On Land Between Two Muddy Rivers — George Sutherland

B. about 1660 in (probably) New Kent County, Virginia¹
M. about 1680 in (probably) Virginia¹
Wife: Elizabeth (possibly) Norment
D. before June 1699 in (probably) King and Queen County, Virginia²

To tell the story of George Sutherland, what we know is almost entirely contained in a series of documents about his estate after he died. But by putting the established facts into the context of history and geography, it’s possible to understand a little more about who he was.

George is thought to have been born in Virginia in about 1660 to Alexander Sutherland (also spelled Southerland), a man from Scotland;¹ George’s mother is completely unknown. Many researchers have claimed that Alexander’s pedigree connects to Scottish royalty, and this seems to be fraudulent, or at the very least unlikely. More probable is that Alexander came from more humble roots that are impossible to trace — his only appearance on a document is in a passenger list for a ship that arrived in York County, Virginia on November 1, 1654.¹ That puts him near the land his supposed son George later claimed. This fact, plus that the name Sutherland is less-than-common, makes a case that Alexander was the father of George.

After George came of age in around 1680, he married a woman named Elizabeth (her last name is thought to be Norment).¹ The couple had at least three sons, and possibly other children. Sometime during the 1680s or 1690s, George acquired land from some Indians, apparently giving them money or goods in return. This wasn’t a valid transaction in the eyes of the colony because legally, the King of England owned the land, and only he or his representatives could grant it to an individual. The title wasn’t disputed, though, until after George died.⁴

George’s land was located in a place described as Pamunkey Neck,² which was a geographic feature formed by two small rivers (the Pamunkey and Mattaponi) coming together to form a larger river (the York). It was these inland waterways that gave the Virginia Tidewater its climate, which in turn gave the colonists their livelihood. The rivers wide enough to be navigable supplied a way for planters to transport their tobacco to the ports where it could be shipped around the world. Deposits of the rivers made the soil very rich along the riverbanks, and this was the land granted to the wealthier settlers who came over from England.⁵ 

Map of where George had his land.

Places that weren’t along the water’s edge weren’t nearly as good for growing tobacco. “Neck” land was described as being “thin and barren.”⁵ This is probably the type of acreage George got in his deal with the Indians. Land of this type was said to be worth as low as “5 shillings an acre,” compared to the “rich bottom land” typically valued at £5 an acre.⁵ Perhaps this is why even without proper documentation, the courts posthumously cleared up the title and allowed his sons to inherit the land.

Since the single known record identifying George seems to suggest that he died at age 40 or younger, it leads to the question of how he died. The answer may lie in the climate of the region. The heat and the swampy nature of the Virginia Tidewater meant that mosquitos were a huge presence, and with that came diseases like malaria, typhoid fever and dysentery.⁵ This is pure speculation, but George may have been the victim of one of these illnesses. His death date is unknown, but it was before June of 1699.² It’s unknown when his wife Elizabeth died.

Children:
1. Joseph Sutherland — B. about 1680 in (probably) King and Queen County, Virginia;¹ D. about 1739, King William County, Virginia;¹ M. _____ Chiles, before about 1718, (probably) Virginia⁶

2. Phillip Sutherland — B. before June 1799 in (probably) King and Queen County, Virginia²

3. George Sutherland — B. before June 1799 in (probably) King and Queen County, Virginia²

Sources:

1    Sutherlands and Their Tangled Branches, Robert J. Walsh, 1985, pp. 12-13
2    English Duplicates of Lost Virginia Records, 1958, p. 62
3    “Southerland Famiy of King William County, Virginia,” Winston of Virginia and Allied Families, Clayton Torrence, 1927, pp. 389-394
4    Journal of the House of Burgesses, Vol. 3, page 283
5    Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America, David Hackett Fischer, 1989
6    There is a string of evidence that points to a Miss Chiles being the wife of Joseph. (1) In 1763, Fendall was executor to the probate of a man named Walter Chiles, implying a close relationship. (2) Walter Chiles had two sisters, one of whom married a Mr. Sutherland (Reports of Cases in the General Court of Virginia, 1829, p. 133). (3) The age of Walter Chiles and his sisters would put them on the generation of Fendall’s father, Joseph.

