Elizabeth Hooton

by Emily Manners

HOOTON DESCENDANTS

The materials with which to re-erect the house of Hooton are scattered and difficult to identify; the frequent use of the same fore-name is a source of danger; but we venture to place before our readers such facts as at present see the light, in the hope that later research will be aided thereby.

Samuel Hooton

Samuel, son of Oliver and Elizabeth Hooton, was baptized at Ollerton in 1633.

The hand of persecution rested upon him in early life; we find him in prison in Nottingham in 1660 for refusing to take the Oath of Allegiance,[150] and in Leicester in 1662 he was in prison with George Fox and others,[151] being “cast into yᵉ Dungeon amongst yᵉ felons. There was hardeley roome to lye downe they [the prisoners] were soe thronge.”[152] Before reaching the age of thirty he was the objective of Muggletonian curses,[153] as was his mother later; and eight years after, in 1670, as recorded by Besse,[154] restraints were laid upon his goods “for the Cause of religiously Assembling to worship God.”

On the 30th of November, 1670, Samuel Hooton married Elizabeth Smedley, both of Skegby, at the home of the bridegroom’s mother. There were two children born at Skegby, Oliver[155] in 1671 and Elizabeth in 1673.

Of his religious service we have found nothing before his departure for New England early in 1666, as related ante, and the next reference is dated two years later, May, 1668: “one Samuel, son of old Elizabeth Hooten,” is mentioned among “those that labour in the work of the ministry.”[156]

Towards the close of 1670, among signatories to An Appeal from Nottinghamshire, occurs the name Samuel Hooton.

In the Minute Book of Nottinghamshire Quarterly Meeting, at the date, 26 x. (Dec.) 1670, the same date on which his mother wrote the letter given ante, the word “backslider” is written beside the name of Samuel Hooton (see photo. facsimile, p. 75). This was probably done a few years later in connection with the passing of the following minutes by the Nottinghamshire Q.M.:

Nine & Twentith Meeting

At the Quarterly Meeting at Maunsfeild the 29ᵗʰ day of first month 1675.

Exhortation the 1ˢᵗ time

Robert Grace & Thomas ffarnsworth Exhorted Sammuell Hooten for paing of Tyths, as to that he would giue noe Answer but was found very scornefull.

Exhortation the 2ⁿᵈ time.

Georg Cockram, & Mathias Brackney Exhorted Sammuell Hooten for paing of Tyths, his answer was, he was neuer conuienced in his conscience but that they ought to be payed, it was spoken to him as that he did beare his testimoney against them and suffered the spoyling of his goods for his Testimony he said that he did it out of the strength of his owne will.

Agreed that a Testimonie be drawne up Against the Spirit that Leads Sammuell Hooten To pay tythes (& justifie his paying of them) and to be giuen him by Robert Grace and William Malson, a Coppy as followeth:

“A Testimonie from the people of god (in scorne called Quakers) Against Tythes & Tithe takers & all that pay them in Generall (whoe denie Christ Jesus come in the flesh—who hath Ended the Law & the Changable preisthood, and is becom the unchangable high preist over the house of god for Euer) But more Especialy against the Spirit that now acts in & by Sammuell Hooten.

“Whereas Sammuell Hooten hath Long beene a professor of gods blessed truth and hath borne a Larg verball Testimony thereunto & not onely soe but hath suffered much thereby, by all which according to outward Apearance he was Looked upon by many to be a faithfull wittness for god, but Alass as a flourishing tree which brings forth noe good fruite, soe is a profession without the possession of the truth, & as Euery Tree is knowne by his fruite soe is Euery spirit knowne by its Action, and though the said Sammuell hath walked Long in apearance as aboue said, yet hath he Lately brought forth bad fruit to the dishoner of god in paing Tiths to an Jmpropriator and though he hath beene tenderly dealt withall yet he still persists to manetaine the thing as Lawfull, soe that wee are constrained for the truth sake to giue forth this testimony against that Spirit that Led him to pay tiths (and plead for them) and doe foreuer judg it, & Condemne it in him or in whome-soeuer it is found, being the same Spirit with them that takes Tithes by whome many of our deare friends haue suffered Jmprisonment unto death & sealed there testimoney with there Bloud, and this is to goe forth into the world that truth may be cleared, & all false Reports stopped & Judged, who now say we alow what we formerly declared against, noe more but in true Loue to all people we Reste.”

ffrom the Quarterly Meeting at Maunsfeild, the 29ᵗʰ day of the 1ˢᵗ month 1675.

