(Vance Mead is among the very advanced researchers of the Mead-e Family in America. A native of Greenwich, Conn., a town founded by brothers John and Joseph Mead in the late 1600s, he now resides in Helsinki, Finland, with his wife and daughter. But, each summer he travels to Watford in Hertfordshire Parish on the outskirts of London to delve into family records that have remained a mystery since the 1500s. In this article, he will attempt to piece together all that is known -- some fact, some hearsay and some speculation -- about William Mead and his family, believed to be the progenitors of the Meads in Connecticut.)
They came by sea, but which ship and when?
A welcome sight for ocean travelers.
By VANCE MEAD
I have files on diskettes -- just a few years old -- that I can't read because I don't have a compatible program in my new computer. I also have a collection of vinyl LPs -- 20 or 30 years old -- that I can't play because I no longer have a turntable, just a CD player.
Buildings two or three hundred years old have long since crumbled into dust. But, something as fragile as paper and parchment, at the mercy of fire and water, mice and mold, survives to tell a tale four hundred years old.
Everything we know about William Mead of Stamford comes from three contemporary sources: the Watford Parish records, the Stamford Town records and the New Haven Colonial records. Without the chance survival of these few pieces of paper and parchment, we would be entirely in the dark.
William was born in 1592 in Watford, the son of Priscilla Mead (masculine given name) and Dorothy Grey. He was the grandson of Richard Mead and Margaret Goldhurst. Records show William was still living there in 1626, when his first daughter, Mary, died and was buried.
After that, there was a paper gap of 15 years until December 7, 1641, when he was granted land in Stamford. Sometime, during those 15 years, he moved to London and sailed from there to Boston, and then (probably) went by way of Wethersfield and New Haven to Stamford.
William is possibly the "Goodman Mead" who appears in the New Haven Colony records in June 1642: "A difference between Mr. Evance and Goodman Mead is referred to Mr. Gilbert and Mr. Gregson with the consent of both parties." Goodman was a title used in the colonies to identify a man or woman (Goodwyfe) as a person of high standing and reputation.
Stamford was part of the New Haven Colony and was subject to the court there. If this is William, it could indicate he had lived in New Haven, where John Evance lived, before moving to Stamford. There were people in New Haven during its first year called the Hertfordshire Group. They sailed to Boston in 1637 with Rev. Peter Prudden and went to New Haven in 1638. Prudden was from Kings Walden, Herts, about 12 miles north of Watford. Possibly, William Mead came with this group, although he didn't go with Prudden when they founded Milford, Conn., in 1639.
Another possibility is that William came with the congregation of Rev. Richard Denton, settling first in Wethersfield and then in Stamford. But, if this was the case, it raises the question why William didn't come to Stamford in the summer of 1641 with Rev. Denton and the other original settlers who came as a group from Wethersfield.
According to Long Island Genealogies by Mary Powell Bunker, William Mead went from Stamford to Hempstead, Long Island, in 1644 with Rev. Denton. I have not found any confirmation of this and William Mead is not on the list of "Fifty Original Proprietors of Hempstead" in 1647, which includes the names of others who received land in Stamford at the same time he did, such as John Case, John Ogden and Thomas Armitage.
In any case, William and his family were in Stamford in October 1654, when Martha Mead, William's daughter, was in a court case in New Haven. Her older brother, Joseph, testified on her behalf. In 1656 and 1657, John, Martha's younger brother, and Joseph, "of Stamford", appeared in the New Haven Court records. In 1658, Joseph was an Assistant Justice of Hempstead and in 1969 the town of Hempstead paid him nine shillings to go from Stamford to Fairfield to see about hiring a minister. This suggests Joseph was well-known in Hempstead, so it is possible the family had lived there for a few years after 1644 before returning to Stamford.
Nothing else is known of William Mead until March 1657, when he petitioned the court to forgive a fine against his son-in-law, John Richardson. William was still alive in September 1657 when Philippa, "the wife of William Mead", died in Stamford. After that, there are no more records of him.