A Widow Taken to Court — Marie-Louise Chalifour

B. 13 Sep 1661 in Quebec City, New France¹
M. 18 Apr 1678 in Quebec City, New France²
Husband: Joseph Vandandaigue
D. 29 May 1735 in Quebec City, New France³

When Marie-Louise Chalifour was in her old age, she was charged with an unusual offense — building a channel from a waterway that affected community interests downstream.

Marie-Louise was born in Quebec City, New France on September 13, 1661.¹ Her parents were Paul Chalifour (also spelled Chalifou) and Jacquette Archambault, the daughter of early Montreal settler Jacques Archambault. Louise became part of a very large family, which was typical for New France — she was the 7th of 14 children. All of her older siblings were girls, which placed a burden on her father to marry them off, and most of them were brides at a very young age. This was true for Louise who got married at age 16.

Louise’s husband was Joseph Vandandaigue, who was a carpenter that constructed buildings — this was the same occupation as her father, so it’s possible they had worked together on projects. Joseph had the unusual distinction of having been born in Brussels, Belgium; his name was originally Josef Van den Dyck when he arrived in the colony. Their wedding took place on April 18, 1678 at Notre-Dame in Quebec City,² and Louise brought a large dowry of 2,500 livres into her marriage, which included land and a house. By the end of the year, she gave birth to her first child;⁴ she had six more born by 1693, with two dying as infants.

Louise and Joseph made their home in Beauport, and in 1681, both were witnesses to an altercation between two of their neighbors, Jean de Rainville and Charles Turgeon.⁵ It was de Rainville’s wife who seems to have struck and injured Turgeon, and Louise and her husband must have been there because they were called to testify in court. The men involved ended up settling out of court.

After a long marriage together, Joseph passed away in January 1725.⁶ Louise was left to handle her farm on her own, and later that year was hit with a lawsuit coming from the seigneur of Notre-Dame-des-Anges, Jacques Pinguet de Vaucourt, claiming that she had rerouted a stream.⁷ It’s likely that the offender was really her husband, and that she was forced to take responsibility for it now that he was dead. The charge stated that de Vaucourt could no longer operate his grist mill, something that affected an entire community. Louise was ultimately fined 40 sols, a considerable amount of money. 

Map showing Joseph and Louise’s property in 1709.

Louise lived another 10 years, dying on May 29, 1735 in Quebec City.³ She was buried at Saint-Charles Borromée Cemetery in Charlesbourg.

Children:
1. Jaquette Vandandaigue — B. 27 Dec 1678, Quebec City, New France;⁴ D. 24 Apr 1714, Quebec City, New France;⁸ M. Pierre Boutillet (~1676-1715), 5 Oct 1699, Beauport, New France⁹

2. Marie-Anne Vandandaigue — B. 12 Jan 1680, Quebec City, New France;¹⁰ D. 31 Mar 1752, Montreal, New France;¹¹ M. (1) Antoine Bourg dit Lachapelle (~1662-1729), 26 Nov 1696, Beauport, New France;¹² (2) Pierre Thibault Leveilé (1688-1747), 6 Oct 1732, St-Laurent, New France¹³

3. Claude Vandandaigue — B. 2 May 1682, Quebec City, New France;¹⁴ D. 10 Mar 1752, St-François-de-Sale, Ile Jésus, New France;¹⁵ M. Marie Brideault (1691-?), 5 Nov 1708, Beauport, New France¹⁶

4. Jeanne Vandandaigue — B. Mar 1684, Quebec City, New France;¹⁷ D. 11 Sep 1684, Quebec City, New France¹⁸

5. Marie-Charlotte Vandandaigue — B. 29 Jun 1685, Beauport, New France;¹⁹ D. 8 Oct 1727, Montreal, New France;²⁰ M. Jean-Baptiste Dugas (~1670-1758), 9 Jan 1708, Beauport, New France²¹

