Capt. Thomas Warren

• Not the son of Robert Warren & Margaret de Burgie. Not the son of The Honorable William Warren, Esquire & Catherine Warren Sewell. *Not the same as Thomas Warren of Ripple
• Not the same as Thomas Warren, Gent.

  ---

Nathan W. Murphy, AG, FASG, BLURRED LINES #1: Disproving the Claimed Kentish Parentage of Thomas' Warren of Surry County, Virginia in The American Genealogist (2021/2022) Vol 92.1:72-7

Thomas Warren (circa 1621-1670), a burgess in Surry County, Virginia, has been presumed since 1954 to be a son of William Warren, gentleman, of Ripple, Kent, by his wife, Catherine (Gookin), with a royal descent published in 1959, and which most recently appeared in 2018 in Gary Boyd Roberts's The Royal Descents of 900 Immigrants.' William Warren of Ripple indeed had a son Thomas, baptized there on 30 January 1624/5. In Virginia, Thomas stated his age as 40 years in a deposition of 3 May 1661, suggesting an approximate birth year of 1621.' It would fit chronologically for the Surry County planter to be the Thomas Warren whose headright Capt. Daniel Gookin claimed in Virginia in the 1640s. Daniel Gookin, from the gentry Gookin fam ily of Kent, was a first cousin of Catherine (Gookin) Warren, wife of William Warren of Ripple. If this solution were correct, Thomas Warren would be a first cousin once removed of Daniel Gookin. But this plausible identity for the Virginia planter is contradicted by evidence from primary sources in England,

The younger of two sons of William Warren of Ripple, Thomas Warren was in line to inherit half of some of his father's lands in Kent "in the nature and tenure of gavelkind," an ancient inheritance custom in Kent by which all sons inherited equal portions of certain types of property, Different response retained different specific customs of gavelkind, apparently derived from practices predating the Norman conquest, William Warren of Ripple, the father, died a lunatic, intestate, about 16367 On 7 May 1647, William's younger brother, John Warren, gentleman, of Gray's Inn, sued William's elder an only surviving son, Albert or Albertus Warren, in Chancery. In John's com plaint, it was recorded that William's only other son was Thomas Warren and further that "[a]bout a year and a half ago the said Thomas Warren d parted this life without any issue of his body lawfully begotten." 998

In 1658 Albert Warren brought a related lawsuit in which he stated that was the "brother and heir of Thomas Warren, late the other son and con of the said William Warren." While no burial or estate document has be found to corroborate the death of Thomas Warren of Ripple apparently late 1645 or early 1646, the possibility that Thomas's uncle John and brother Albert, in these two lawsuits, would have been either deliberately prevaricating or misinformed about the fate of their brother and nephew Thomas Warren cannot be entertained.

The Virginia burgess Thomas Warren possibly belongs elsewhere in same gentry Warren family of Ripple, Kent. The royal descent first published in 1959 and most recently in Roberts's Royal Descents of 900 Immigrants, b ever, would only remain valid for the immigrant if he could be proved to son of one of the brothers of his previously presumed father, William Warren of Ripple: the line in Roberts ascends through William's mother. William Warren of Ripple had two brothers: Thomas Warren, baptized 1603/4, whose fate and place of residence as an adult are unknown, and John Warren of Gray's Inn, baptized 1609/10, one of the litigants mentioned above, whose own estate was administered in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury in 1662,10 John would have been only eleven years old in 1621, the presumed year of the Virginia settler's birth based on his stated age in 1661. Thomas, the middle brother, would have been seventeen, a possible but unlikely age for paternity.. At this time, therefore, the ancestry of Thomas Warren of Surry County, Virginia, must be considered unknown.

---

Name Thomas Warren

Birth 1624 Ripple Court, Kent, England
Not the one Baptised Jan 30, 1624
Not the one with Parents William Warren and Katherine Gookin Warren
Not evidence of birth/baptism record and parents - https://www.genealogy.com/forum/surnames/topics/warren/14545/

Emigration 1640

First Marriage to Alice Powell - born 1626 - James River, Jackson, Virginia Colony - Died 1650 - Surry, Virginia Colony
Children:

1. William Warren died before 24 Sept 1670
2. Alice Warren, b c. 1643; mar Matthias Marriott

Second Marriage to Elizabeth Spencer - born Sep 25, 1654, Surry Co., Virginia - Died - 1655 - Surry, Virginia
Child:

1. Elizabeth Warren; mar John Hunnicutt

Third Marriage to Jane Allen born - Jan 1, 1659, married Mar 24, 1658. Surry Co., Virginia - Death: Apr 21, 1670 "Warren House", Surry Co., Virginia
Children:

