Thomas Phelps, 1650 Baltimore/AA County Indentured servant from

"Colonial Families of Maryland: Bound and Determined to Succeed" by Robert W. Barnes, 2007 

Extracted and comments by Doug Phelps, 5/2008

The main purpose of this work is to chronicle and categorize the life experiences of 519 persons who entered Maryland as indentured servants or, to a lesser extent, as convicts forcibly transported.   In my opinion, after a thorough review of the records of Thomas Felps d. 1759 Baltimore Co,  the Thomas Phelps described in this book (see the Thomas Phelps Family info below) was not that person.

To the other economic extreme, no Phelps or Felps of Baltimore Co was listed in the book From Gentlemen to Townsmen: The Gentry of Baltimore County, Maryland, 1660- 1776 by Charles Steffen.   

The comments in the introduction of the book give great insight about the Thomas Felps named in the book. .  The introduction to this book, by Barnes follows:

Colonial Families of Maryland   -   Introduction  [Copied]

"Between 1634 and 1777 thousands of people were transported to Maryland. Some were indentured servants, who came to work out a contract willingly entered into that bound them to serve a master for a specified number of years. Others were convicts, who were sentenced to a term of servitude as an alternative to going to the gallows. The indentured servants had some rights in the courts, but the convicts were generally looked down on. Descendants of known indentured servants and convicts should feel proud that their ancestors overcame what may have been a blot on their record and became respectable citizens.

Many scholars have examined the life of these immigrants. Lorena S. Walsh compiled "Servitude and Opportunity in Charles County, Maryland, 1658-1705," in Land et al. eds. Law, Society and Polilics in Early Maryland, pp. 111-133. She limited her target group to servants in Charles County and attempted to trace their careers once they had completed their time of service.

Russell Menard published "From Servant to Freeholder. Status, Mobility and Property Accumulation in Seventeenth Century Maryland," in the William and Mary College _Quarterly (3rd set.) 30 (1973):37-64. Mr. Menard's article primarily dealt with servants who arrived in Maryland in the 1640s and 1650s. Like Walsh, he attempted to trace their careers in early Maryland. In "British Migration to the Chesapeake Colonies in the Seventeenth Century," Colonial Chesapeake Society, edited by Lois Green Carr, Philip D. Morgan, and Jean B. Russo (published for the Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia, by the University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill and London, 1988), pp. 99-132, Menard stated that the chances for a male indentured servant, who completed his time of service, of achieving a satisfactory lifestyle were pretty high until 1660. These chances declined after 1680, when former servants often left the region in search of better prospects elsewhere (p. I I I ).

My own research has determined that a number of servants who came after 1680 remained in Maryland and attained some measure of prosperity. They acquired land. established families, and in some cases held office. Anthony Chamness, Francis Clarvo, Miles Hennis, Thomas Knightsmith, Benjamin Lego, Joseph Peregoy, Amos Pilgrim, William Winchester, to name a few, all arrived in Maryland as servants. They all served their time, married, established families, and, except for Chamness and Pilgrim, stayed in Maryland.

A. Roger Ekirch, in Bound for America: The Transportation of British Convicts to the Colonies, 1718-1775 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), discussed the practice of transporting felons. He pointed out the alarm felt by Maryland colonists over the arrival of these convicts, who, it was feared, would bring gaol fever and other pestilence and vicious habits (Ekirch:135, 137).

Convicts were employed for their various skills. Many of them were purchased to labor in the ironworks (Ekirch:144-145). Ekirch did attempt to trace 145 convicts named

in Kent County records but was able to identify only five. None were well to do. He also attempted to trace an additional 395 males imported into Kent and Queen Anne's counties. Only eight could be traced (Ekirch:180-181).

My own research has revealed that a number of early inhabitants in Baltimore County started life in Maryland as detainees "at His Majesty's Pleasure." Sentenced to death for what were often very minor crimes, convicted felons were allowed to choose the option of transportation. Once they had served their time, many established themselves, acquired land by patent, purchase, or lease, and settled down to raise families.

Few scholars have attempted to trace the subjects of their studies after their subjects' term of service was ended. I wanted to do just that. In gathering data for this book, I made a detailed study of 549 such individuals, 17 of whom were convicts. I found that 104 (almost 19%) completed their service and established families that prospered enough to have grandchildren, and 89 (16%) owned land.  I didn't just want to compile genealogical data. I wanted to find out what kind of people these immigrants were. I broke them down into age, gender, and literacy categories. Category I comprised literate males; category 2 comprised males who were known to have only made their mark rather than write their names; category 3 comprised literate females; category 4 comprised illiterate females. Of 118 literate males, 26 had grandchildren; 330 illiterate males produced 87 grandchildren. Women were harder to trace unless I could find out whom they married. Of three literate females, one had grandchildren; 81 females made their marks, and of these four had grandchildren.

Turning to jobs, I tracked those who: (a) had no job, (b) were unskilled or laborers, (c) engaged in agriculture, (d) were artisans, such as spinsters, (e) those in service, such as coachmen or grooms, and finally (f) those who might be considered of the professional class. 1 found that 359 men and 72 women arrived in Maryland with no job designation; 15 men and no women were designated as "unskilled" or laborers; 15 men and no women were designated as agricultural laborers; 38 men and I I women were designated as artisans: three men were designated as coachmen or grooms; 13 men were designated as professionals or had jobs that required "book learning."