6. Louise Vandandaigue — B. 23 Mar 1687, Beauport, New France;²² D. Oct 1725, Montreal, New France;²³ M. (1) Jacques Gervais (~1677-1708), 17 Nov 1704, Beauport, New France;²⁴ (2) Jean Étienne Boutin (1684-?), 14 Nov 1712, Beauport, New France;²⁵ (3) François Lefebvre (1679-1727), 17 Jan 1718, La Pairie, New France²⁶

7. Marguerite Vandandaigue — B. 7 Apr 1693, Beauport, New France;²⁷ D. 1693, Beauport, New France²⁸

Sources:
1    Baptismal record of Marie-Louise Chalifour, Quebec Catholic Parish Registers, 1621-1979, FamilySearch.org
2    Marriage record of Joseph Vandandaigue and Marie-Louise Chalifour, Q., C. P. R.
3    Burial record of Marie-Louise Chalifour, Q., C. P. R.
4    Baptismal record of Jacquette Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
5    Court record of case between Charles Turgeon and Jean Rainville, 1 Sep 1681 to 10 Sep 1681, BAnQ
6    Burial record of Joseph Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
7    Court record of case between the seigneury of Notre-Dame-des-Anges and Louise Chalifour, 28 Jun 1725, BAnQ
8    Burial record of Jacquette Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
9    Marriage record of Pierre Boutillet and Jacquette Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
10  Baptismal record of Marie-Anne Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
11  Burial record of Marie-Anne Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
12  Marriage record of Antoine Bourg Lachapelle and Marie-Anne Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
13  Marriage record of Pierre Thibault Leveilé and Marie-Anne Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
14  Baptismal record of Claude Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
15  Burial record of Claude Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
16  Marriage record of Claude Vandandaigue and Marie Brideault, Q., C. P. R.
17  Baptismal record of Jeanne Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
18  Burial record of Jeanne Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
19  Baptismal record of Marie-Charlotte Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
20  Burial record of Marie-Charlotte Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
21  Marriage record of Jean-Baptiste Dugas and Marie-Charlotte Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
22  Baptismal record of Louise Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
23  Burial record of Louise Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
24  Marriage record of Jacques Gervais and Louise Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
25  Marriage record of Jean Étienne Boutin and Louise Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
26  Marriage record of François Lefebvre and Louise Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
27  Baptismal record of Marguerite Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.
28  Burial record of Marguerite Vandandaigue, Q., C. P. R.

The Paid and the Poor — John Hughes

B. before 19 Mar 1755 in Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England¹
M. 26 Jun 1780 in Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England²
Wife: Betty Morris
D. before 1 Aug 1818 in Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England³

For centuries, a system of charity existed in England where the needy were taken care of by the community. A person was evaluated by their parish council — they were either able to pay the local rate, or they were considered to be poor. And if they were poor, they received regular handouts distributed at the town church.

During most (if not all) of his adult life, John Hughes was one of the poor. He was born in the village of Almondsbury, England, baptized at St. Mary’s Church on March 19, 1755.¹ John’s parents were Thomas and Elizabeth Hughes, but nothing else is known of the family. At age 25, John was married at Almondsbury to Betty Morris; the wedding took place on June 26, 1780,² and John was able to sign his name to the parish register, indicating that he may have had a basic education. The couple were known to have had six children, with the first baptized on March 22, 1781.⁴ Their youngest was baptized in 1798,⁵ but this isn’t always proof of a birth year because some waited a few years to bring their children to the church.

The conditions John’s family lived in were likely desperate, and by 1799, he began making visits to the church for assistance. That November, a line formed outside the vestry room at St. Mary’s for an effort called “clothing the poor.” Over 40 people were there to receive what the community could offer. John was allowed 7 yards of cloth, while other people got shirts, shifts, jackets or blankets (one woman was even given a petticoat that day).⁶

A few weeks later on January 29, 1800, John returned to the vestry room with a request for money: he wanted to build a house.⁶ So they gave him 1 pound and 1 shilling, the equivalent of about $100 in today’s money. The meager amount didn’t go far enough, and he asked for more in February; this time he was awarded 1 pound,11 shillings and 6 pence. Presumably John then built his family a dwelling where they could live, but there are no details about the house itself. He likely did much of the work along with his older sons, which gives the impression that John and his family were hard-working people. 

Donation to John in 1800 Almondsbury vestry book.