If there is a moral to this story, it is that computers crash and computer programs are soon out of date. If is really important, put it on paper.
(SOURCES FOR THIS STORY: Elijah Baldwin Huntington, History of Stamford, Connecticut; Records of the colony and plantation of New Haven; Gordon Remington, The English Origin of William Mead of Stamford, CT, The American Genealogist, January 1998; Spencer Mead, History and Genealogy of the Mead Family; Mary Powell Bunker, Long Island Genealogies.)
Between Us ...
Lee Meade, Editor
I HAD A SUDDEN URGE the other day to do some work on the more recent files of my family tree. It's already 2007. The next census of the United States is just around the corner. But, wait! The 1940 census -- the 16th since the process of counting our nation's population began in 1790, will not be released to the public until April 1, 2012.
Better make that April 2 since April Fool's Day falls on a Sunday in 2012. Let's see now, since the 2nd of April is my birthday, I'll be 84 years old then. My doctor told me quite some time ago the best thing to inherit from your parents is longevity. If it's in your genes, I should be in fairly good shape. My grandparents and my mother lived into their mid-80s, so I guess I do have a shot.
I'm not sure there still will be a Mead-e Family Tree or not by then, but if my curiosity holds out about the 1940s, I may try to hang around long enough to see the records for myself. Let's see now, World War II was under way, but our "Day of Infamy" at Pearl Harbor was still almost two years in our future when the census takers made their rounds in April.
The Queen Elizabeth had just completed its maiden voyage across the Atlantic Ocean. Winston Churchill delivered his first speech as Prime Minister of Great Britain. German troops were marching into Paris. The first military draft number (I believe it was 158) was being drawn. President Franklin Roosevelt was re-elected for a historic third term (he would have still another). The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Negroes were entitled to first class train service. All of these historic events were just unfolding. * * * *
THERE IS a privacy mandate that prevents the census from being released to the general public until 72 years after it is recorded. I imagine there's a good reason, but, as a genealogist, I do not see it. So, like others of my ilk, I will wait.
Many things can be done during the waiting period. Perhaps, the greatest will be to get your records in order to patiently await the release date. After all, for genealogists, it will be the most important date since April 2002 when census data for 1930 was made available. Actually, that was when I began to realize all of the records I had poured through over the years were not without error. For instance, my name was incorrect. The census taker recorded it as "Lee M. Meade." All of my life, I had thought it was "Lee L. Meade."
In truth, it wasn't the census taker's fault, but the facts still were wrong. My parents had a squabble over what my middle name would be. My mother wanted it one way, my dad insisted on another. My mother won the battle, but I lost the war. When I was baptized, she spoke up and told the Congregational Church minister it was one way. My dad held his disagreement in check, but recorded it another when he registered my birth.
At the time, it certainly didn't matter to me, but almost 40 years later I learned of the discrepancy and had to go back to the recorder's office at the court house and, somewhat painfully, report the "mistake." It was important because all of my school, marriage and government data was recorded one way, but the census taker's written word prevailed. I dutifully changed my name to make the correction. When told, my dad just laughed at his "40-year joke." * * * * THE QUESTIONS asked in 1940 seemed quite standard. There were 32 questions seeking information of birthplace (street, avenue, road, etc.), house number (in cities and towns), number of the household in order of visitation, whether a home was owned or rented, the value of the home or the amount of monthly rental and is the property a farm.
The census asked the name of each person who lived in the home on April 1, 1940, relationship of this person to the head of the household, sex, race, age at last birthday and marital status. People were asked if they attended school or college and the highest grade completed. They also were asked if they were born in the U.S. and to name the state. They were asked their citizenship if born outside the U.S.
Employment status was among the most detailed of the questions, from the age of 14 and up, along with the money earned during the past year if it was above $50 in 1939.
