XIXConclusions

Illustration 74.—Left, blacksmith’s hammer. One-half. (USNM 59.2081.)Illustration 75.—Center, iron wrench. One-half. (USNM 60.91.)Illustration 76.—Right, iron scraping tool (fig. 89b). One-half. (USNM 60.133.)

Illustration 77.—Left, bit or gouge chisel (seefig. 89c). One-half. (USNM 59.1644.)Illustration 78.—Right, jeweler’s hammer. Same size. (USNM 59.1664.)

One fine tool is from the equipment of a jeweler or a clockmaker (USNM 59.1664,ill. 78). It is a very small hammer with a turned, bell-shaped striking head. Originally balanced by a sharp wing-shaped peen, which was, however, badly rusted and which disintegrated soon after being found, the tool has atubular, tinned, sheet-iron shaft handle which is secured by a brass ferrule to the head and brazed together with brass. The lower end is plugged with brass, where a longer handle perhaps was attached. In 1748 Sydenham & Hodgson, through William Jordan, imported for Mercer “A Sett Clockmakers tools.” This entry is annotated, “Return’d to MrJordan.” Although the hammer cannot be related to this particular set of tools, the ledger item suggests that fine work like clockmaking may have been conducted at Marlborough. This tool may have been used in the process.

Figure 90.—Scythefound against outside of east wall, Structure H.

FARMING, HORSE, AND VEHICLE GEAR

Illustration 79.—Wrought-iron colter from plow. One-fourth. (USNM 60.88.)Illustration 80.—Hook used with wagon or oxcart gear. One-half. (USNM 60.9.)Illustration 81.—Left, bolt with wingnut. One-half. (USNM 60.145.)Illustration 82.—Right, lashing hook from cart or agricultural equipment. One-half. (USNM 59.2030.)

The 1771 inventory is in some ways a more significant summary of 18th-century plantation equipment than are the artifacts found at Marlborough, since its list of tools is longer than the list of tool artifacts and is pin-pointed in time. However, artifacts define themselves concretely and imply far more of such matters as workmanship, suitability to purpose, source of origin, or design and form, than do mere names. The Marlborough tools and equipment, moreover, correspond, as far as they go, very closely with the items in the inventory, thus becoming actualities experienced by us tactually and visually.

For instance, the inventory lists 22 plows at Marlborough. Among the finds is an iron colter from acolonial plow in which the colter was suspended from the beam and locked into the top of the share (USNM 60.88,ill. 79). The colter is bent and torn from exhaustive use (Chapman, in 1731, fitted a plow “wthIron” for Mercer). From it we learn a good deal about the size of the plow on which it was used and the shallow depth of the furrows it made.

Figure 91.—Farm gear: a, part of collapsible-top fitting from carriage; b, chain, probably from whiffletree; c, part of bridle bit; d, iron stiffener from a saddle; e, worn chain link; f, base of handle of a currycomb; g, rivet and washer; h, piece of iron harness gear; i and j, two horseshoes; and k, chain to which a strap was attached—probably harness gear.

Four chain traces were on the list, one of which is represented by a length of flat links attached to a triangular loop to which the leather portion of the traces was fastened (USNM 60.64,fig. 91b). The halves of two snaffle bits (USNM 59.2078, 60.67,fig. 91c;ill. 87) correspond to an item for eight “Bridle Bitts.” (A “snafflebit” costing 1s. 8d. was among Mercer’s purchases for 1743.) A third bit, crudely made of twisted wire attached to odd-sized rings, is a makeshift device probably dating from the 19th century. Three ox chains listed in the inventory are not distinctly in evidence in the artifacts, although a heavy hook, broken at the shank, is of the type used to fasten an ox chain to the yoke (USNM 60.9,ill. 80).

Illustration 83.—Hilling hoe. One-fourth. (USNM 59.1848.)