It is possible that the family emigrated to the Western World. Mrs. Amelia Mott Gummere, of Haverford, Pa., contributes the following, which may refer to the above Samuel:

“Elizabeth Hooton, wife of Samuel Hooton, of Shrewsbury, New Jersey, with her daughter Elizabeth, wife of Thomas Hillborne, were appointed guardians of Samuel Hooton, when the latter became insane in 1694. Thomas Hillborne and Elizabeth Hooton, both of Shrewsbury, N.J., were married 12th December, 1688, at the house of her mother, Elizabeth Hooton. The original marriage certificate was in the possession of Thomas Darlington, of Birmingham, Pa., in 1863.”

Of the Hootons of N.J., Mrs. Kate B. Stillé wrote in the Jnl. F.H.S. iv. 50: “Their descendants hold the land near Burlington and Evesham, which was bought from the Indians.”

Elizabeth Hooton, Jr., Afterwards Lambert.

The marriage of the younger Elizabeth with Thomas Lambert, of Tickhill, 21st of September, 1669, is recorded in the Registers of Nottinghamshire, but there is no entry therein of any children or of the deaths of Thomas and Elizabeth Lambert.

We may hazard the suggestion that emigration to the New World removed their names from the Registers of the Old. In the published New Jersey Archives, first series, vol. xxiii., p. 236, we read:

“1692-3, Feb. 20. Hooton John. Letters of administration on the estate of, formerly granted to Thomas Lambert in behalf of his wife, confirmed, notwithstanding application of Richard & Thomas Hilbourne on behalf of Samuel Hooton for it, based on the order of Gov. Hamilton making Elizabeth, the wife of the said Samuel, Thos. Hilbourne and wife Elizabeth, daughter of Samuel, his guardians during his lunacy (N.J. Arch., vol. xxi., p. 193). John White, attorney for Thos. Lambert, submits the affidavit of John Snowden, to whom John Hooton had said, shortly before his death, he did not intend his brother Samuel should have his plantation, while William Black and John Birch attest that deceased had expressed his intention that John, the son of his brother, Thomas Lambert, should have it. (Burlington Records, p. 18.)”

Oliver Hooton

1. Oliver, son of Elizabeth, is mentioned by Fox in his Journal, under date 1672, and he was apparently at home in England at the time (Camb. Jnl. ii. 213).

His “hystry” is referred to on page 4, also his Certificate concerning George Fox.

He was at Skegby in May, 1666 (page 54).

2. Oliver Hooton, living in Barbados, is referred to in sundry places.

He wrote a Testimony concerning William Sympson (dropping into verse at the close), on the 16th of February, 1670, printed in A Short Relation ... of William Simpson, 1671.

In 1674, he was fined 1,592 lbs. of sugar for “not appearing in Arms.”[157]

Thomas and Alice Curwen visited him, and wrote a letter from his house, dated the 12th February, 1676.[158]

In 1677, with other Friends, he signed an Appeal to Governor Atkins on behalf of sufferers for the Truth.[159]

There is a letter in D.[160] from O. Hooton to George Fox, dated “Barbados yᵉ 8: 2ᵈ mᵒ 1682.” References to the writer’s personal history are wanting, but he writes as one who knew Fox, “from the begining of yᵉ apearance of yᵗ Glorious Day, yᵉ dawnings wherof (in our dayes) first made knowne its Splendor through thee.... I have both loved and honored thee from yᵉ first.” The writer is on the eve of a visit “to see yᵉ new Countreys of new Jarsey and Pensilvania,” but he “cannot say to Setle there.”

There does not appear to be sufficient evidence to state that 1 and 2 are the same persons.

3. The Registers of Mansfield Monthly Meeting record the death of Oliver Hooton, son of Samuel and Elizabeth Hooton, 14 xi. 1671, who died at his parents’ house at “Seckby” and was buried at “Skegby.” See page 81, note 1.

Martha Hooton

The name, Martha Hooton, also appears in the records of Barbados—in 1689 she was fined £4 19s. 0d. “for Default of sending a Man and a Horse armed in to the Troop,”[161] and there is in D. a curious manuscript, being a petition from a slave girl named Mama to obtain the freedom granted by her mistress, Martha Hooton, widow, in her will dated “the third day of the fifth Month ... 1704,” she having died on the 8th September of that year.

