Mertz Genealogy - Person Sheet
Mertz Genealogy - Person Sheet
My Comments notes for John Wiley
I think the fact that John Sr. and Martha of Anne Arundel County had sons named John and Luke and both John and Luke jointly patented a tract of land in Baltimore County in 1734 and then both leased land from Thomas Brerewood in 1742-1743 gives an indication they were most likely brothers and that suggests the linkage to the Anne Arundel family.
Had it been just John or just Luke who appeared in Baltimore County, I wouldn’t be so sure I could cite an Anne Arundel County birth, but John and Luke stayed paired together and led parallel lives once in Baltimore County.
Had it been just John or just Luke who appeared in Baltimore County, I wouldn’t be so sure I could cite an Anne Arundel County birth, but John and Luke stayed paired together and led parallel lives once in Baltimore County.
Children Names notes for John Wiley
Children Names: John’s wife was named Hannah. Births of some of their children were recorded in the register of St. John’s/St. George’s: Sarah 1733, Benjamin 1734, Abel 1736, John 1737, Anne 1738 and Margaret 1742. His 1743 land-lease named three sons: John Jr. 15, Benjamin 7 and Ablo 5 -- raising the question of whether he had two sons named John or else which fact suggesting John’s birth date or age was typographically incorrect?
To confuse things even further a John Wiley wrote his will 24 Apr 1777 and it proved 7 Jun 1777 and he specifically said his son Benjamin was his only heir. Since Benjamin was Executor, he must have been of age.
But an inventory was filed for a different John Wiley 5 Jul 1766 by Benjamin Wiley, Administrator with John Wiley Sr. and Aquilla Wiley identified as next of kin. It almost seems like it could be the same John except the will was 10 years later and Benjamin would then have been Executor (not Administrator) of John’s estate. It was a different John.
Clearly the John who died in 1766 was a son of John, the one born in about 1702. So he either really did have two sons named John (by two different wives?) or else John 1777 was the son of William (quite possible) or the son of Luke (also I guess possible) or of the next generation (also I guess possible).
The mention of Aquilla on that 1766 inventory also caught my eye. He was another (to us) important member of the Wiley family worthy of consideration. Aquilla Wiley married our ancestor Penelope (Brown) Sparks as her second husband. I don’t know when either Penelope or Aquilla were born but she married first Josias Sparks in 1749, so early 1730’s, if not before, is about right for her. I would think Aquilla was perhaps a few years older.
I believe Aquilla was John’s son -- born, like Luke’s daughter Elizabeth, possibly before the family moved to Baltimore County and began worshipping at St. John’s/St. George’s. Thus neither Aquilla nor Elizabeth were listed in the St. John’s/St. George’s registers. Aquilla could also have been the son of Luke or William but I am basing my conclusion on his mention with John Sr. as next of kin on that inventory.
There is no question Aquilla was of this family. Consider that in 1787, Benjamin Wiley conveyed the tract called Lukes, which Luke Wiley had acquired in 1739 from Thos Brerewood, to Aquilla Wiley. Benjamin had acquired it from William Wiley, son and heir of Luke, in 1780. Later that same year, Aquilla conveyed it to Benjamin Anderson Jr.
To confuse things even further a John Wiley wrote his will 24 Apr 1777 and it proved 7 Jun 1777 and he specifically said his son Benjamin was his only heir. Since Benjamin was Executor, he must have been of age.
But an inventory was filed for a different John Wiley 5 Jul 1766 by Benjamin Wiley, Administrator with John Wiley Sr. and Aquilla Wiley identified as next of kin. It almost seems like it could be the same John except the will was 10 years later and Benjamin would then have been Executor (not Administrator) of John’s estate. It was a different John.
Clearly the John who died in 1766 was a son of John, the one born in about 1702. So he either really did have two sons named John (by two different wives?) or else John 1777 was the son of William (quite possible) or the son of Luke (also I guess possible) or of the next generation (also I guess possible).
The mention of Aquilla on that 1766 inventory also caught my eye. He was another (to us) important member of the Wiley family worthy of consideration. Aquilla Wiley married our ancestor Penelope (Brown) Sparks as her second husband. I don’t know when either Penelope or Aquilla were born but she married first Josias Sparks in 1749, so early 1730’s, if not before, is about right for her. I would think Aquilla was perhaps a few years older.
I believe Aquilla was John’s son -- born, like Luke’s daughter Elizabeth, possibly before the family moved to Baltimore County and began worshipping at St. John’s/St. George’s. Thus neither Aquilla nor Elizabeth were listed in the St. John’s/St. George’s registers. Aquilla could also have been the son of Luke or William but I am basing my conclusion on his mention with John Sr. as next of kin on that inventory.
There is no question Aquilla was of this family. Consider that in 1787, Benjamin Wiley conveyed the tract called Lukes, which Luke Wiley had acquired in 1739 from Thos Brerewood, to Aquilla Wiley. Benjamin had acquired it from William Wiley, son and heir of Luke, in 1780. Later that same year, Aquilla conveyed it to Benjamin Anderson Jr.