Archeological evidence of the two oxcarts and onewagon listed in the inventory is confined to nuts and bolts that might have been used on such vehicles. A long axle bolt (USNM 59.1802) measures 23 inches. A small bolt or staple, split at one end and threaded at the other, has a wingnut (USNM 60.145,ill. 81). A hook with a heavy, diamond-shaped backplate and a bolt hole was perhaps used on a wagon to secure lashing (USNM 59.2030,ill. 82). A heavy, curved piece of iron with a large hole, probably for a clevice pin, appears to be from the end of a wagon tongue, while a carefully made bolt with hand-hammered head (USNM 59.1821) and a short rivet with washer (USNM 59.1881,fig. 91g) in place seem also to be vehicle parts.

Illustration 84.—Iron reinforcement strip from back of shovel handle. One-half. (USNM 59.1847.)

The inventory listed four complete harnesses, the remains of which are probably to be found in four square iron buckles (USNM 59.1644, 59.1901, 60.131,fig. 91h), a brass ring (USNM 59.1678,fig. 83), and an ornamental brass boss (USNM 59.1878,fig. 83j).

Illustration 85.—Half of sheep shears. One-half. (USNM 59.1734.)

Twelve “Swingle trees” (whippletree, whiffletree, singletree) are listed in the inventory. The artifacts include three iron loops or straps designed to be secured to the swingletrees. One (USNM 59.2042,fig. 91b) still has two large round links attached. (In 1731 Chapman fitted ironwork to a swingletree.)

Ten “Hillinghows,” 17 “Weeding hows,” and 8 “Grubbing hows” are listed. In the long Chapman account for 1731 we see that Mercer then purchased “5 narrow hoes” and “2 grubbing hoes.” The only archeological evidence of hoes is a fragmentary broad hoe (probably a hilling hoe) (USNM 59.1848,ill. 83) and the collar of another.

Thirteen axes are listed in the inventory. Again we find Nathaniel Chapman providing a “new axe” in 1731 for five shillings, while William Hunter sold Mercer “2 narrow axes” and “4 Axes” in 1743. One broken ax head occurs among the artifacts, worn back from repeated grinding and split at the eye (USNM 59.1740,fig. 89e).

There were four spades and an iron shovel at Marlborough in 1771. An iron reinforcement from a shovel handle occurred in the site (USNM 59.1847,ill. 84), while a slightly less curved strip of iron may have been attached to a spade handle (USNM 59.1662). Once more in Chapman’s account we find evidence oflocal workmanship in an item for “1 Spade.”

Thirteen scythes were listed in 1771; perhaps the one excavated from the foundation of Structure H on Potomac Creek may have been among these (USNM 59.2400,fig. 90). There were eight sheep shears; half of a sheep shears was found in Structure G (USNM 59.1734,ill. 85). Of the other items on the list, a few, such as stock locks and hammers, have already been mentioned, while the remainder of the list is not matched by artifacts. An item for a chalk-line is supported by a piece of chalk (USNM 59.1683,fig. 84).

Illustration 86.—Animal trap. One-third. (USNM 59.1715.)Illustration 87.—Iron bridle bit (seefig. 91c). Same size.Illustration 88.—Fishhook. One-half. (USNM 59.1681.)Illustration 89.—Brass strap handle (seefig. 83j). Same size. (USNM 59.1736.)

A few specimens are not matched in the inventory. One is a springtrap of hand-forged, hand-riveted iron (USNM 59.1715,ill. 86) for catching animals. Another is a fishhook (USNM 59.1681,ill. 88), possibly one of 95 bought in 1744. An iron stiffener for the framework of a saddle is fitted with 10 rivets forsecuring the leather and upholstery (USNM 59.1847,fig. 91d). The third artifact is an elegantly designed brass fitting for a leather curtain or strap (USNM 59.1736,fig. 83j,ill. 89). It is fitted with a copper rivet at the stationary end for securing leather or cloth; just below the rivet is a recessed groove and shelf, perhaps to receive a reinforced edge; to the lower part of this is hinged a long handle cut in a leaf design. An iron hinge bar is part of the equipment for folding back the top of a chaise (USNM 60.178,fig. 91a). There are several horseshoes, two whole shoes and numerous fragments (fig. 91i and j). Finally, the handle shaft and decorative attachment of an iron currycomb (USNM 59.2077,fig. 91f) recalls Mercer’s purchase of “1 curry comb and brush” in 1726.