Supplemental questions asked the name and place of birth for the father and mother, along with their native tongue. Veterans were identified and social security registration was checked. Occupations were listed and information on marriage were taken from women who were or had been married, along with their age at first marriage and the number of children born. Stillbirths were not reported. * * * * I HAVE NOT quite jumped into my mode of preparedness, yet. At last check, we still have somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,700 days -- more or less -- until the 1940 census figures are released. I figure I can wait just a bit longer before I join the frantic stampede of fellow genealogists charging the National Archives in 2012 to get a first look at the figures.
But here are some words of caution: Don't make too many assumptions. If a relative lived in one state when the 1930 census was taken, it's impossible to know where he or she lived 10 years later. And, don't believe if you knew someone by one name, it remained unchanged. I know the answer to that question first hand.
It will help, however, if you do take the time to get your facts in order. Using myself as an example, I was born in Hudson Township, Douglas County, Minn., and have lived at various stages in my life in Alexandria, Minn., International Falls, Minn., Litchfield, Minn.; St. Cloud, Minn.; Willmar, Minn., Inchon, Korea; Lafayette, La.; Beaumont, Tex.; Lake Charles, La.; Denver, Co.; Rye, N.Y.; Dallas, Tex.; Minnetonka, Minn.; Miami, Fla.; Worcester, Mass.; Elk Grove, Calif.; Horseshoe Bay, Tex., and Eden Prairie, Minn.
I'm certain tracing a person's migration through that series of cities would challenge the imagination of even the most dedicated census worker and strongly suggest a new line of work.
Mead Reunion in Oregon
Nothing superstitious about this family -- Friday, the 13th!
The Mead Family, with all its spelling variations, is moving West -- at least temporarily!
The third annual Mead Reunion will be in Medford, Oregon, beginning Friday, the 13th of July, and running through Monday, July 16.
Carolyn Mead Hildebrand of Sanger, California, will host the event with her husband, Noel, and will take over as chief "Cat-herders" for the Mead Clan from Lance Mead, who has organized the family get-together the past two years.
Carolyn is director of the Mead DNA project for descendants of Stamford immigrant William Mead and will give a report at Saturday morning's first session. The group also will meet Sherman Meeds, a native of Oregon, and his family on Saturday afternoon.
Sunday, the Meads will attend the Shakespeare Theatre in Ashland, setting up one of Carolyn's favorite stories:
"What did William Mead have that William Shakespeare did not?"
Answer: Lots and lots of descendants. None of Shakespeare's grandchildren had children to carry on his line.
The Red Lion Inn in Medford will be a meeting place for the group.
The Mead Researchers are a nation-wide group of people studying the genealogy of the family of 17th Century immigrant William Mead in this country. The organization was founded in 2005 by Wanda Mead Campbell of Binghamton, N.Y., and now has more than 100 members. It's webpage can be found on www.Yahoo.com. Proceed to "groups."
Long-fabled company?
The all-Mead Company ... ... of the Revolutionary War?
BY BEVERLY MEAD BRENNEISE Contributing Writer
There they were ... the names of Mead family members who had served during the American Revolutionary War. I sucked in my breath. Had I actually found that elusive and, up to this point, fabled unit comprised of all-Mead family members. And, glory be, there wasn't just one unit, but there were three: one from Connecticut, one from New York and one from Vermont.
Wow!
My elation was short-lived, however, as I examined the wording more closely. I was looking at pages 74-76 from Dr. Spencer P. Mead's History and Genealogy of the MEAD FAMILY of Fairfield County, Connecticut, Eastern New York, and Western Pennsylvania from A.D. 1180 to 1900.
"Continental Line and Connecticut Forces Commissioned Officers" I read. No specific regiment or company was named, nor was a location -- other than Connecticut -- given. Instead, the pages listed Meads from Connecticut who had been commissioned officers and Meads who had been privates. The same lists -- but different Meads -- were repeated for New York and Vermont.
My suspicions grew.
