Individual Details

Disclaimer. Any serious researcher of Anthony Haden should be aware that there are multiple erroneous ancestors seen both in print and on the Internet. Family tree sites such as Geni.com are perpetuating these false family lines. Although I have strong reasons to suspect Anthony was not an immigrant, but was a descendant of an earlier John Haden/Hayden who received land from the Pamunkey Indians, later from the English Crown, there are not enough records extant to positive state that Anthony is said descendant. What I have proved is that he is NOT a descendant of the erroneous ancestors often found. There were two main sources of mis-information. The first of these was in a family publication, described later - the submitter of this family line was assumed to be the widow of an Anthony Haden descendant by the editor of the publication. She was not - her husband was a descendant of a Thomas Haydon of Spotsylvania Co, VA who was a contemporary of Anthony - DNA has proved the lines of Thomas Haydon and Anthony Haden are completely divergent. They do not even have deep ancestral origins. Unfortunately this line was picked up by later authors and incorporated in at least one book which does state the line is tradition; however, many reading the book choose to accept the "tradition" as fact. It's simply the wrong family.

The other source of erroneous ancestors for Anthony Haden was fraudulent research. It happened this way - an older lady in Texas paid a monthly retainer to a man in England to research for her. He fed her bits and pieces of family - but never sent a single copy of any document - to keep her paying. Later research by another descendant in England proved that he had altered names, dates, and in some instances totally created false ancestors. By the time the man was discovered to be dishonest, the lady had already submitted the fakery to the Ancestral File of the LDS church. It appeared in the Ancestral File for several years and was found and adopted and included by some subsequent persons in their manuscripts and family books without substantiation. The false lineage has been removed from the Ancestral File and is no longer found there - the damage was done.

After careful study my version of the often seen "ancestors" [Samuel, James, John] of Anthony Haden as false information follows:

Excerpts from "The Hayden Family" Charles Hayden Publisher, Chicago.

Vol I. No. 2. Second Quarter. April 1, 1929 p.59.
Copy of letter from Harrodsburg KY, dated Sep 4, 1928 to Charles Hayden [editor]
Dear Sir:
The papers I sent you through Mr. Hutton need not be returned, as I am very glad the opportunity was afforded me to give you the information in regard to the Haydon family.
My husband was Ezekiel Haydon, son of Ezekiel W. Haydon and grandson of William Haydon who lived in Jassamine [sic] County Kentucky. My maiden name was Sue S. Stephenson, daughter of Thomas Stephenson who was in the war of 1812. I am now in my eighty fourth year and I am enjoying wonderful health...

More follows about a Noah Hayden's grave which can't be found. These people named in the letter are descendants of Thomas Haydon of Spotslyvania - they are not any known descendants of Anthony Haden/Haydon. An editor's note at the bottom of the page "Anthony Haydon line" but it isn't!

Vol 1, No. 4. Fourth Quarter. October 1, 1929 p. 166
Article about "John Haydon" Born 1600; Beheaded 1656. "A man of herculean size and strength ...seven feet in height" Line traced down then to James born 1626 in England. Samuel born 1649 in England. Anthony born 1694 in England and emigrated to America. This record furnished by Sue S. Haydon (84 year old lady above) and she says "Genealogy of the Haydon family obtained from John Haydon, who made the synopsis from the original record kept in the family of his father, which was unfortuately burned with his father's residence many years since. I have no positive proof at present but have reasons to work on the supposition that Anthony and Thomas Haydon of Spotsylvania Co VA were brothers. I find their descendants married in families of the same name."

On p.167, the editor prints the following. "There is a flaw in the records furnished by Mrs. Sue Haydon, probably a typographical error. I hope to have an answer soon."
[My note: No answer seemed to be forthcoming in the volumes that exist. There was no further explanation of the flaw.]

More recent researchers of these two families agree that Anthony and Thomas, though contemporaries, were likely not related at all. [DNA has proved they certainly were not.] Some of each of their descendants did indeed marry into the Kirtley family in Missouri - but not until 1830-1840. Seems to have just been coincidence and proximity, but it is interesting that there are persons who can claim descendancy from both families - Haden and Haydon.