FOOTNOTES:[212]Seymour B. Wyler,The Book of Sheffield Plate(New York: Crown Publishers, 1949), pp. 4-5.[213]Albert H. Sonn,Early American Wrought Iron(New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1928), vol. 2, p. 9.

FOOTNOTES:

[212]Seymour B. Wyler,The Book of Sheffield Plate(New York: Crown Publishers, 1949), pp. 4-5.

[213]Albert H. Sonn,Early American Wrought Iron(New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1928), vol. 2, p. 9.

Almost no exclusively 17th century artifacts were found at Marlborough; at least, there were very few sherds or objects that could not have originated equally well in the 18th century. The exceptions are the following: Westerwald blue-and-white stoneware with gray-buff paste; several sherds of delft and other tin-enameled ware, late 17th century in type, and an early 17th-century terra cotta pipestem. Otherwise, we find a scattering of things belonging to types that occurred in both centuries: North Devon gravel-tempered ware, which was imported both in the late 17th and early 18th centuries; yellow-and-brown “combed” ware, which elsewhere occurs most commonly in 18th century contexts; pewter trifid-handle spoons, the form of which dates from about 1690 but which may have been cast at a later date in an old mold (a wavy-end spoon in the style of 1710 may also have been cast later). Fragments of an onion-shaped wine bottle may date from the first decade of the 18th century, but the presence of such bottles in the Rosewell trash pit shows that bottles, being too precious to throw away, were kept around until they were broken—in the case of Rosewell for 60 or 70 years. Thus the Marlborough sherds cannot be excluded from the Mercer period. The same may be said of a late 17th-century type of fork. Thus, there is virtually no evidence of the Port Town occupation, especially as the few 17th-century artifacts that were found may well have belonged to the Mercers rather than to Marlborough’s previous occupants.

The ceramics and glass are the most readily datable artifacts, and these coincide almost altogether with the period of John Mercer’s lifetime. Common earthenwares are predominantly Tidewater and Buckley types, with a scattering of others, most of which are recurrent among other Virginia and Maryland historic-site artifacts. No distinct type emerges to suggest that there may have been a local Stafford potter. Common stonewares occur in such a variety of types that no source or date can be attributed, although there is some evidence of the work of William Rogers’ shop in Yorktown. Westerwald stonewares are predominantly of the blue-and-gray varieties commonest in the second quarter of the 18th century.

There is only a small quantity of delftware, but a great deal of Chinese porcelain. Evidences are that the first kinds of English refined wares, such as drab stoneware, Nottingham stoneware, and agateware, were used at Marlborough, thus pointing to an awareness of current tastes and innovations. The large quantity of white salt-glazed ware suggests that, although it was a cheap commercial product, it was regarded as handsome and congenial to the environment of a plantation house that was maintained in formal style.

Except for the white salt-glazed ware, which was probably acquired in the 1760’s, most of the table ceramics date from about 1740 to 1760. Bottles and the few datable table-glass fragments are also primarily from this period. Creamwares and late 18th- and early 19th-century whitewares diminish sharply in numbers, reflecting a more austere life atMarlborough in its descent to an overseer’s quarters. Later 19th-century wares are insignificant in quantity or in their relation to the history of Marlborough. Tool and hardware forms are less diagnostic. Most of them correspond to ledger entries and to the 1771 inventory, so, without contradictory evidence, they may be assumed to date from John Mercer’s period.

In general, the artifacts illustrate the best of household equipment available in 18th-century Virginia, and the tools and hardware indicate the extensiveness of the plantation’s activities and its heavy reliance on blacksmith work.