I had previously looked at the names listed in some of the regiments found in Ye Historie of Ye TOWN OF GREENWICH County of Fairfield and State of Connecticut, also written by Spencer Mead. Chapter X gives detailed information about the records of Greenwich relating to the Revolutionary War. Lists of the Revolutionary War soldiers' units in this book usually included the town and/or area from which the unit had been formed, along with regiment and company numbers. Not one of the regiments and companies list an all-Mead unit. Many Mead names are included, but they are combined with many other surnames also included in these units.
In looking back again at the list of Mead names in Spencer Mead's History and Genealogy of the MEAD FAMILY, I began to wonder if pages 74-76 were merely three compiled lists -- one for each of the three states (Connecticut, New York, and Vermont) -- of Mead family members taken from the companies in which they had actually served. If so, then this might disprove the theory of an all-Mead fighting unit during the Revolutinary War.
I checked with a librarian at the Ferguson Library of Stamford, Conn., and my hunch seemed to be verified by her reply.
"Yes," she said. "The names on these pages were compiled from companies in Connecticut, New York and Vermont."
I figured this out by checking a source titled "Stamford Soldiers - Genealogical biographies of Revolutionary War Patriots from Stamford, Conn." What I learned was some Mead family members served under a relative such as a brother, so Mead family names were found together in the same list. An example of this is Capt. Matthew Mead, 13th Company of the Connecticut Militia), was in the regimental command of his brother, Maj. Gen. John Mead.
So, alas, the Mead family members did not form their own company. The names of the Meads on pages 74-76 in the History and Genealogy of the MEAD FAMILY did not mean the states of Connecticut, New York and Vermont each had an all-Mead fighting unit during the Revolutionary War. Instead, the names of individual Mead soldiers had been lifted from the lists of their original companies and had been put together with the names of other Mead soldiers. These Mead names had been separated from the lists of soldiers in their original companies. And, these lists on pages 74-76 give the false impression that, perhaps, these Mead men had all fought together in the same unit for their respective states.
What a disappointment! There was no elusive all-Mead fighting company of the Revolutionary War. Not unless someone else can find this ghost company elsewhere.
Short shots . . .
TELL US WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE If you have a suggestion for a story or better yet, if you would like to write a story about your Mead-e family relatives, please send it to: Mead Newsletter, 8505 Flying Cloud Drive #221, Eden Prairie, MN 55344. All of our articles are contributed by volunteer writers, who are doing research upon their descendants. We would like to hear from you. All photos submitted will be returned promptly, although we cannot ensure them against loss.
SUPPORT AND CONTRIBUTIONS The newsletter is published quarterly and is supported with contributions from readers such as yourself. All written material is freely given and can be reprinted by researchers of the Mead family. Publication dates are in January, April, July and October.
QUESTIONS, INFORMATION AND HELP
If you have questions about your personal genealogy, we will be glad to assist you in finding information about your family tree. There is no charge for this assistance.
A SHORT STORY OF THE CIVIL WAR One more river to cross
1st Lt Fayette Clark Meade
(This is the third of a four-part short story on the final days of the Civil War, based on letters written by 1st Lt Fayette Clark Meade of Litchfield, Mich., to his wife, Mary Jane Wolcott. Meade served in 1964-1965 with the Michigan Sharpshooters.)
BY LEE MEADE Great grandson of Lt. Meade
Gen. Parke's troops at Petersburg had moved through the city and across the Appomatox River. But, after pursuing the retreating Confederates a few miles, they had been called back to the cityj.
Lt. Meade, now with his own unit once again, had appreciated the respite from the battle, but, even though the roar of the cannon and the staccato of funfire had moved far to the west, death and destruction were everywhere. He hated the burial details and the screams from the wounded soldiers in overcrowded military hospitals that pierced the evening calm.
Suddenly, a different noise reached his ears. It sounded like charging horses, hundreds of them, thundering down the road. They were stirring up a vast cloud of dust as they raced along the stone roadbed toward Petersburg. Looking closely, he recognized the blue coats of the riders and realized they were Union horsesoldiers. And, leading the charge was his namesake, Gen. George Gordon Meade. The general had lost his hat and his face was flushed as he rode by, arms upraised to the sky.
