ROGERS-L Archives

From: <>
Subject: ADEUSTONE/ROGERS, Pt 1 of 5
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 1996 01:13:30 -0400

Hi everyone,

Chan Edmondson thought it would be a good thing if I uploaded the text from
the National Society of Genealogy Quarterly, Vol. 77, issue 2, which has the
story of the Adeustone ROGERS name in it. It is a very interesting example
of how one person's self-interest can affect dozens of descendants over
several generations. This first John ADEUSTONE insisted that no one could
inherit his land unless they carried HIS name, even if they were his
daughter's descendants and she had married a man named John ROGERS. You can
imagine what happened after that. The NSGQ did a very good idea of
documenting the story. Hope you enjoy it. It'll be in more than one piece
because of it's length.

This was originally typed in by Ellie Swanger. Thanks, Ellie. That was a
LOT of work.

Regards,
Pat Marcum
102 Walnut Cove
Mt. Holly, NC 28120
(704) 827-4357
==============================================================================

NATIONAL GENEALOGICAL SOCIETY QUARTERLY
Volume 77 - June 1989 - Number 2
(Spellings are typed as found in the article.)

Part 1

"The Adeustone-Rogers Families of Virginia:
Tracing a Colonial Lineage through Entailment and Naming Patterns"
by Margaret Hickerson Emery, C.G.

During the one hundred years preceding the American Revolution there were
born in York Co. Virginia, at least a dozen individuals who bore the
"unusual" name Adeustone, (var. Aduston, etc. ) Rogers. Researchers have
frequently considered themselves fortunate upon discovering descent from one
or another of these individuals--assuming that the task of linking
generations in a well-to-do family with such as "uncommon" name would be a
relatively simple one. In the end, most attempts have generated a quagmire
of confusion.

One such individual whose ancestry has eluded genealogists is the William
Aduston Rogers, who made his last will and testament in York County on 5 Dec.
1784--a Revolutionary War patriot who has attracted much interest among
Rogers researchers. The riddle that this man posed has been solved, and the
key documents which serve to establish his ascending lineage for five
generations also have explained the reason for the proliferation of that
given name throughout so many branches of the York County Rogerses. More
important, those documents and the various Aduston/Adeustone Rogerses who
will be sorted out in this paper also serve as a reminder to the genealogist
of the importance of understanding the legal implications of those
"commonplace" land records that researchers work with daily.

On 20 July 1778, William Aduston Rogers executed an indenture of sale for a
portion of the property in his possession.

"For and in consideration of the sum of three hundred pounds current
money...Rogers doth...Grant Bargain Sell Alien Release Enfeoff and confirm
unto...Benjamin Wright...his Plantation tract...in the Parish of Yorkhampton
and County of York aforesaid containing by estimation one hundred and ten
acres...bounded by Chisman's Creek up the said Creek westerly to Goose Creek
to a line of marked trees between John Moss and said Land, running an East
Course to a corner Sycamore tree turning a north course to a corner pine
between said Moss and Thomas Smith turning an East course as the road runs
then cornering a South course as the road runs down to a larger Cow Dam at
the head of Prichet's Cove a branch of the said Chisman's Creek which said
Plantation Tract or parcel of Land the said William A. Rogers was seized as
Tenant in fee tail and by an Act of the General Assembly of Virginia the
Entail is (now) docked."

Fee tail or entailment, as defined by Black's Law Dictionary, is the
encumbrance of property with a fixed line of inheritable succession, limited
to certain classes of particular heirs. Therefore, the above deed indicates
that William Aduston Rogers had not purchased the land he sold on this day in
1778; he had inherited it under specific terms that would have been
stipulated in the will of a person whose identity, at this point, cannot be
know. Worse, it cannot be said that William Aduston Rogers was actually
named in the will of that person who entailed the land, nor can it be said
how many generations of entailment may have existed prior to the time that
the property passed into the hands of this man who was finally permitted to
break the fee tail in 1778.

Given the nature of Virginia's land records and their legal descriptions,
attempts to backtrack chains of title in the colonial period often prove
futile. They would have in the present case, given the number of generations
over which the property changed hands without benefit of a formally executed
transfer. However, as the present writer proceeded with conventional
research--gathering and analyzing all known records on the York County
Rogerses as well as ;their kin and acquaintances by other names--it was the
ever-present entailment of this property which permitted the accurate
identification of the line of ascent of this William Aduston Rogers. That
thread of entailment, binding a certain class of heirs to the parcel of land
on Chisman's Creek, will weave throughout the following family
reconstruction.