Marlborough’s beginnings as a town in 1691 cast the shape that has endured in a few vestiges even until today. The original survey of Bland and Buckner remains as evidence, and by it we are led to believe that the courthouse was located near the “Gutt” to the west of the town, near a change of course that affected the western boundary and all the north-south streets west of George Andrews’ lots. Archeological excavation in the area disclosed Structure B, which subsequent evidence proved to be the foundation of Mercer’s mansion, built at the pinnacle of his career between 1746 and 1750. No evidence exists that this foundation was associated earlier with the courthouse.

Two years after the second Act for Ports was passed in 1705, the second survey was made and was lost soon thereafter. There is evidence that the house built by William Ballard in 1708, on a lot “ditched in” according to this plat, was also in the vicinity of the courthouse. After Mercer moved into this house in 1726, it became clear that the two surveys were at odds, and a new survey was ordered and made in 1731. The maneuvers which followed make it fairly clear that Mercer’s residence was encroaching upon the two acres that had been set aside for the courthouse, which by Act of Assembly had reverted to the heirs of Giles Brent after the courthouse had burned and been abandoned about 1718. The 1731 plat provided a whole new row of lots along the western boundary of the town, while pushing the original lots slightly to the east. This device would have assured the integrity of the courthouse land, while relieving Mercer of the uncertainty of his title. When Mercer’s petition to acquire Marlborough was submitted in 1747 (the 1731 plat still remained unaccepted), he offered to buy the courthouse land for three times its worth. Since Mercer was guardian of the heir, “Mr. William Brent, the Infant,” he was called upon to testify in this capacity at the hearings on his petition. Thus the courthouse, Ballard’s house, and Mercer’s mansion all appear to have been involved in a boundary difficulty, and we may assume, therefore, that the courthouse during its brief career stood close to the spot where Mercer later built his mansion.

This difficulty, in particular, was influential in determining the shape of the town, the manner in which Mercer developed the property and the peculiarities that made Marlborough unique. It was not until 1755 that he was permitted to acquire all the town and by that time Marlborough’s character had already been fixed. We have seen that its outstanding feature, the mansion, was architecturally sophisticated, that leading craftsmen worked on it, and that it was as highly individualistic as its master. It was lavishly furnished not only with material elegancies but with a library embracing more than a thousand volumes.

Aside from the mansion, the area most actively developed by Mercer lay between it and Potomac Creek, with some construction to the north and the east. In 1731, Mercer built two warehouses which probably stood near the waterside at Potomac Creek where his sloop and schooner and visiting vessels found sheltered anchorage. These burned in 1746, but must subsequently have been rebuilt, since Thomas Oliver in his 1771 report to James Mercer commented thatthe “tobacco houses” must be repaired as soon as possible. They were probably among the buildings that Mercer had constructed up to 1747, when he reported that he had “saved” 17 of the town’s lots by building on them. These lots comprised 8½ acres in the southwest portion of the town.

The windmill was built on land near the river shore, east of the mansion. It was probably located a considerable distance from the shore, although erosion in recent times has eaten back the cliff. In the fall of 1958, half of the stone foundations collapsed, leaving a well-defined profile of the stone construction. Fragments of mid-century-type wine bottles found in the lower course of the stones support other evidence that the mill was built in 1746.

Mercer mentioned his “office” in 1766. This may have been a detached building used for a law office. Oliver in 1771 listed a barn, a cider mill, two “grainerys,” three cornhouses, five stables, and tobacco houses. He mentioned also that “the East Green House wants repairing, the west dowants buttments as a security to the wall on the south side.”

Besides the malthouse and brewhouse built in 1765 (which may have been situated at Structure H and the 100-foot-long stone-wall enclosure attached to Wall A), John Mercer in his 1768 letter mentioned “Cellars, Cooper’s house and all the buildings, copper & utensil whatever used about the brewery,” as well as the “neat warm” house built for the brewer. When the property was advertised in 1791, “Overseers houses,” “Negroe quarters,” and “Corn houses” also were mentioned.