1. Thomas Warren, Jr., b 9 Jan 1659/60.
2. Robert Warren
3. Allen Warren
4. William Warren b 1669

https://gw.geneanet.org/tdowling?lang=en&p=thomas&n=warren&oc=9

[https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Warren-1125]

Thomas arrived in Virginia in 1641 with Capt. Daniel Gookins/Gookin, II, his cousin; it was Daniel Gookins' return voyage.[3] He claimed land in James City County.[2] On November 4, 1642, Daniel Gookin received 1400 acres on the north side of the Rappahanock for the transportation of 28 people, including Mrs. Mary Gookin, Samuel Gookin, Thomas Warren.[3][4]

On September 20, 1667, Thomas received a grant for "200 acres on Blackwater Swamp adjoining a branch which divides the land from that of Martin Sheppard."[3] On November 1, 1669, he received another grant for 450 acres adjacent to his own land (Pat. Bk. 6, Pg 263).

Thomas married three times and had seven known children:

1st Marriage: He married in 1639, possibly in Surry, Virginia, as his 1st, to Alice Powell. She died c. 1650. Children of Thomas and Alice Powell:[3]

1. William Warren died before 24 Sept 1670
2. Alice Warren, b c. 1643; mar Matthias Marriott

2nd Marriage: He married September 23, 1654 in Surry County, Virginia, as his 2nd, and as her 2nd, to Elizabeth (Spencer) Sheppard, widow of Robert Sheppard and daughter of William Spencer, Ancient Planter. On 23 Sep 1654, a marriage contract was written [recorded 9 Nov 1654] between "Mr. Thomas Warren, of Smith's Fort, Surry, Gent. and Mrs. Elizabeth Shepard, widow of Maj. Robert Shepard, of Lower Chippoakes (D. & W. 1645-71, p. 56)."[1] Children of Thomas and Elizabeth Spencer Sheppard:[3]

1. Elizabeth Warren; mar John Hunnicutt

3rd Marriage: He married January 1, 1659 at at Lawns Creek Parish, Surry County, Virginia, as his 3rd, to Jane Allen King, the widow of John King. Children of Thomas and Jane Allen King, the widow of John King:

1. Thomas Warren, Jr., b 9 Jan 1659/60.
2. Robert Warren
3. Allen Warren
4. William Warren b 1669

--------------------------------------------

https://books.google.com/books?id=Ir6kljPPONgC&pg=PA67&lpg=PA67&dq=...

THOMAS WARREN, Capt. bapt. 30 Jan 1624; d. bef Apr 21, 1670, Smith's Fort, Surry Co., VA [See Will probate notes below.]; married: 1) Alice Spencer - ISSUE: 1. William 2. Alice, b. abt. 1645 3. Elizabeth m. John Hunnicutt 2) Elizabeth (Spencer) Shephard/Sheppard; died abt. 1655, Jamestown, Surry Co., VA 3) Jane King, ISSUE: 1. Thomas 2. Allen 3. Robert 4. William Notes: 1) Thomas Warren was Member of House of Burgesses for Surry Co. in 1658/59, 1660/62, 1663 & 1666/67 [Ref: http://www.newrivernotes.com - "Colonial VA Register" also "Journals of House of Burgesses of VA] 2) Elizabeth Sheppard (dau. of Wm. & Alice Spencer) relict of Maj. Robert Sheppard (Served in House of Burgess, James City Co. 1646/48) 3) VA Historical Genealogies" by John B. Boddie gives a body of evidence to substantiate that this is Thomas Warren of Kent, Eng. whom Dan'l Gookin transported to Surry Co., VA. 4) Will of Thomas Warren dated Mar 16, 1669 & probated April 21, 1670 by son, William. Matthias Marriott (husband of Alice) rec'd full share with surviving children & 1/3 share to wife, Jane of manor house, other houses, orchards, & devident of land as well as share of wheat & oat crops.

=============================================

Thomas Warren, Gentleman, is thought to have been born at Ripple Court, Kent, England and is thought to have been the same that died in Surry County, Virginia. He came to Virginia in 1640, served as a member of the House of Burgess in 1644, 1645, 1658, 1662, 1666. He patented land in Surry County and purchased land from Thomas Rolfe, the son of John Rolfe and Pocohontas. On this land he built the Warren House in 1652, the oldest standing brick house in Virginia.

http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/h/o/o/Opal-H-Hooks/WEBSI...

23 Sept., 1654. Indenture between Mr. Thomas Warren,
gent., and Mrs. Elizabeth Sheppard, widow, both of Surry as to a marriage to be solemnized between them. "Mentions children by a former marriage, viz. : Anne, John, Robert, Wiliam, Priscilla and Susanna Sheppard." Wit. : Edward Ffolliott, William Cockerham.

http://archive.org/stream/virginiacountyre61croz/virginiacountyre61...