GENERATION ONE:
John Adeustone (var. Adleston, Aduston, Adison), whose eccentricity made his
name a popular one in York County, first appears in Virginia's extant records
in 1647--about the time that he married Joane, the recent widow of Thomas
Trotter. The Trotter property he thus acquired was soon augmented by other
land granted to Adeustone individually and in partnership with Lt. Col. John
Cheeseman, Esquire--including some 300 acres that are of particular
importance to this study. Under grant of 13 May 1654, the latter land was
partially described as:

"lying on the north side of Cheesemans Creek and on the Bay tree neck,
beginning at a corner tree of John Adleston's development, running by marked
trees being the dividing line between said Cheeseman & Adlestone & land of
Mr. Beale & John Clerkson."

The patent to this property was renewed by "Cheeseman & Adlestone" on 18
March 1662, and there is no record of its disposal prior to Adeustone's death
in 1678. Subsequent litigation involving his estate makes it clear that his
half of this tract was indeed the property he encumbered in the will that he
drafted on 19 January 1677/78:

"Touchinge the disposition of my Lands and Tenements, I give and bequeath all
my Lands in Generall unto my livinge wife Joane Adeustone duringe her life
p'vided that she doeth not marry...& after her Decease my will is that the
before Specified Land in Generall shall
be for Adeustone Rogers and the heirs of his body lawfully to be gotten and
if in case ye aforesaid Adeustone Rogers should die before he come to age of
one and twenty that...it returne unto Richard Dixsone, my grand child and the
heirs of his body lawfully to be gotten and if in case he dieth before he
cometh to age that then it Returne to Agnes and Eliz: Dixsone as joynt heirs
and to the heirs of their bodys lawfully to be gotten, provided always where
the name of Adeustone is amongst the afaoresaid Orphans that the said land do
remaine without any trouble or Molestation of any heir whatsoever & if in
case all ye aforesaid Orphans doeth die before they be of age, that then my
will is that it returne unto my daughter Agnes Rogers and the further heirs
of her body lawfully to be gotten provided always that the name of Adeustone
be continued upon ye aforesd Land."

As can be deduced from the portions of the will presented above, John
Adeustone had a daughter but no sons to carry on his name. That daughter
Agnes, who had been married twice, was identified in other provisions of this
will as wife of John Rogers and mother of the young son who was the preferred
heir--preferred obviously because he alone of the grandchildren born at that
time carried the name Adeustone.

Under other terms of this will, John Adeustone explicitly excluded his
son-in-law Rogers from any management of his estate. His "lovinge wife
Joane" was to have all of his "servants and household goods cattle horses
Maires or what things else duringe her life and widowhood," and two friends
were to serve as the executors of his will. However, just as the state of
Virginia ultimately outlawed the entailment that he placed upon his property,
so were his other provisions thwarted. His executors declined to serve. His
"lovinge wife"--who had in earlier years earned notoriety in the court
records for having "absented herself several times from her husband's house,
(refusing) to return"--proceeded in ;1679 to assign the management of
Adeustone's entire estate to that distrusted son-in-law, Rogers. However,
his management did not proceed smoothly. Suits between the two depended from
time to time in the York County courts but were usually dismissed or
nonsuited because of non-appearance of one or the other party. Such attempts
at justice between the two continued until 24 May 170, when Rogers petitioned
for an examination of his accounts in settlement of the estate of Joane
Addustone that he then held in his hands.

Thus, the curtain fell on the lives of John and Joane Adeustone of York
County, Virginia, in the seventeenth century. However, by his last legal
act, Adeustone set the stage for centuries of difficulty in the genealogical
reconstruction of his family. By decreeing that the name Adeustone as a part
of the name of at least two children in every family that might be in line to
inherit the Adeustone property. That is not to say that each male descendant
followed the practice. As was the case in the mother country, in America the
laws of primogeniture were in effect during this period in history, and
younger sons were well motivated to strike out and seek their own fortunes or
remain forever in mediocrity. Thus, as will be shown later, some offspring
left the colony and settled inEngland; others who remained in Virginia
applied their energies and ingenuities to merchandising, warehousing, and
shipping. But the hope of inheritance was sufficiently strong in enough
branches to generate a plethora of Adeustone/Aduston Rogerses in that one
county of York.