The development of the area in the southwest portion of the plantation probably sustained—or established for the first time—the character originally intended for Marlborough Town. The situation of the mansion was undoubtedly affected by this, as indeed must have been the whole plantation plan. The archeological evidence alone shows that the plan was abnormal in terms of the typical 18th-century Virginia plantation. The rectangular enclosure formed by the brick walls east of the mansion doubtless framed the formal garden over which the imported English gardener, William Black, presided. It connected at the northwest with the kitchen in such a way that the kitchen formed a corner of the enclosure, becoming in effect a gatehouse, protecting the mansion’s privacy at the northwest from the utilitarian slave quarter and agricultural precincts beyond. Walls A-I and A-II, however, related the mansion directly to this plantation-business area and caused it to serve also as a gate to the enclosure.

The position of the kitchen dependency northwest of the house is the only suggestion of Palladian layout, other than the garden. The southern aspect of the house and the rigid boundary to domestic activity imposed by Walls A-I and A-II probably prevented construction of a balancing unit to the southwest. Slave quarters, stables, and perhaps the barn apparently were located to the north.

Since it was not until 1755 that Mercer came into full title to the town, the town plan and its legal restrictions were influential in determining the way in which the plantation was to grow. The house and the surrounding layout were, therefore, wholly peculiar to the special circumstances of Marlborough and probably also to the individuality of its owner. The approach to the house from the waterside was to the south end of the building, leading up to it by the still-existing road from the creek and along the old “Broad Street across the Town,” which probably bordered Walls A-I and B-I. The mansion thus had a little of the character of a feudal manor house, as well as some of the appearance of an English townhouse that abuts the street, with the seclusion of its yards and gardens defended by walls. In many respects it only slightly resembled, in its relationship to surrounding structures, the more representative plantations of its period.

The house was well oriented to view, ventilation, and dominant location. The veranda, which afforded communication from one part to another out-of-doors, as well as a place to sit, was exposed to the prevailing southwesterly summer winds. In the winter it was equally well placed so as to be in the lee of northeast storms sweeping down the Potomac. The view, hidden today by trees, included Accokeek Creek and a lengthy vista up Potomac Creek. Presumably, a road or driveway skirted the kitchen at the west and perhaps ended in a driveway in front of the house. The gate in Wall E south of the kitchen would have been a normal entrance for horses and vehicles.

Within the garden was the summerhouse built by Mercer in 1765. From the east windows and steps of the house and from the garden could be seen the Potomac, curving towards the bay, and the flailing “drivers” of the windmill near the Potomac shore.

The excavated and written records of Marlborough are a microcosm of Virginia colonial history. They depict the emergence of central authority in the 17thcentury in the establishment of the port town as a device to diversify the economy and control the collecting of duties. In the failure of the town, they demonstrate also the failure of colonial government to overcome the tyranny of tobacco and the restrictive policies of the mother country. They go on to show in great detail the emergence in the 18th century of a familiar American theme—the self-directed rise of an individual from obscure beginnings to high professional rank, social leadership, personal wealth, and cultural influence. They demonstrate in Mercer’s career the inherent defects of the tobacco economy as indebtedness mounted and economic strains stiffened. In Mercer’s concern with the Ohio Company and westward expansion they reflect a colony-wide trend as population increased and the need grew for more arable land and areas in which to invest and escape from economic limitations. They show that the war with the French inevitably ensued, with its demands on income and manpower, while following this came the enforcement of trade laws and the immediate irritants which led to rebellion. So Marlborough gives a sharp reflection of Virginia’s history prior to the Revolution. It was touched by most of what was typical and significant in the period, yet in its own details it was unique and individual. In this seeming anomaly Marlborough is a true illustration of its age, when men like Mercer were strong individuals but at the same time typifying and expressing the milieu in which they lived.

Mercer’s rise to wealth and leadership occurred at a time when favorable laws held out the promise of prosperity, while boundless lands offered unparalleled opportunities for investment. It remained for those best able to take advantage of the situation; Mercer’s self-training in the law, his driving energy, and his ability to organize placed him among these. The importance of his position is signified by the justice-ship that he held for so many years in Stafford County court; the brick courthouse on the hill overlooking the upper reaches of Potomac Creek was the architectural symbol of this position. Although most of his income was derived from legal practice, it was his plantation that was the principal expression of his interests and his energies. Mercer was in this respect typical of his peers, whose intellectual and professional leadership, on the one hand, and agricultural and business enterprise, on the other, formed a partnership within the individual. The great plantation house with its sophisticated elegancies, its outward formalities, and its rich resort for the intellect in the form of a varied library, was the center and spirit of the society of which men like Mercer were leaders. With the death of the system came the death of the great house, and the rise and fall of Marlborough symbolizes, as well as anything can, the life cycle of Virginia’s colonial plantation order.