Thomas Hooton

1. Thomas, son of Oliver and Elizabeth Hooton, was baptized 1636. Of this son, Mrs. Manners writes: “The late Mary Radley thought that Thomas was an older son of Oliver and Elizabeth Hooton, but I think she must have read this name as ‘Timothy.’ Mrs. Dodsley, who searched the Skegby Parish Registers for me, thinks the name given is ‘Thomas,’ and as I have found no mention of ‘Timothy’ in any of the documents I have searched, I am inclined to think Mrs. Dodsley’s surmise is correct.”

2. According to the Friends’ Registers for the County of Lincoln, Thomas Hooton, of Sibsey [? Sibson], Leicestershire, married Mary Sharp of Barnby at the house of John Pidd, at Barnby, Notts, 1662 xii. 15. The Hooton home in Leicestershire was Sileby, and the home of the bride, Barnby, is not far distant from Ollerton, the Notts Hooton home.

3. The following extracts have been taken from the Minutes of Nottinghamshire Q.M.:

Thirteth Meeting

At the Quarterly Meeting at Maunsfeild the 28ᵗʰ day of the 4ᵗʰ month 1675.

Agreed that William Malson Robert Grace Francis Clay, & Mathias Brackney, doe consider with Thomas Hooton about the Repairing of Joseph Roberts house.

One and Thirteth Meeting

At the Quarterly Meeting at Maunsfeild the 27ᵗʰ day of the 7ᵗʰ month 1675.

It is Agreed that friends at the monthly meeting belonging to Maunsfeild put an End to the buseniss betwixt Thomas Hooton and friends, About Joseph Roberts house & ground.

Six & Thirteth Meeting

At the Quarterly Meeting at Nottingham the 28ᵗʰ day of the 10ᵗʰ month 1676.

Paid out of the publique Stocke for the Reparing of Joseph Roberts house the sume of £2: 10: 6.

4. At a Quarterly Meeting held at Lincoln, 27 x. 1693, the following minute was made: “At this meeting Thomas Hooton sent Twenty Shillings to be disposed of this Meeting received and disposed of at this accordingly.”

5. There was a Thomas Hooton of London, of whom more is known. He and his family emigrated to New Jersey. See Besse’s Sufferings; Clement’s Settlers in West New Jersey, 1877, p. 301; The Friend (Phila.), lxxvii. (1903), p. 52; New Jersey Archives.

John Hooton

The following is from the Minutes of the Nottinghamshire Q.M.:

Seauen Twentith Meeting

At the Quarterly meeting at Maunsfeild, the 28ᵗʰ day of the 7ᵗʰ moᵗʰ 1674.

Exhortation the first time—

Georg Corkram & Mathias Brackney exhorted John Hooton for paying of Tyths, his answer was that if they take it he would not hinder them and that he had as good pay tythes as pay Rente for them.

Eight and Twentith Meeting

At the Quarterly Meeting at Maunsfeild, the 28ᵗʰ day of the 10ᵗʰ month 1674.

Exhortation the Second time

Robert Grace & Thomas ffarnsworth Exhorted John Hooton for paing of Tythes, & his Answer was, he was not fully conuinced, but that it was the Jmpropriators Right or due after they had set there marke in it and he said if he found anything in himselfe that did oppose it for the time to come he hoped he should be faithfull to it, And he was Lowe & tender.

One and Thirteth Meeting

At the Quarterly Meeting at Maunsfeild the 27ᵗʰ day of the 7ᵗʰ month 1675.

Exhortation the 3ʳᵈ time.

Francis Clay, and Robert Grace Exhorted John Hooton for paing of tyths, his Answer was that he found that it was not right to be paied, neither did he jntend to pay any more but he said his seruants did Leaue some contrary to his order, and he was found very tender.

For John Hooton, of N.J., see under [Elizabeth Hooton], aft. Lambert.

Josiah Hooton

Of Josiah Hooton, mentioned on page [3], nothing further appears.

JUDGE ENDICOTT (p. [50])

“It was not the people of Massachusetts—it was Endicott and the Clergy”—who persecuted the Quakers.—John Fiske, Beginnings of New England, 1895.