Know children of Joane (--?--) by her first husband, Thomas Trotter, were as
follows:
i. William Trotter, born about 1642
ii. Richard Trotter, "younger son" born about 1644, made choice of his
guardian on 26 Oct 1658.
Known children of Joane (--?--) by her second husband John Adeustone, were as
follows:
+ 2 iii. Agnes Adeustone, born 1648, York County; married first (--?--)
Dixon; married second John Rogers.
=============================================================
NATIONAL GENEALOGICAL SOCIETY QUARTERLY

Volume 77 - June 1989 - Number 2

(Spellings are typed as found in the article.)

"The Adeustone-Rogers Families of Virginia:

Tracing a Colonial Lineage through Entailment and Naming Patterns"

by Margaret Hickerson Emery, C.G.

During the one hundred years preceding the American Revolution there were
born in York Co. Virginia, at least a dozen individuals who bore the
"unusual" name Adeustone, (var. Aduston, etc. ) Rogers. Researchers have
frequently considered themselves fortunate upon discovering descent from one
or another of these individuals--assuming that the task of linking
generations in a well-to-do family with such as "uncommon" name would be a
relatively simple one. In the end, most attempts have generated a quagmire
of confusion.

One such individual whose ancestry has eluded genealogists is the William
Aduston Rogers, who made his last will and testament in York County on 5 Dec.
1784--a Revolutionary War patriot who has attracted much interest among
Rogers researchers. The riddle that this man posed has been solved, and the
key documents which serve to establish his ascending lineage for five
generations also have explained the reason for the proliferation of that
given name throughout so many branches of the York County Rogerses. More
important, those documents and the various Aduston/Adeustone Rogerses who
will be sorted out in this paper also serve as a reminder to the genealogist
of the importance of understanding the legal implications of those
"commonplace" land records that researchers work with daily.

On 20 July 1778, William Aduston Rogers executed an indenture of sale for a
portion of the property in his possession.

"For and in consideration of the sum of three hundred pounds current
money...Rogers doth...Grant Bargain Sell Alien Release Enfeoff and confirm
unto...Benjamin Wright...his Plantation tract...in the Parish of Yorkhampton
and County of York aforesaid containing by estimation one hundred and ten
acres...bounded by Chisman's Creek up the said Creek westerly to Goose Creek
to a line of marked trees between John Moss and said Land, running an East
Course to a corner Sycamore tree turning a north course to a corner pine
between said Moss and Thomas Smith turning an East course as the road runs
then cornering a South course as the road runs down to a larger Cow Dam at
the head of Prichet's Cove a branch of the said Chisman's Creek which said
Plantation Tract or parcel of Land the said William A. Rogers was seized as
Tenant in fee tail and by an Act of the General Assembly of Virginia the
Entail is (now) docked."

Fee tail or entailment, as defined by Black's Law Dictionary, is the
encumbrance of property with a fixed line of inheritable succession, limited
to certain classes of particular heirs. Therefore, the above deed indicates
that William Aduston Rogers had not purchased the land he sold on this day in
1778; he had inherited it under specific terms that would have been
stipulated in the will of a person whose identity, at this point, cannot be
know. Worse, it cannot be said that William Aduston Rogers was actually
named in the will of that person who entailed the land, nor can it be said
how many generations of entailment may have existed prior to the time that
the property passed into the hands of this man who was finally permitted to
break the fee tail in 1778.

Given the nature of Virginia's land records and their legal descriptions,
attempts to backtrack chains of title in the colonial period often prove
futile. They would have in the present case, given the number of generations
over which the property changed hands without benefit of a formally executed
transfer. However, as the present writer proceeded with conventional
research--gathering and analyzing all known records on the York County
Rogerses as well as ;their kin and acquaintances by other names--it was the
ever-present entailment of this property which permitted the accurate
identification of the line of ascent of this William Aduston Rogers. That
thread of entailment, binding a certain class of heirs to the parcel of land
on Chisman's Creek, will weave throughout the following family
reconstruction.

GENERATION ONE:

John Adeustone (var. Adleston, Aduston, Adison), whose eccentricity made his
name a popular one in York County, first appears in Virginia's extant records
in 1647--about the time that he married Joane, the recent widow of Thomas
Trotter. The Trotter property he thus acquired was soon augmented by other
land granted to Adeustone individually and in partnership with Lt. Col. John
Cheeseman, Esquire--including some 300 acres that are of particular
importance to this study. Under grant of 13 May 1654, the latter land was
partially described as:

"lying on the north side of Cheesemans Creek and on the Bay tree neck,
beginning at a corner tree of John Adleston's development, running by marked
trees being the dividing line between said Cheeseman & Adlestone & land of
Mr. Beale & John Clerkson."