Having long been interested in overseas origins, 1 wanted to see what could be found about this topic. 1 was able to determine at least the parents of 55 men and six women and the place of origin of 239 men and 18 women.

One of my major areas of interest was what happened to these servants after they arrived. 1 tabulated how many: 192 men and two women could be located in a specific county; 1 found 144 men and I 1 women who were married; 142 men and seven women had children (in or out of wedlock); 60 men and one woman were creditors to someone else, which meant that they had reached a degree of financial stability enabling them to loan money. One man served as a vestryman; eight men held civil office; three men served in the military.

Fifty-eight men and two women performed some neighborly service such as witnessing a will or serving as guardian to minor children; 38 men performed some community service such as signing a petition or appraising estates; 49 men and seven women were summoned to civil or criminal court; 108 men left an estate at death, and eight moved to another colony.

The families included in this volume started their life in Maryland as debtors, either to the individuals who paid their way or to society for some crime they had committed.

Whatever their reasons for coming, they had to endure a long and difficult ocean voyage; they had to survive the first year of a different climate; they had to serve their time, and they had to establish themselves financially so they could begin a family. They had strength-physical and emotional, and, they had the determination to do well. Following the lives of these individuals has not always easy. Sometimes the name might be transcribed one way in a given source and transcribed differently elsewhere. Servant William Muddy appears elsewhere as William Moody. Sometimes as in lhe case of William Hunter there appear to be two men with the same name. (see the discussions in the text for the four William Austins and the four Nicholas Bakers). Some individuals may never be fully identified. Research in Calvert County is almost impossible because of the destruction of the colonial records. Women servants who later married may be difficult to trace if there are no extant church records.

This book traces 102 servants and convicts and their descendants to the third generation, and in many cases, beyond. Four of the servants were women. In some cases, the servant left no male descendants and so the descendants of daughters were followed. The female lines that were traced have been noted under the name of the servant."

All text below is directly from these pages. Bracketed words in blue are our comments. Barnes uses the following codes:

A = the Anne Arundel Gentry book as shown

MPL = Land Office Patent Record;

MDTP=Maryland Prerogative Court Testamentary Proceedings. 

BALR=Baltimore County Court Land Records;

INAC=Prerogative Court Inventories and Accounts;

AALR Anne Arundel County Land Records.

Sources: A: Harry Wright Newman. Anne Arundel Gentry. Volume 3. (1979) Repr.: Westminster: Family Line Publications, 1998.

I. THOMAS PHELPS, servant, was transported by Oliver Spry in 1650 (MPL Qo:204, 250, Q:303,386, 4:385-88, R:154a-155a). He married Ellinor [-?-], who married 2nd, by 21 Sep 1674, William Ferguson (MDTP 6:282).

He may be the Thomas Phelps of AA Co. who claimed land for service by 1668 or 1669 (MPL GG:474, JJA 11:517, 12:423).

On 10 Oct 1672 [sic] Robert Chapman of KE Co. conveyed Wolfs Neck to Thomas "Philips" or Phelps of AA Co. (BALR G#J:161 [Baltimore Co. Land Records], TR#RA:117).

Thomas Phelps was the father of SARAH

Lancelot Todd died leaving a will dated 30 Feb 1690/1 and proved 10 Nov 1691. Wife Sarah was to have his dwelling plantation for life and then it was to pass to son John, who was also to have a moiety of Phelps Rest at age 18. Dau. Mary was to have the residue of Philks' Rest, but if she died without issue, the land was to go to dau. Sarah and then to dau. Elinor. Mary was to have the cow and increase given her by her aunt Elizabeth Howard. Wife was to have her thirds and to be extx. Kinsman Lawrence Todd was to have his freedom at age 18. John Dorsey, Hugh Bawden and John Leary witnessed the will (MWB 2:219).

Lancelot and Sarah (2) (Phelps) Todd were the parents of (A:182): JOHN, m. Katherine Smith, MARY, ELIZABETH; and ELINOR.

3. JOHN TODD, son of Lancelot and Sarah (2), died 1 I July 1733 (A:188). fle married Katherine Smith in 1710 (A:187).

In April 1709 John Todd boatwright, sold 140 a. of Howard's Heirship to Stephen Bentley (AALR PK:32). On 20 May 1729 John Todd, and wife Catherine sold to Thomas John Hammond 316 a. Philks' Rest (AALR RD# 1:236).

There is no record of his estate in the Prerogative Court of Maryland (A:188).

John and Katherine were the parents of the following children, whose births were recorded in St. Margaret's Parish (A:187, AALR: 111, 112, 116): ISABEL, b. 16 Nov 1710, LANCELOT, b. 16 Aug 1713, did not m. Rachel Warfield (See "Stephen Todd, Capt. Lancelot and Elizabeth (Rock-hold) Todd and Notes on Some of Their Descendants," hfGSB 33 (Spring 1992) 333-17.); JOHN, b. 17 Dec 1715; THOMAS, b. 9 March 1715/6, ELIZABETH, b. 15 Dec 1720; HENRY, b. 5 May 1723; RICHARD, b. 18 Nov 1726; and SAMUEL, b. 5 Aug 1729, m. Ann Aldridge on I April 1755.

4. SAMUEL TODD, son of John (3) and Katherine, was born 5 Aug 1729. He married Anne Aldridge on I April 1755 in St. Margaret's Parish (AACR: 133).

Samuel and Ann were the parents of (AACR.135): THOMAS, b. 2 Jan 1755 in St. Margaret's Parish. AA Co.