Vol II, No. 1. First Quarter. Jamuary 1, 1930. p.39
Continuation of details about the James, Samuel & Anthony above. This is the article that describes Anthony as serving under Marlborough (extemely doubtful given Anthony's supposed age - Marlborough's battles were over by 1711 when he was accused of embezzling public funds) and settling first in North Carolina where he was Councillor of State for 10 years (This is not confirmed by any NC Colonial records. No Haden/Hayden of any spelling can be found that early in NC Colonial records. No land records in North Carolina until Anthony's sons William and Joseph move to North Carolina as part of the migration from Virginia to North Carolina circa 1770's.) Describes his service in the Revolution at 80 years of age (This certainly refers to the records of the GRANDSON Anthony who did serve - this earlier Anthony was likely deceased by or soon after 1763 as that's when the last proveable record of his has been located.)

Information from these articles has been reprinted in "John Haden of Virginia" and books on the Blakey family but without some of the background details as outlined above. Perhaps picked up from book to book without going back to read the original printing. I believe this to be a misunderstanding dating back to 1929. If John, James, and Samuel are anyone's ancestors, they appear to belong to Thomas Haydon of Spotsylvania, and not Anthony Haden. There also seems to be a definite possibility that the elderly lady did not even remember her husband's lineage correctly.

Another book which has misrepresented the data on the Haden family is:
Anthony Roots & Branches.
Nancy Vashti Anthony Jacob
Professional Business Services, Shreveport, LA
1971, Rev. 1983
Vol II - Allied Families
p.33 Hayden/Haden Family
Gives the same information from Haden Family Magazine about the supposed ancestors of Anthony Haden . They are repeated from The Blakey Family by Kress. Kress also claims Margaret was a sister to Rev. Douglas, etc. - for which there is no indication or proof. It's The Rev. Douglas's parents who were William Douglas and Grishild McKeand - he detailed his family in The Douglas Register - if he had a sister who had lived and died in Goochland Co, he would no doubt have listed her here. The fact is that if he had a sister she would likely have been born in England as he was, and not been available for Anthony to meet and marry. There is also age discrepancy. Margaret simply was not kin to Rev. William Douglas.
The Anthony book also confuses the generations:
This book states that the 1st child of Anthony & Margaret was a Benjamin Haden who married Margaret Douglas, his cousin. There has been no trace found of such a son - they did have a grandson Benjamin, son of John. There is also no trace of a second Margaret.
The book mistakes another grandson as an Anthony Jr., and places him as a son of Anthony & Margaret, but he's given the same wife and children as the proved younger Anthony who was a son of John Haden, hence he was certainly the grandson of Anthony & Margaret.


The Family Bible of Captain Jack Jouett gives Anthony Haden the Elder as born Aug 26 1694. This was on a note pinned in the Bible, many years after the fact, likely by someone who never knew Anthony Haden. Capt. Jack's daughter married into the Haden family. There is no way to determine the authenticity of this data. The age does seem consistent with what is known about Anthony. It does seem likely that if he had been born in England, that would have been notable enough to include, but no such statement was made.


Another firmly entrenched tradition of Anthony Hayden/Haden says he was "of Norfolk". And h "probably" changed the spelling of his name from Hayden to Haden. [I believe this to be just a guess - DNA has shown Anthony's descendants are not kin to those families that spell the name Hayden] The name is spelled variously by some descendants and public officials: Haden, Hayden, Haydon, Haddon, Headen. But Anthony Haden signed his own name on several documents and always as HADEN. There were also Haydens who migrated at an earlier time that settled in Massachusetts (John Hayden of Braintree, Norfolk County, MA) and Maryland (the Maryland Haydens were primarily Catholic). YDNA shows that Anthony was of no kin to any of these groups.

Some of the traditions include the story that he fought under "The Great Marlborough" which would have been the Duke of Marlborough who fought several battles with France - 1704-1711. Anthony, if born in 1694, would have been very young (age 10-17) to have been included in any of these battles. I doubt that he was even in England, but growing up in King William County, Virginia.

Anthony said by some to have immigrated to North Carolina c.1725. In 1733 said to be Councillor of the Colony of North Carolina - at the time Gabriel Johnston was appointed Second Royal Governor by King George II - however I have seen no proof at all that he was ever in North Carolina. The index to the North Carolina Colonial Records gives no reference to the Haden name, any spelling. It is my opinion that Anthony was never in North Carolina, although two of his sons moved there and a third son owned land in the "Carolinas". A migration directly into North Carolina and then a move back to King William and Goochland Counties in Virginia would be highly unusual for that time and place. However, for sons or grandsons to move from Virginia to North Carolina, looking for cheaper land, would be the normal course of events.

