12. A father from Tyrrell County, N.C.      by D Phelps

(The purpose of this article was to explore any possibility that a Phelps from Tyrrell was the father of James d 1786 Caswell Co, NC. James married a Mary who some have claimed was a Bateman.  Hopefully the general researcher will benefit from the information.)  Related evidence can be found in my other paper Notes on Phelps in Tyrrell Co, NC

Thanks to a contributing researcher, Brenda Emory, I have been enlightened with the significant number of Phelps - including several James Phelps -  who lived in Tyrrell County during the time of our James Phelps of Caswell.  Tyrrell is south across the Albemarle Sound from Perquimans Co.   With Brenda's help I tried  to determine if James' parents could have come from this area.   It seems few researchers have worked on this line of Phelps.  In addition to Phelps, some Batemans also lived there.  If anyone has researched this area we would appreciate very much to hear from you.

Conclusions on the study of the several James in Tyrrell Co. in the 1700s

 Sept 20, 2004

My objective was to determine if there was a James Phelps in Tyrrell who moved to Caswell by the time James of Caswell is recorded being.   The likely date was no later than 1778 when he made his land entry and for certain no later than 1784 when he was listed on tax list.   It would be very helpful if we could find a James in Tyrrell who married a Mary but apparently there is no record of that in Tyrrell. (See my other material showing that the reported marriage to Mary Bateman in Perquimans was not possible.)

Even though there are many early records in Tyrrell County, I am not aware of anyone who has unraveled the many "James Phelps" who were there in the 1700's.  A key problem is that apparently there is no Phelps mentioned in any will during the period.  I offer this research in the hope that someone may be able to support the conclusions or supply a reasonable alternative.   

Tyrrell County is south across the Albemarle Sound from Perquimans County where other Phelps lived.  Gates County is adjacent to Perquimans and also had a Phelps line. Crossing the Sound would be a sail of a few hours and could be extremely rough in a wind over15 mph which is common.  Ground travel would be much more difficult and longer.  

My conclusions:  The net of this analysis is that we can identify five James before the target date when James of Caswell was in Caswell,1778 to 1784.  One was reported to have died, leaving four "James" remaining.  At the target date, we have four: James Sr, James Jr, Captain James and James.  I found no indication of a marriage of a James to a Mary in this county in the time period required (of course all the marriage records recorded in the Episcopal Church records were lost).   Therefore I submit that the James of Caswell did not move from Tyrrell County.

Please use the associated table to understand the conclusions .   The table was created by applying from the available records all the use of any "James" to the known "James".   Across the top of the table are the individual James.  The left column list the  year and source.   I then applied the name on the record to what seemed reasonable considering the overall understanding of the records.

Several very key records should be noticed:

·          1740 Edward describes his son James' cropmark

·          1747 Processioners Book:  A James is named as Edward's son

·          1754 Military record:  Three different James are named:  James Jr, James Sr, and a James

·          1765 deed:  Three different James are named:  James Sr, James Jr (named as James Sr's son) and a James.

·          1778 Estate of a James Phelps.  Never identified as to which James.

Here is a list of those whom I consider to be reasonable candidates:

·          One should be discarded -  a James son of John who was so named in the 1784 Tyrrell Tax list, is after the target date..  There are five other "James" candidates but  realistically only four as described below:  

·          James Sr, apparent brother to Edward

·          James, son of Edward

·          James Jr, son of James Sr.

·          Captain James

·          Possibly another James who followed the death of a James who died in 1778

1.       James Sr, apparent brother to Edward, and James, son of Edward.   The first use of "James" is 1729.  In 1740 we find that Edward has a son named "James". It seems evident that between 1729 and 1740 the records identify the brother of Edward.   After the introduction of Edward's son in 1740 and up through 1747 there are several uses of "James".  Some deeds identify James with Edward so likely those records are for Edward's son.  Other uses of James in those years could be either Edward's son or brother.   In 1752 we see James Sr and Jr for the first time, with a "James" the year before.  I submit that the Edward's brother is now being called James Sr and that he has a son, James Jr - and that further uses of  "James" refers to Edward's son.

James Sr is listed beyond 1784 into 1790, and so could not have been the James in Caldwell.    To argue that the original Sr died and another James took his place and another James took Jr's place  - or that there was even another James - does not seem to be reasonable or likely at all, considering the records.  

"James" is named continually through1790.  In 1778 a James died yet James Sr and Jr continue afterwards.  I submit that it is only reasonable to conclude that the death was to Edward's son, James.  The death is identified only by the name of his estate and that Edward was the executor.  With Edward as executor it is very likely that the "James" was either his son or his brother, but since James Sr (Edward's brother) continues to be seen we must assume the death was to his son.  If so, this would mean there is another James who is named beyond 1778, but we still have a count of four. Alternatively, if we add another James and apply the death to James Sr and shuffle people, the count remains at four.

2.       James Jr, son of James Sr. as documented by the 1765 deed.     "James Jr" first appears in 1752. He is so named from 1752 through 1793 - while James Sr also continues to be listed. To propose that the original Sr died in 1778 and the Jr took his place does not seem to be possible or reasonable, considering the records.  So this James cannot be the one in Caswell.

3.       Captain James.  He first appears in 1784 and could have been one of the earlier named "James" but it does not matter since he was alive in Tyrrell in 1784. So whoever he was, he can be omitted.  The James CT [?]   (as shown on the 1782 Tyrrell tax transcription with the question mark recorded by the transcriber) is listed on the index as "James".  Possibly the CT represented Captain seen in the 1784 tax list - or the James whose land grant of 235A is similar to the 253A on the  1784 tax list.   I contend it does not matter which since the count remains at four.  

Other considerations

1.       I found no record of a Mary Bateman marrying a James Phelps in this county during this period.   However there were many Batemans there during the time, just as there were in Perquimans across the sound.

2.       I found no wills of any James Phelps.  There was simply the statement of an estate in 1778 for James Phelps and another for J Phelps in 1796.

The conclusions in the table below are based largely on my analysis in my other paper Notes on Phelps in Tyrrell Co, NC