Between 1801 and 1811, John didn’t appear in the vestry records. This may have meant he moved out of the area, but because he just built his house, that doesn’t seem likely. More plausible was that John was able to support his family during those years, and therefore didn’t seek the community’s help. In November 1811, his name was back on the list at clothing-the-poor day, and he received another length of cloth for his family.⁶

John was only about 63-years-old when he died, and his funeral took place at St. Mary’s on August 1, 1818.³ His wife Betty had passed away only a couple of weeks earlier,⁷ which suggests they may have died of the same illness, although there is no evidence of this. Within a generation, the vestry system was phased out in England because too many unemployed people overwhelmed it. New laws were passed during the 1830s requiring those getting public assistance to live in workhouses, which were essentially prisons for the poor. For that we can say that John was lucky to have lived at an earlier time.

Children:
1. George Hughes — B. before 4 Mar 1781, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England;⁴ M. Ann Gastrell (?-1812), 22 Mar 1806, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England⁸

2. Sarah Hughes — B. before 8 Feb 1784, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England⁹

3. John Hughes — B. before 22 Apr 1787, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England¹⁰

4. Thomas Hughes — B. before 28 Nov 1790, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England;¹¹ D. 15 Jun 1835, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England;¹² M. Hester Keen (~1790-1868), 2 Jan 1811, Bristol, England¹³

5. William Hughes — B. before 26 Jan 1794, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England¹⁴

6. Hannah Hughes — B. before 25 Mar 1798, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England;⁵ D. about 23 Apr 1821, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England;¹⁵ M. Stephen Bracey (1794-1872), 11 May 1816, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, England¹⁶

Sources:

1    Baptismal record of John Hughes, Bristol, England, Church of England Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1538-1812, Ancestry.com
2    Marriage record of John Hughes and Betty Morris, Bristol, England, Church of England Marriages and Banns, 1754-1938, Ancestry.com
3    Burial record of John Hughes, England, Bristol, Parish Registers, 1538-1900, FamilySearch.org
4    Baptismal record of George Hughes, B., E., C. of E. B., M. & B.
5    Baptismal record of Hannah Hughes, B., E., C. of E. B., M. & B.
6    Overseers order books, 1797-1817, England, Almondsbury, Gloucestershire, FamilySearch.org
7    Burial record of Betty Hughes, E., B., P. R.
8    Burial record of George Hughes, E., B., P. R.
9    Baptismal record of Sarah Hughes, B., E., C. of E. B., M. & B.
10  Baptismal record of John Hughes (younger), B., E., C. of E. B., M. & B.
11  Baptismal record of Thomas Hughes, B., E., C. of E. B., M. & B.
12  Burial record of Thomas Hughes, E., B., P. R.
13  Marriage record of Thomas Hughes and Hester Keen, E., B., P. R.
14  Baptismal record of William Hughes, B., E., C. of E. M. & B.
15  Burial record of Hannah Bracey, B., E., C. of E. B.
16  Marriage record of Stephen Bracey and Hannah Hughes, B., E., C. of E. M. & B.

A Doctor in Colonial Maryland — Samuel Berry

B. before about 1670 in (probably) Charles County, Maryland¹
M. before 1700 in (probably) Charles County, Maryland¹
Wife: unknown
D. after 30 Nov 1734 in Charles County, Maryland²

At a time when anyone with basic knowledge could practice medicine, Samuel Berry was described as a doctor and a surgeon. His birthdate is estimated as before about 1667, and he was likely born in Charles County, Maryland.¹ This was a region of tobacco plantations, and many people named Berry lived in the area. Most were thought to be descended from a James Berry who arrived from Devonshire, England by 1652.³ With a lack of records aside from wills and land transactions, it’s impossible to piece them together.

Samuel’s name first appeared in a lawsuit suing a man named John Wilder in 1690 for an unknown reason;³ unfortunately the original source for this is lost. Also unknown was the name of the woman Samuel married, likely sometime during the 1690s.¹ They had at least six children, born between about 1700 and about 1718, and probably there were others. It’s possible Samuel was married more than once.