From Find A Grave Memorial# 88146035

Capt Thomas Warren, I

• Birth: Jan. 30, 1624 Ripple Kent, England
• Death: Apr. 21, 1670 Surry Surry County Virginia, USA

Thomas Warren who deposed 03 May 1661 that he was aged 40, served in the House of Burgess 01 October 1644 at the early age of 22. He married (3) Jane, widow of John King, and left a will, now lost, 16 March 1669/70-21April 1670. Elizabeth (Spencer) Sheppard Warren died between 1655-1658 since Thomas Warren, Jr., son of his father's (3) marriage was born 09 January 1659/60. above info provided by Angela Carnes

Son of William and Catherine Gookin Warren.

He came from Kent, England to Virginia in 1640, served as a member of the House of Burgess in 1644, 1645, 1658, 1662, 1666.

Thomas had a total of 7 known children:

• - Alice Powell (2) Alice and William
• - Elizabeth Spencer (1) Elizabeth
• - Jane Allen (4) Thomas Jr., Allen, Robert and William

Family links: Parents:

• William Warren (1596 - 1635)
• Catherine Gookin Warren (1599 - 1641)

Spouses:

* Alice Powell Spencer Warren (1626 - 1659)

• Elizabeth Spencer Sheppard Warren (1625 - 1655)
• Jane Allen Plaw King Warren (1629 - 1670)

Children:

• Alice Warren Marriott (1645 - 1706)*
• William Warren (1647 - 1670)*
• Elizabeth Warren Hunnicutt (1655 - 1699)*
• Thomas Warren (1659 - 1721)*
• Allen Warren (1662 - 1744)*
• Robert Warren (1667 - 1721)*
• William Warren (1670 - 1702)*
• Calculated relationship

Burial: Warren Family Surry County Virginia, USA

Created by: macw Record added: Apr 06, 2012 Find A Grave Memorial# 88146035

---

Stated in a May 3, 1661 deposition that he was aged 40.

However, he was christened January 30, 1624.

• **************************************************************************

Thomas Warren purchased Smith's Fort Plantation from Thomas Rolfe (son of John Rolfe and Matoaka/Pocahontas). Part of his payment was made in corn.

It was once thought that either Thomas Warren or the Rolfe family built the "Warren House," however, "a dendrochronological study, which included an analysis of tree ring sizes in the timbers of the house, indicated the house was built c. 1763, and most likely first occupied by Jacob Faulcon. Faulcon's prominent status in Surry County is evidenced by his ascension to the clerk of the county court in 1781. The house remained in the Faulcon family until 1835." http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/jamesriver/war.htm

More about Smith's Fort Plantation: http://www.vahistorical.org/collections-and-resources/garden-club-v...

From "Warren of Virginia and Maryland" Virginia Historical Magazine:

He was a burgess both in James City county and in Surry county as late as 1666. He had as second wife, marriage contract dated 25th September, 1654, Elizabeth, widow of Major Robert Sheppard, of Lower Chipoaks. He had sons, John, Richard and Thomas, but by which wife they were is not in evidence.

---

"The oldest brick house in Surry is the one built by young Thomas Warren in 1651-52 on land purchased by him from Thomas Rolfe (son of Princess Pocohantas) at Smithy's Fort Plantation. It was inherited by Alice Warren Marriott who with her husband, Matthias, sold the house & land to John Salway July 23, 1673. The Warren House is owned by Assoc. for Preservation of VA Antiquities by gift from J.D.Rockefeller, Jr. It has been called the oldest house of authentic record still standing in English America. Ref: "Colonial Surry", Chapter VIII, The Warren House, page 66.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1920195?seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents

• Reference: MyHeritage Family Trees - SmartCopy: May 15 2017, 0:05:32 UTC

Allen's grandfather Thomas was a refugee Cavalier who came to Virginia during the English Civil War and was elected to the Burgesses almost immediately in his late-20's. He served several one-year terms over the next 20 years until his death in the 1660's. - via Richard Bullington

---

GEDCOM Source

24 DEC 2016 10:34:19 GMT -0500 Bonnie King King Web Site <p>MyHeritage family tree</p><p>Family site: King Web Site</p>Family tree: 341491041-1 Discovery 341491041-1

GEDCOM Source

Thomas (Captain Thomas Warren I) Warren Esquire 3 24 DEC 2016 Added via an Instant Discovery™ Discovery