See p.4 of John Haden of Virginia, " ....with so few official records available, it is necessary to look to the family tradition records for any further information on Anthony Haden." Many people seem not to have noticed that Dorothy K. Haden stated plainly that this section of her chapter was based on tradition and not substantiated by fact. As most of us have discovered, family traditions are highly unreliable - time and memory alter these greatly.

Note:
Many researchers believe Anthony Haden to have been the Immigrant. I believe this is not so; the records indicate a man of colonial Virginia habits. He used the English naming patterns for his children - he gave his sons land; his daughters slaves at their marriage, etc. A second or third generation Virginian - not a newcomer. He came to Goochland from King William County. There are scant records left from King William, or its parent county, King & Queen. However, the few records that do exist contain a John Hayden/Haden who lived at least one generation prior to Anthony - there may indeed have been two successive John Hadens. One of this John Hayden's neighbors was a William Douglas (traditionally the name of Anthony's father-in-law). Anthony moved to Hanover Co in his later years, and married again there - the few records in existence from Hanover, mostly from St. Paul's Parish, indicate a Haden family lived in Hanover at the time Anthony lived in Goochland and for some years both before and after. It is also true that the Haden family often followed closely the naming patterns of English families - Anthony named his eldest son John, also a suggestion his father was John. I have compiled a paper on these findings but choose not to post it here - it is not for publication because of the possibility of misuse. However, if you are a serious Haden researcher, please email for more information.


Actual records of Anthony include the following:

He was undoubtedly living in Goochland in March of 1744.
WILLS FROM GOOCHLAND DEED BOOK 5 1745-1749 by Benjamin B. Weisinger III. p. 66: Inventory of Joseph Ballenger by Court Order, Mar 1744. Commissioners: Anthony Haden, Joseph Pool, James George

Here is a summary of all property bought by Anthony Haden in Goochland Co and the disposition of that property:
16 Nov 1742: Anthony Haden of King William County bought 400 acres part in Goochland, part in Hanover, from the Watson family. Anthony and wife Margaret sold it back to Watson Nov, 1745. IThis is the ONLY document found that names Margaret - she must have died soon after as dower releases for land sales were required in Virginia.]
20 Dec 1743: Anthony of King William bought 200 acres on branch of Byrd Creek from Benj Hawkins. Gift to son John in May, 1747
§ Jun 1744: Anthony of King William [St. John's Parish] bought 200 acres from Thomas Stone on the Great Byrd Creek. I believe this was his home plantation; he will now be indicated as "of Goochland County". Apr 1749: He added an adjoining 50 acres bought from Edward Rice. By May 1769, Edward Rice's will reveals that Anthony's son Zachariah Haden is living on this land. In Oct, 1774 Zachariah & wife Elizabeth sold this 250 acres, both properties devised [willed] to him by his father Anthony Haden, to neighbor John Hopkins. [The Will of Anthony Haden by then of Hanover Co has been lost as have many of the Hanover records - but there was a will.]
§ Nov 1745: Anthony Haden of Goochland County bought 200 acres from Richard Brown, also on Byrd Creek. Gift to son Joseph in Jan of 1756, Anthony was now of St Paul's Parish, Hanover County.
§ May 1748: Anthony of Goochland bought 141 acres on Byrd Creek from Henry Nash. In Sept of 1749, he added to this property, buying 55 acres from Francis Thurston who had previously purchased this 55 acres from Henry Nash. Nov of 1755, both properties were a gift to son William Haden; Anthony now living in Hanover County.

After moving to Hanover County between Sept of 1749 and Nov of 1755, Anthony Haden also made deeds of gifts of slaves to daughters, Rachel Johnson and Ruth Ferris, and to Ann Rea, his granddaughter and daughter of Elizabeth Rea, with the income of the slave to go to daughter Elizabeth during her lifetime and then to his granddaughter.


