Note: The Rootsweb Mailing Lists will be shut down on April 6, 2023. (More info)
RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Total: 2/2
    1. questions
    2. Bruce E. Carpenter
    3. I'm confused. Amos Carpenter claimed that William2 "was in the colony only three years when he was elected to the general Court of Plymouth (Memorial p. 38)." Does this mean that William2 was a representative of Weymouth or does it mean he was a general member of the Plymouth Court? This was I presume before any deliberations for the move to Rehoboth. This whole matter should be gone over carefully in the Plymouth records. Bruce Carpenter

    03/02/2005 03:12:11
    1. Re: [CARPENTER] questions
    2. John Chandler
    3. Bruce wrote: > I'm confused. Amos Carpenter claimed that William2 "was in the colony only > three years when he was elected to the general Court of Plymouth (Memorial > p. 38)." Does this mean that William2 was a representative of Weymouth or > does it mean he was a general member of the Plymouth Court? The Separation of Powers was not practiced in those days. The General Court was both a legislative and a judicial body, and it consisted of elected representatives of the various towns. > presume before any deliberations for the move to Rehoboth. Right. Rehoboth would not have had a representative until after it was officially constituted as a town. > This whole matter > should be gone over carefully in the Plymouth records. Even without perusing the colony records, I can report that Savage says William1 (!) was elected representative in 1641 and 1643. It's clear that either the list of the General Court is found in the Colony records for those years or the Weymouth town records show the election of William Carpenter (or both). It's not clear whether anything in the records identifies the representative as William2. If the only record is the list of members in the Colony records, then there are surely no corroborating details, and probably not even a notation that William was from Weymouth. (Note that Savage thinks it was William1 who died in 1659/60 and supposes that William2's death escaped detection somehow. Although Savage was "clearly" wrong about that identification, this demonstrates how easy it is to go astray when connecting the names in the records to the persons in a genealogy.) John Chandler

    03/02/2005 08:09:50