On October 2, 1704, Samuel bought 100 acres of land in Charles County, a plantation called “Hull,” and some adjacent property called “Hopewell.”⁴ The seller was Samuel Cawood, and the price was 3,000 pounds of tobacco. The land was located near the Mattawoman Creek, northwest of the present-day town of Waldorf; Berry Road runs through the area and was likely named after his descendants. Most interesting in the transaction record was that Samuel was referred to as “Doctor Samuel Berry,” suggesting that while he operated a tobacco plantation, he was also practicing medicine, a fact confirmed in other documents.

What did being a doctor mean in early 18th-century Maryland? It’s almost certain Samuel didn’t have any medical schooling in his background. He likely learned how to treat patients in some other way, such as an apprenticeship to another man serving as a doctor. By picking up the basics of how to care for the sick, Samuel could offer his services to those who had no other options. A doctor like Samuel made very little money from this, and his primary income would be from his tobacco farm.

Samuel’s name, sometimes written as Dr. Berry, appeared in other records as witness to transactions, or as someone who was owed money in a probate document.¹ The latter seems to suggest he may have been treating the person in their final illness, although this is speculation. As for the plantation he bought in 1704, there’s no reason to believe he ever moved from there, remaining until near the end of his life.

By 1732, Samuel seemed to be living in poverty. That year he filed for an exemption from paying taxes, and his request was granted.³ It’s likely that his wife had died by this time and he may have been physically unable to work. On November 30, 1734, he sought help from a son-in-law named John Robey, signing over all of his possessions in return for being taken care of in his old age.² The document specified that Robey was to receive “a feather bed and furniture, a wooden cupboard, two iron pots, an iron skillet and four pewter basins.” This seems to indicate that Samuel only owned some very basic items at that point in his life. His date of death is unknown, but he may have survived for another 10 or 15 years.³  

1734 document involving Samuel and his son-in-law, John Robey.

Connection to son-in-law John Robey (~1714-1804)
The only document linking Samuel Berry to John Robey who died in 1804 is the statement he made signing over his possessions in 1734. Two things suggest that this is accurate. One is that there were no other men named John Robey living in the region where Samuel was. The other is that one of John Robey’s sons was given the first name Berry.⁵ While neither of these proof points are solid genealogical evidence, the two of them together make the conclusion strong.

Children:
1. Elizabeth Berry — B. about 1700, Charles County, Maryland;¹ D. before 7 Apr 1794, Charles County, Maryland¹

2. Anne Berry — B. about 1701, Charles County, Maryland;¹ D. after 7 Sep 1775, (probably) Charles County, Maryland¹

3. William Berry — B. about 1703, Charles County, Maryland;¹ D. 19 Feb 1733, Charles County, Maryland;¹ M. Esther Wakefield (~1706-1753), before 1729, (probably) Charles County, Maryland¹

4. Humphrey Berry — B. about 1705, Charles County, Maryland;¹ D. before 22 Jan 1772, Charles County, Maryland;³ M. (1) Mary Smallwood (~1710-~1731), before 1729, (probably) Charles County, Maryland;¹ (2) Anne Lovejoy (~1712-1798), about 1732, (probably) Charles County, Maryland¹

5. (supposed) Mary Berry — B. about 1715, Charles County, Maryland;¹ D. before 1802, (probably) Charles County, Maryland;¹ M. John Robey (1714-1804), before 11 Dec 1734, (probably) Charles County, Maryland²

6. Samuel Berry — B. about 1718, Charles County, Maryland;³ D. before 18 Mar 1776, Charles County, Maryland;³ M. Anne Thomas (~1722-?), about 1738, (probably) Charles County, Maryland³

Sources:
1    Samuel Berry listing, Early Colonial Settlers of Southern Maryland and Virginia’s Northern Neck Counties (website)
2    Document signing over property to John Robey, Charles County, Maryland Land Records, 1733-1743, Book O#2, p. 65
3    “Berry Family of Charles County,” Arthur L. Keith, Maryland Historical Magazine, 1906
4    1642-1753 Rent Rolls Charles County, Maryland, Hundred – Port Tobacco: Rent Roll page/sequence: 314/84
5    Mary Berry listing, Early Colonial Settlers of Southern Maryland and Virginia’s Northern Neck Counties (website)