Some confusion exists about the children of Anthony and Margaret. There is said to be an older son Benjamin who is claimed to have even been born in England - his descendants are supposed to have settled in Logan County KY and eventually Montgomery County, MO. This family has a strong tradition as being descended from Anthony and Margaret. [There is a family that traces their line to Logan County KY but their ancestors in that place spell the name "Hadden" and are totally unrelated, proved the records and by YDNA.] Other Hadden researchers with whom I have corresponded also trace these Haddens further back to Virginia to a Revolutionary ancestor, Elisha Hadden, not an Anthony! That given name never appears anywhere in their family. The man who conducted this research about Benjamin is long deceased - he was a single man and his records lost - no proof exists for any of his proposed lineage after he traced the family to and beyond Logan Co KY. There is absolutely no shred of evidence to indicate Anthony had a son Benjamin, although he did have a grandson of that name - a grandson that never lived in Kentucky.

-----There is sometimes shown a son Thomas - several researchers think this Thomas is the Thomas Haydon who settled in Spotsylvania County, VA, and died 27 Jun 1782, but who is really too old to have been a son of Anthony and Margaret. He is more of an age to have been a brother to Anthony but actually was of no relation at all. He had a son named Thomas among others, William, John, etc....many similar names but also names like Elijah and Jarvis which were not used by Anthony's family. DNA has proved the descendants of Thomas Haydon to be completely unrelated to descendants of Anthony Haden.
However, a Thomas Haden was a witness to a deed of Anthony Haden's: Mar 6, 1761. Henrico Co VA. Anthony Haden of Hanover, deeded his son-in-law Jacob Ferris and his daughter Ruth Ferris, a negro woman, Aggey and two children Amey and Sarah. Wit: Geo. Clopton and Thomas Haden. There's another Thomas Haden record too early to be any of the known Thomases among Anthony Haden's descendants: From WILLIAM AND MARY COLLEGE QUARTERLY; Vol. 7, Series 1, p.105 "Marriage Bonds in Goochland County" 11 Feb 1778. Solomon Williams to Lucy Holland. Sec., James Williams. John Holland's letter of consent to daughter's marriage witnessed by John Massie and Thomas Haden. The latter, Lucy Holland, aged 21, Dec 6, 1779. A Thomas Haden is also mentioned in the St. Paul's Parish records of Hanover Co during the years from 1764 through 1774 and he was taxed in Hanover in 1763 and in 1782 - this range even suggests a possibility of two successive Thomas Hadens, although there is nothing else to indicate that and presumably the records are of the same man. I strongly suspect Thomas Haden was kin to Anthony, possibly a nephew, more likely a cousin.

-----There is a John Haydon ( a proven son of the above Thomas Haydon of Spotsylvania) who married Lucy Dale and lived in Spotsylvania County - he has sometimes been confused with the John who married Jenny Mosley and was definitely a son of Anthony and Margaret, proved by deeds, etc. These two Johns were approximately the same age and some of their children ended up in Kentucky but in different parts of that state and this John Haydon of Spotsylvania left a will naming all of his fifteen children. It is beyond my comprehension that these Johns have been confused, but it has happened and in some databases they are more or less melded together. The only thing in common was that both had descendants that moved from the state of Virginia to the state of Kentucky - an exceedingly common migration of that period.

-----There may have been two daughters of Anthony & Margaret named Elizabeth, one who died young, but again there is only one writing that suggests this and I disagree with the interpretation of that record. There is confusion about the married name of Elizabeth - some have interpreted it as "Rex" but the deeds involving Elizabeth say very plainly "Rea" and at times perhaps "Ray".

-----A youngest daughter sometimes seen as Jane, born circa 1744, is not listed in all records and I find no proof that there even was such daughter - she is said to have married a Hendley or Hundley, the Hundley name is the one that occurs in Goochland records. I can find nothing to suggest this daughter actually existed. Anthony's son Joseph did apparently marry as his first wife, an as yet unidentified Hundley lady. I have not located any research on the Hundley family that could help clarify this problem.

-----Several researchers have tried to create an Anthony Jr. but there is a very well documented grandson, Anthony, son of John Haden & Jenny Mosley, whose records have been confused with those of his grandfather. It is also true that there are other Anthony Hadens of a later generation that are not found to be part of this family - more about them later.

