!
> I have been spending some time researching the line of Jeffrey Manning husband to
>
> Hepzibah Andrews (Heiress).
>
>
>
> Here is some of the information I have gathered about J. Manning:
>
> [Research Notes: Please note that the connection to John and Abigail Manning is unproven to my standards. I will cont. to research this family line as time permits. I have kept the line past jeffrey Manning, in mt gedcom, as shown for the information contained within. I can NOT claim the line from Abigail Maverick until this issue is resolved. MDAW]
English Origins of Jeffrey Manning
The theory that Jeffrey's parents could have been the John Manning and Abigail Maverick was an undocumented assumption that was published early and has been widely accepted. Despite the fact that data exists that has discredited the theory. since there was no new information to replace it, everyone has stuck with the original story. Note that UNTIL NOW, other than the early theories which have been published and republished, no document has been found placing Jeffrey Manning in Massachusetts.
A newly published and well-researched article fills that void and shows that Jeffrey Manning was actually born in Hawstead, Suffolk, England.
Jeffrey Manning, the son of John Manning and Elizabeth Goodye of Hawstead, was baptised 17 March 1638/39 in Hawstead, Suffolk, England (confirmed by Parish records). Jeffrey's father was a thatcher.
Jeffrey came to Massachusetts through an indenture to Capt John Cutting, mariner of Charlestown, Mass. Apprenticeship indenture records were located in Hawstead parish, Suffolk, England. A transcription is given in the article. At the time of his indenture (20 Mar 1650/51) Jeffrey's father (and presumably his mother) had died. The apprenticeship to Captain Cutting was for seven years, so Jeffrey likely served from about 1650/51 to 1657/58. The author presumes the apprenticeship was to serve on Cutting's ships. John Cutting died in Newbury, Mass on 20 Nov 1659. Jeffrey married Hepzibah Andrews about 1661, based on the births of their children.
With regard to pushing the ancestry back beyond Jeffrey's father John, the author has strong theories as to John's parentage, but no proof.
In any publication of this information, please include the source below and try to read it yourself. Thanks. The author is not me, just someone who I have been corresponding with for some time who gave me a heads up.
Source: Clifford L. Stott and Pat Donaldson-Mills article, "The English Origin of Jeffrey Manning of Piscataway, New Jersey"; The American Genealogist, No 341 Jan-Apr 2012 (Pub Oct 2013) Vol 86 No 1 pp 1-10.
sangreel
Jul 14, 2014, 4:33:32 AM7/14/14
to
Thank you so much Ellen. You have given me a solid place to start further research, again, Thank you.
You write: "With regard to pushing the ancestry back beyond Jeffrey's father John, the author has strong theories as to John's parentage, but no proof."
Is there a chance you will publish your theories? I would very much enjoy reading them and may be able to add some to your work.
Thank you,
MDW
You write: "With regard to pushing the ancestry back beyond Jeffrey's father John, the author has strong theories as to John's parentage, but no proof."
Is there a chance you will publish your theories? I would very much enjoy reading them and may be able to add some to your work.
Thank you,
MDW
budw...@gmail.com
Jun 24, 2018, 8:41:18 PM6/24/18
to
It has been six years since "The English Origin of Jeffrey Manning..." appeared, with the new theory of Jeffrey Manning's parentage. Are there further developments to discredit this? Is there any proof that his parents were indeed the original Abigail Maverick and John Manning?
My wife is descended from Jeffrey Manning and Hepzibah Andrews, but we're trying to get back to Mary Gye (Richardson Gateway Ancestor) and John Maverick, parents of Abigail Maverick. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Bud Warder (budw...@gmail.com or b...@kioskamerica.com)
sangreel
Aug 10, 2018, 6:56:19 AM8/10/18
to
So far, nothing. I have corrected my GEDCOM to reflect the change away from the Maverick Line as I have found NO proof that Jeffrey Manning is from that line.
I will keep researching as time permits.
I will keep researching as time permits.
che...@gmail.com
Nov 22, 2018, 9:23:25 AM11/22/18
to
On Friday, August 10, 2018 at 6:56:19 AM UTC-4, sangreel wrote:
> So far, nothing. I have corrected my GEDCOM to reflect the change away from the Maverick Line as I have found NO proof that Jeffrey Manning is from that line.
>
> I will keep researching as time permits.
Thanks for this post. I also have been trying to determine Jeffery's parentage. I see that as recently as August 2018 you haven't found any proof one way or the other.
> So far, nothing. I have corrected my GEDCOM to reflect the change away from the Maverick Line as I have found NO proof that Jeffrey Manning is from that line.
>
> I will keep researching as time permits.
One note about the excerpt from this book:
The genealogical and biographical history of the Manning families of New England
By William Henry Manning
Page 805
Hepzibah's grandfather was not Lord Mayor of London. I researched this and very readily found a list of all the Lord Mayors. There was a Thomas Andrews but he did not emigrate to the colonies and the dates don't match up. So many people include this fact about Hepzibah in their computer generated histories but didn't bother to research it. The town of Hingham printed a history quite a while ago, mentions Thomas Andrews but doesn't say he was a Lord Mayor of London. So I know what you mean about research standards. If you're ever successful in your Jeffrey quest I'd be curious how it works out.
Cheryl Pedersen
joybre...@gmail.com
May 24, 2020, 1:46:59 AM5/24/20
to
Hi,
My name is joy and hepsibah Andrews is my 10th great grandmother I saw your post about your wife being a decendent also maybe I can share what information I have I been doing research my she is on my grandma Nina Flo Harvey if you would like to talk it would be cool maybe we could help each other
My name is joy and hepsibah Andrews is my 10th great grandmother I saw your post about your wife being a decendent also maybe I can share what information I have I been doing research my she is on my grandma Nina Flo Harvey if you would like to talk it would be cool maybe we could help each other
0 new messages