"It's all over, boys! Lee's surrendered!" he shouted. "It's all over now!"
As Meade raced past them at the head of his column, there was a stunned silence. Then, spontaneously, everyone joined the celebration. Hats, boots, coats and guns were thrown into the air. Men hugged each other and kissed as if they were embracing their sweethearts back home.
Others sat quietly, some glancing at shattered bodies; some had tears in their eyes, thinking of lost friends who had not made it to this dramatic point in time.
In the distance, a band began to play. But, after the playing of a few patriotic military songs the band stopped and a lone trumpet echoed the solumn sounds of "Taps" in memory of the tens of thousands who had died.
Finally, the celebration stopped. While most of the men collapsed in sleep, many stared endlessly into the night. Some prayed.
Meade couldn't get to sleep and as he sat in front of his tent, he recalled some of the rapid-fire events that had been jammed into the last three weeks.
"After the dullness of the many months of siege, things sure picked up around here," he thought. "And, there's been a strange camaraderie that has developed between the Yanks and Rebs, even across the lines of battle."
He remembered the still night just a couple of weeks earlier when he was inspecting the front lines. A Union sentry thought he heard activity in the no-man's zone between the two armies. Only a couple of hundred yards separated the troops, and an alert vigil was essential for both sides.
"Hey, Reb," the Union sentry yelled. "What are you doing out there? Get back in your works or you're going to get a bullet through your head."
There was a brief moment of silence, then a voice called back, "Just trying to grub something to eat, Yank."
"All right," the Union soldier replied, "but make it quick."
Not a single shot was exchanged.
A few nights later, just before the Rebels charged Fort Stedman, a soft call came from behind the Southern lines.
"Yank, you over there?" the voice asked. "You better be awake, Yank, because we're coming to get you."
Moments later, the Confederate attack began.
Meade thought to himself, it wasn't as if, even as rivals in the deadliest game of all, they couldn't betray their strange, compassionate relationship without an advance warning to the other side. Soldiers on both sides of the battle empathized with each other. They feared a surprise attack themselves and they wouldn't launch an attack without a friendly, yes, a friendly warning.
Lt. Meade had seen Gen. Meade many times. On one occasion, they had talked, discussing the common link of their last name.
Gen. Meade has been born in Cadiz, Spain, where his father was serving as a U.S. diplomat. He was descended from the Meades of Pennsylvania and lived in Philadelphia after attending the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. There was no blood relationship between the two men. The general's ancestors came from Ireland, where their name had been spelled Meagh; the lieutenant's were from England, where the spelling was Mead. Nobody knew for certain why the spellings were changed.
Gen. Meade had been raised for a career in the military and had been the commanding officer at the Battle of Gettysburg, generally conceded to be the turning point of the war. Lt. Meade's ancestors were the first Meades to set foot in the colony, landing in Boston about 1635. From there, they migrated to the midwest through Connecticut and New York. He had entered the Union army as one of a million volunteer soldiers.
But, after their name linkage had been called to their attention, they frequently greeted each other with a wink or a quip when they passed in the encampment.
The general and the lieutenant had come together upon the battlefield and were united in a military command. Now, they would each go their separate ways, returning to civilian life never to meet again.
With the war at an end, there was no effort by Lincoln or Grant to prolong their stay on Confederate land. The Union troops prepared to move out as quickly as possible, most of them returning to Washington, D.C., while awaiting their separation from the service.
Lt. Meade received his orders several days later and learned he had been assigned to join an advance party of men who would proceed to Washington immediately and assist in the discharge process.
It was Good Friday, the 14th of April, and Meade, a deeply religious man of the Puritan Church, was looking forward to attending Easter services that Sunday with the nation once again at peace.
(The concluding part of One More River to Cross will appear in the July 2007 issue of the Mead-e Family Tree.)