The children I show here are the proved children of Anthony. Since he followed the Virginia tradition of giving land to sons, slaves to daughters, I don't believe there were any other children who reached adulthood. Zachariah was the only son who did not directly receive a deed for land, yet he had the homeplace after Anthony moved to Hanover Co. All the land that Anthony purchased in Goochland has been accounted for and there was none remaining to have been given to another son. The possibility does exist for deeds of gift made in Hanover that were not recorded in Goochland and were among the missing records of Hanover, as was Anthony's will, referred to in Zachariah's deed of 1774.


There are several unidentified and unattached Anthony Hadens.
-----There exists records of an Anthony D. Hayden who received Bounty Land in "Arkansas County" Missouri for his service in the War of 1812 and he has not been linked to this family - he married Agnes Ballew and lived in Cape Girardeau County, MO, moving down into Arkansas and dying there about 1819. He lived in Louisiana before moving north and served in the War of 1812 from Louisiana.
-----An Anthony Haden, a minor, was listed in a Hanover County Taxpayer's list, St Paul's Parish, 1785, living in the household of James Parker. He would have been too young to be the following Anthony D. Haden that may have also been from Hanover Co. Was this Anthony, under age 21 in 1785, the same as the Anthony in Missouri/Arkansas? Seems possible. Other Hadens found in the Hanover Tax lists include An Isaiah Haden (signed his own name) was in St. Martin's, 1782, with 14 slaves, 6 horses, and 17 head of cattle and is there through 1790. A Thomas "Haidon" is listed but has nothing to declare and likely just turned of age. [Hanover County Taxpers, Sanit Paul's Parish, 1782-1815, William Ronald Cock, III, p. 55 & 95]
-----There is another Anthony D. Haden who lived in Pittsylvania Co. VA and whose widow [this Anthony died May 1829] claimed a pension on his Revolutionary service. There is testimony in the file that conflicts - an individual that testified on two occasions stated once that Anthony D. Haden enlisted from Hanover Co in 1778 and another time stated Anthony D. enlisted from King William Co. There was a John Haden living in Pittsylvania Co VA at the same time in the early 1800's as this Anthony D. - they even had adjoining properties. This Anthony D. Haden in the Pittsylvania Co records, also may have had property or even lived for a time in Halifax Co, VA, as some of his children seem to have married in Halifax. No link has been found back to Anthony of Goochland but they certainly may descend from those Hadens found in Hanover Co. Recent DNA tests for descendants of the John Haden of Pittsylvania do not indicate a particularly close kinship to descendants of Anthony of Goochland, but the markers are not as divergent as those between all the other various Hayden families.

Anthony certainly did not live until 1797 as often seen and also indicated in the old Ancestral File.
Anthony Haden and some of his sons and grandsons are said to have "all fought in the Revolution together" - Anthony would have been at least 80 at the time of the Revolution and I have found the records indicating he was already deceased several years prior to the Revolution. The grandson named Anthony served as a Captain and his records were mistaken for his grandfather's. The Battle of Point Pleasant or Lord Dunmore's War (which was actually before the War, in 1774) is mentioned as a place where Anthony fought but examination of many references to that battle (including the Draper Manuscripts) so far reveals no Hadens at all, any spelling, were in that Battle.

Unfortunately, applications to lineage societies have also confused the Revolutionary service of the Haden sons and grandsons. There is on Ancestry.com, the SAR applications ...The application of Matthew H. Crawford, #38585 is for Capt Anthony Haden/Hayden, submitted in 1924. The only problem is that it is based on this Anthony who was already deceased by the time of the Revolution. I don't know that SAR has ever corrected this error, because I believe others have joined on this line [and may be continuing to do so]. Since Mathew H. Crawford was also a descendant of the grandson Anthony, who indeed served as a Captain in the Revolution, I suppose it is a moot point - he was a descendant of a Revolutionary soldier. Matthew H. Crawford also cited as part of his proof the service of an Anthony Haden from Hanover Co - he was the Anthony D. Haden who later lived in Pittsylvania Co, VA and whose relationship to this family has not been proved. Not only does this application confuse generations, but also combines service of two very different men.