The patent to this property was renewed by "Cheeseman & Adlestone" on 18
March 1662, and there is no record of its disposal prior to Adeustone's death
in 1678. Subsequent litigation involving his estate makes it clear that his
half of this tract was indeed the property he encumbered in the will that he
drafted on 19 January 1677/78:

"Touchinge the disposition of my Lands and Tenements, I give and bequeath
all my Lands in Generall unto my livinge wife Joane Adeustone duringe her
life p'vided that she doeth not marry...& after her Decease my will is that
the before Specified Land in Generall shall

be for Adeustone Rogers and the heirs of his body lawfully to be gotten and
if in case ye aforesaid Adeustone Rogers should die before he come to age of
one and twenty that...it returne unto Richard Dixsone, my grand child and the
heirs of his body lawfully to be gotten and if in case he dieth before he
cometh to age that then it Returne to Agnes and Eliz: Dixsone as joynt heirs
and to the heirs of their bodys lawfully to be gotten, provided always where
the name of Adeustone is amongst the afaoresaid Orphans that the said land do
remaine without any trouble or Molestation of any heir whatsoever & if in
case all ye aforesaid Orphans doeth die before they be of age, that then my
will is that it returne unto my daughter Agnes Rogers and the further heirs
of her body lawfully to be gotten provided always that the name of Adeustone
be continued upon ye aforesd Land."

As can be deduced from the portions of the will presented above, John
Adeustone had a daughter but no sons to carry on his name. That daughter
Agnes, who had been married twice, was identified in other provisions of this
will as wife of John Rogers and mother of the young son who was the preferred
heir--preferred obviously because he alone of the grandchildren born at that
time carried the name Adeustone.

Under other terms of this will, John Adeustone explicitly excluded his
son-in-law Rogers from any management of his estate. His "lovinge wife
Joane" was to have all of his "servants and household goods cattle horses
Maires or what things else duringe her life and widowhood," and two friends
were to serve as the executors of his will. However, just as the state of
Virginia ultimately outlawed the entailment that he placed upon his property,
so were his other provisions thwarted. His executors declined to serve. His
"lovinge wife"--who had in earlier years earned notoriety in the court
records for having "absented herself several times from her husband's house,
(refusing) to return"--proceeded in ;1679 to assign the management of
Adeustone's entire estate to that distrusted son-in-law, Rogers. However,
his management did not proceed smoothly. Suits between the two depended from
time to time in the York County courts but were usually dismissed or
nonsuited because of non-appearance of one or the other party. Such attempts
at justice between the two continued until 24 May 170, when Rogers petitioned
for an examination of his accounts in settlement of the estate of Joane
Addustone that he then held in his hands.

Thus, the curtain fell on the lives of John and Joane Adeustone of York
County, Virginia, in the seventeenth century. However, by his last legal
act, Adeustone set the stage for centuries of difficulty in the genealogical
reconstruction of his family. By decreeing that the name Adeustone as a part
of the name of at least two children in every family that might be in line to
inherit the Adeustone property. That is not to say that each male descendant
followed the practice. As was the case in the mother country, in America the
laws of primogeniture were in effect during this period in history, and
younger sons were well motivated to strike out and seek their own fortunes or
remain forever in mediocrity. Thus, as will be shown later, some offspring
left the colony and settled inEngland; others who remained in Virginia
applied their energies and ingenuities to merchandising, warehousing, and
shipping. But the hope of inheritance was sufficiently strong in enough
branches to generate a plethora of Adeustone/Aduston Rogerses in that one
county of York.

Know children of Joane (--?--) by her first husband, Thomas Trotter, were as
follows:

i. William Trotter, born about 1642

ii. Richard Trotter, "younger son" born about 1644, made choice of his
guardian on 26 Oct 1658.

Known children of Joane (--?--) by her second husband John Adeustone, were
as follows:

+ 2 iii. Agnes Adeustone, born 1648, York County; married first (--?--)
Dixon; married second John Rogers.

This thread:

• ADEUSTONE/ROGERS, Pt 1 of 5 by <>