[Stafford County Will Book—Liber Z—1699-1709—p. 168 ff.]

An Inventory of the Estate of George Andrews taken the (six) October 1698. 6 small feather beads with Bolsters 5 Ruggs 1 Turkey Work 1 Carpet 1 old small Flock Bed boulster Rugg 4 pair Canvis Shooks 2 pair Curtains and valleins 4 Chests 1 old Table 1 Couch 1 Great Trunk 1 small ditto 1 Cupboard 2 Brass Kettles 1 pieis Dowlas 2 spits 1 Driping pan & fender 6 Iron Pots 5 pair Pot-hooks 6 dishes 1 bason 2 dozen of plates 4 old chairs made of kain 9 head horses + mares 3 Colts of 1 year old each 4 head Oxen 2 Chaine Staples 8 Yoaks 7 Cows + 1 Bull 2 barron cows 2 five year old stears 6 Beasts of a year old each 30 head of sheep being yews and lambs 4 Silver spoons 1 Silver dram cup 1 Lignum vitae punch Bowl 1 Chaffing Dish 1 Brass Mortar & Iron Pestle 2 ditto & 1 great iron pestle 1 broad ax 2 narrow Do1 Tennant Saw 1 Whipsaw 1 drawing knife 2 augurs 1 Frow 1 pair Stilliards & too with Canhooks 1 Saddle & Curb bridle 3 servants 2 Men 1 Woman 3 years + 6 months to serve 1 Welshman 4 years to serve the other servant named Garrard Moore 13 months to serve 1 old Chest drawers 1 old plow 1 old pair Cart wheels wtha Cart 2 old Course Table Cloths & 8 Napkins 4 Towels 1 GallnPott 1 Paile Pott 2 Chamber Potts 2 tankards a parsil of old Bottles 1 old Looking Glass 1 Grid Iron 1 Flesh fork & Skimmer 1 pair Spit hooks Iron square 3 pair Iron tongs 2 Nutmeg graters 3 Candlesticks 1 old Great Boat old Sails Hawsers Graplin 1 Box Iron 1 Warming pan 2 pair Pot racksJurat in CuriaReturned byJohn Waugh Junr

Jurat in Curia

Returned byJohn Waugh Junr

[Stafford County Will Book—Liber Z—1699-1709—p. 158-159.]

Estate of Peter Beach. Inventory taken by William Downham, Edward Mountjoy, WmAllen “having mett together at the house of Mr. Peter Beach.”

“Dan’l BeachAlex and Mary Waugh executors Nov. 20, 1702”