Tradition says Anthony died in 1797 at age 103. By the latter part of 1761 he had given away most of his land and slave holdings as gifts to his children. He retained 200 acres of land in Hanover Co on which he lived as is revealed by a Hanover County Tithable list dated 1763. He was at that time remarried to the widow Isabel Clement and this may have been her property, as noted in the Will of her Clement husband. He would have been 70 in 1764. He is not found after this date. The deed of sale of his son Zachariah in Goochland in 1774, indicates that Anthony was certainly deceased by 1774, and that he had left a will, undoubtedly in Hanover County, where he was living and where so many records are lost. There is no doubt that some of records of his grandson Anthony in Goochland have been mistaken as his.

VIRGINIA TITHABLES FROM BURNED RECORD COUNTIES, Robert F. Woodson and Isobel B. Woodson, 1970. p. 49
Haden, Anthony of Hanover Co, 1763, 200 acres.
Hadin, John's Exors, Hanover, 1763 (1755), 580 acres.
Hadin, Thomas, Hanover, 1763, 200 acres.
[Thomas and John Haden had both been mentioned in vestry records from St. Paul's Parish in Hanover Co for some years. John Haden's "orphans" are mentioned several times but not named. No Anthony occurs in those records from St. Paul's.]

Anthony Haden was in one instance [in 1763] taxed on 200 acres of land in Hanover Co and deeds indicate he moved there in his later years. Anthony remarried in his old age to the widow Isabel Clement and that is perhaps why he moved to Hanover. This 200 acres may have been the land belonging to that wife. Descendants of a John Clement of St. Paul's Parish claim that his widow married Anthony Haden - her given name was Isabel and from the ages of the Clement children, she was likely past child-bearing age when she married Anthony Haden. John Clement's will was probated in 1749. The descendant wrote me that there is a document in the Simon Clement estate papers in Raleigh, NC, concerning delivery of slaves that had belonged to John Clement. Isabel "Hayden" is named as the mother of Simon and it states she had intermarried with Anthony "Hayden". These papers dated 1759 and in Hanover Co. [Inquiries at the North Carolina Archives did not find any estate papers for Simon - only his son Samuel who died ca 1815 in Granville Co NC and there is nothing in those about prior ownership of the slaves. But keep reading.] Simon is believed to have been born about 1730 - he received land in his father's will, the only son to receive land, and it is not known if he was the eldest or the youngest, although most believe him to be the youngest which precludes any possibility of later children by Isabel and Anthony Haden, as she would have been past childbearing age. There is said to be some evidence that John Clement was also from King William Co. earlier - a John Clement patented land in Hanover when he was "of King William Co" and does seem to be this man. Anthony Haden was "of King William Co" when he made his first land purchase in Goochland Co. Anthony Haden & Isabel Clement Haden are said to have signed the document re the slaves. I had trouble finding these records for myself and there is disagreement over whether the document is signed "Hayden" or "Haden". All of the deeds of Anthony Haden of Goochland/Hanover were signed by him as "Haden" without the "y".

I finally found the deed referenced above after hunting for a number of years. It was indeed filed as "John Clement, 1801". There were several files that the North Carolina Archives overlooked concerning my request for Clement records. [I will add here that not only did they fail to find existing Clement estate records when requested, many papers are mis-filed in the Estate files held by the North Carolina Archives - dates confused, men of the same name placed together even with widely divergent dates, etc.] The papers in the file so labeled had nothing to do with John Clement except that he was mentioned as the first husband of Isabella. The papers were in connection with a lawsuit among the heirs of Simon Clement, son of John & Isabel, who had died about this time. The lawsuit involved the ownership of the female slave Angillo - Simon's son Zephaniah believed the slave had been given to him by his grandmother, Isabel Clement Haden. Angillo's son Moses was in the possession of Zephaniah's stepmother, widow of Simon Clement. Angillo had run away and was still missing. A copy of the deed had been requested from Hanover and it does state that the slave woman was deeded to Simon Clement. Simon had lived in Amelia Co before moving to Granville. Here is a transcript - I have added some commas for clarity, spelling is as found. The name was always written as "Haden" in these papers. Anthony Haden signed some of his deeds in Goochland/Hanover with the same abbreviation "Antho. Haden" as he signed this one. This deed was copied before the record loss in Hanover and doesn't now exist in the records of Hanover. It is basically a pre-nuptial agreement.

LDS Microfilm #2208030 NC Estates, Granville Co
This Indenture made this Sixth Day of October in the year of our Lord Christ one Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Nine Between Anthony Haden of the County of Hanover, Planter, and Isabell his wife of the one Part and Simon Clement of the County of Amelia, Planter, of the other Part. Whereas it was mutually agreed by and between the said Anthony Haden and Isabell his wife [before their intermarriage with each other] that they separately should have, hold, use, occupy and enjoy each of their Estates without the hindrance - interruption or molestation of each of them to the other and that they seperately should dispose of their and each of their Estates or any Part thereof in the same manner as if they had not been married, and that neither of them should inter-meddle with any Part of the others Estate without their mutual Leave or Consent, and for and to comply with their said agreement, they are minded to give grant and Convey all the Estate that she was Possessed of at the Time of their intermarriage aforesaid, unto the said Simon Clement, Son of the said Isabell he having given Bond and Security unto the said Anthony Haden and Isabell his wife that if in case she should happen to outlive or Survive her said Husband she shall not claim any part of the Estate of him her said Husband but that he the said Simon will in that case, maintain and Support the said Isabell as long as she lives, or deliver up unto her the Estate hereby given unto him, now this Indenture. Witnesseth That the said Anthony Haden and Isabell his wife for and in Consideration of the abovementioned Premises and for the natural Love and Affection which they bear unto the said Simon Clement and also for the Sum of Five Shillings Sterling to them in hand paid the Receipt whereof they do hereby acknowledge and also for other good causes and Considerations - them thereunto moving they the said Anthony Haden and Isabell his wife have and each of them hath given and granted and by these Presents do and each of them doth give grant and confirm unto the said Simon Clement his Heirs, Executors, Administrators and Assigns for ever, Five Negro Slaves by name Hager, Angelo, Ismael, Milly and Mansfield and their Increase, and the follows Goods, to wit. Three Feather, Beds and Furniture, Brass, Pewter and Iron Ware and also all other the Goods and Chattels, Debts and Substance whatsoever moveable and immoveable, of what kind, nature of Quality soever the same are - which were in the possession of, or did belong to the said Isabell at the Time of her Intermarriage with the said Anthony Haden after the Decease of the sd Isabel To have and to hold all and Singular the said Negroes, and their Increase, Goods, Chattals and all other the aforesaid Premisses unto the siad Simon Clement his Heirs Executors Administrators and Assigns to his and their own proper Use and uses for ever. In witness whereof the said Anthony Haden and Isabella his wife have hereunto set and affixed their Hands and Seals the Day and Year first above written.
Antho. Haden
Isabell Haden
Signed Sealed & Delivered in presence of
Ja. Allen, Wm Shackelford, Robt Thent, Robt Carter

Memorandum. That on the Day and year within written Livery and Seisin was delivered by the within named Anthony Haden and Isabell his wife unto the within named Simon Clement of the Negroes and Beds within mentioned in the name of all the Estate within mentioned to hold to him the said Simon Clement his Heirs Executors Administrators and Assigns for ever, according to the within written Indenture Witness the Hands and Seals of the said Anthony Haden and Isabel his wife.
Antho. Haden
Isabell Haden
Witness: Robt. Carter, Robt. Thent

At a Court held for Hanover County of Thursday the 1st day of November 1759.
This Deed Indented & the Memorandum of Livery & Seisin thereon Indorsed were proved by the Oath of Robert Carter & Robert Thent, the witnesses thereto & Admitted to Record. Test: William Pollard, DCHC

Virgina, Hanover County to wit. I William Pollard clerk of the Court the County aforesaid to hereby Certify that the foregoing transcript is a true copy from the records of the Court of the said County.
In Witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand & affixed the seal fo the said County the twenty seventh day of July one thousand eight hundred & one.
William Pollard

Birth	26 Aug 1694
Marriage	Abt 1719	MARGARET DOUGLAS
Marriage	Bef 1759	Isabel [Clement]
Death	Bet 1763 and 1774	Hanover County, Virginia

Spouse	MARGARET DOUGLAS ( - 1747)
Child	JOHN HADEN (1723 - 1817)
Child	Ann Haden (1724 - )
Child	Ruth Haden (1729 - )
Child	William Haden (1730 - 1789)
Child	Elizabeth Haden (1732 - )
Child	Joseph Haden (1735 - 1803)
Child	Rachel Haden (1735 - )
Child	Zachariah Haden (1738 - 1792)

Spouse

Isabel [Clement] ( - )

Webtags

Notes