To 4 three year old heifers. at 350 Tobop1400To 1 stear 6 years old at 600 To 5 Do4 year old at 20002600To the 2 yr old at 2800 To 2 Bulls at 6003400To 8 Cows & Calves at 4000 To 2 Barron Cows 9004900To 1 Mare & Mare Filly at 1200 To 1 two year old horse 4001600To 1 Do5 years old at 1000 To 1 very old Doat 1501150To 1 Feather bedd +; Bedstead + furniture 1500 To 1 do at 12002700To 2 Doat 2000 To 1 Old Flock Bed + Feather pillow at 3002300To one servant Bot 9 years to serve 3000 to 4 stoolth 8 Chairs @ 160-3160To 9 old flagg & boarded Chairs 130 To 1 small old table & stool 100230To 1 old Standing Cupboard 150 To Looking Glass at 30100To 1 pair small Stilliards at 60 to 1 Iron Spit + Dripping pan at 80140To 1 pair old Tongs and fire shovel at 30 To 2 Ladles + Chafing Dish 5080To 1 old Narrow Ax + frow at 30 To 1 Box Iron & Heaters at 2555To a passel of Glass Bottles at 40 To a Parcel of old Iron at 5090To 8 old Pewter Dishes and three Basons Ditto at228To 1 small Table Cloth + 6 Napkins at 50 to 4 Tinpanns 1 Copper Sawspan at 150100To 2 2 quart Potts 1 Pewter Tankard Old20To 1 old Warming Pan 20 To 1 Brass candlestick 1 Skimmer Old 1535To pasl of Earthen Ware 50 To 3 Iron Potts 2 prpotthooks 250 To 1 Brass Kettle at 300600To 1 Brass kettle at 60 To 23 pewter plates old 110 To 4 old Chests 250420To 1 Frying Pan 1 Meal Sifter 15 To a parcel of old Tables and Cyder Cask 350365To 1 Pewter Sheaf[214]50 To 1 old Gun 100 To 2 Bibles at 40190To 1 Pewter Chamber Pott 10 To 3 Pewter Salts 1 Dram Cup 1525To 1 pair Iron Spansils[215]at50Total [sic]26010

Daniel Beach was janitor of the Court House, being paid 200 pounds tobacco annually 1700-1703:

1700 and 1701—“To Daniel Beach for cleaning the Court House”1702 and 1703—“To Daniel Beach for Sweeping the Courthouse.”

FOOTNOTES:[214]A cluster or bundle of things tied up together; a quantity of things set thick together. [New Oxford Dictionary][215]SPANCEL: A rope or fetter for hobbling cattle, horses, etc.; especially, a short, round rope used for fettering the hind legs of a cow during milking. [New Oxford Dictionary]

FOOTNOTES:

[214]A cluster or bundle of things tied up together; a quantity of things set thick together. [New Oxford Dictionary]

[215]SPANCEL: A rope or fetter for hobbling cattle, horses, etc.; especially, a short, round rope used for fettering the hind legs of a cow during milking. [New Oxford Dictionary]

[From Ledger B, p. 1]

£s.d.1725October12thTo Ballns. yrAccottBook A for (75)3103To a Sword & Belt14To 1 Snuff8To 1 best worsted Cap5To 1 prNeats Leather Saddlebags129To 2 silk Romall handkerchiefs @ 3/6To 1 prSeersuckers113To 1 fine Hat No7136To Cornelius Tacitus in fol.713thTo 1 prmens white topt Gloves;16To 50 4pNails214thTo 5¼ ydsBroadcloath at 9/273To 7 ydsShalloone at 2/14To 8 Sticks Mohair at 3d2To 7 doz Coatbuttons at 7½d44½To 4 doz. breast doat 3¾13To 3 hanks Silk at 9d23To 1¼ ydsWadding at 10d13To 1 prStone buttons set in Silver515thTo 1 prlarge Scissars7½To 1 p colldbinding17½To 1 p holland tape16To 6 ells broad Garlix NoF at 2/11176To 1 prwomens wash gloves1619thTo 1 ydblack ribband10To 1 horn & Ivory knife & fork121To 1 fine hat No7136To ¼ ydPersian13To 2 ydssilk Ferritting at 5d1022To Cash won on the Race against Cobler529To ¼ ydbroadcloath23To 1 qtRum13To a Sword & Belt143To Club in Punch2To 1£sugar & 1 qtRum230To Club with Quarles9Novbr20To 1 quire best paper16Decr13To 1 narrow axe2316To 1200 10dNails530To 1 prShooebuckles7½To 100 6dNails9To yrStafford Clks notes 162£tobo13Feb5To Cash on AcctThomas Harwood10Mar5To Do18611½21To 1 qtRum & 1£Sugar23Apl3To 2 qtsDo& 1 ydMuslin626To 1 qtDoto ThosBenson16Septr16thTo ½ ydDruggett110½To 2 ydsWadding16To pdfor rolling down Thomson’s hhd. tobo10£19101

[From Ledger B]

Back to Index Next