=======

C8/126/240 [1645]. Parties: Albert Warren v. John Browne. Document: Answer of John Browne to the bill of complaint of Albert Warren

C8/126/240 [1645]. Parties: Albert Warren v. John Browne. Document: Answer of John Browne to the bill of complaint of Albert Warren. Selected details: The defendant says that John Warren was lawfully seised in his de mesne as of fee of and in the manor of Alkham alias Malmand Alkham, and also about 47 acres of land and pasture in the parish of Alkham, Kent. Being so seised, the said John War ren by his deed dated about 12 Jan., 10 Jac. I [1612/3], for a valuable consideration in money paid to the said John by Robert Browne, clerk, granted and sold the said manor to the said Robert Browne and his heirs, which said deed was executed in due form of law and livery of seisin was taken, and so Robert Browne was lawfully seised of the said manor and lands. John Warren, by deed dated about 20 Jan., 10 Jac. I [1612/3], released all his right and title in the said manor to the said Robert Browne. The said Robert did peaceably and quietly possess and enjoy the said manor and lands for several years thereafter. Afterwards the said Robert, by his deed dated on about 2 Oct., 22 Jac. I [1624], for a valuable consideration paid by Thomas Browne and John Browne, son[s] of Robert Browne, granted, enfeoffed and confirmed to the said John Browne and Thomas Browne and their heirs the said manor. And the said John and Thomas were lawfully seised thereof. Then, by another deed dated 4 Oct., 22 Jac. I[1624], he released all the right to the premises to the said John and Thomas, who thereafter enjoyed the said manor and lands. The said Thomas Browne died about 10 years ago, and the said John Browne then held the [non-manorial] lands "in free and com mon socage of the nature and tenure of gavelkind." The said John Browne, by his will, devised two third parts of the premises to the defendant and his heirs (the defendant being the son of the said John Browne), devising the third part thereof to John Browne, son of the said Thomas Browne, and his heirs. Shortly after making his will, John Browne, the defend ant's father, died about the month of March now last past, and the defendant became seised of two parts of the premises, and has held the same ever since and taken the profits thereof. The manor and lands are of the yearly value of £20 or thereabouts.

The defendant says that he does not know that the said John Warren was in his lifetime seised of the premises, as is pretended in the complaint, or that the premises were valued at £40 per year; or that the said John Warren, when he conveyed the premises to Robert Browne, was weak of body or mind, or that the same was about three or four days before his death, or that the same was conveyed to the said Robert Browne by way of mortgage or for any trust or for little or no consideration, or whether the said John Warren made the said Robert Browne his executor, or that the said Robert Browne by that means or otherwise got into his hands all the deeds and evidences concerning the said manor and premises.

The defendant does not know that the complainant is the son of William Warren or tha the said William Warren was the son of John Warren or that the complainants or the said William Warren have or ever had any just right or title to the said manor and premises o to any part thereof, or that the said William Warren was a lunatic, or that his body and land were committed to some friends. Nor does he know that the said Robert Browne did fe any "sleeping title" of the complainants....

C8/125/201 [1647]. Parties: John Warren of Grays Inn, Middlesex, gentleman, v. George Waller and Albert Warren. Documents: (1) Bill of complaint (date in margin: 7 May 1647); (2) Joint answer of George Waller and Albert Warren (date in margin: 14 May 1647). Selected details from complaint: Whereas William Warren, late of the parish of Riple,

Kent, in his lifetime was indebted to the orator in the sum of £300, and being so indebted, by his deed, dated on or about 24 April, 4 Chas. I [1628], did bind himself to the orator in the penal sum of £600, upon condition that, if the said William Warren or his heirs paid to the orator £300 on 3 Sept. 1636, if the orator be then living, then the said deed obligatory was to be void. In his lifetime, the said William Warren married Katherine Gookin, daugh ter of Thomas Gookin, Esq. And the said William Warren was in his lifetime lawfully seised in his demesne as of fee of a parcel of land called or known by the name of the Millfield or Great Mill Field, containing about 20 acres, in Riple, and one capital messuage, a barn, dwelling house, orchard, cottage and 82 acres of land, meadow and pasture or thereabouts. The said William Warren died in or about the 11th year of the said king's reign [1635-36], having issue two sons only, Albert Warren, the eldest, and Thomas Warren, the youngest, both begotten of the body of the said Katherine, and both infants at the time of the death of the said William. The said Albert, son and heir, or his guardian, entered into the Mill Field property and took its issues and profits until attaining the age of 21 years, which he did not attain until after the first day of April in the 21st year of the reign of the now king [1 April 1645]. And the said Albert and Thomas, or some other on their behalf, entered into the said messuage and premises [82 acres, etc.], and took the profits thereof, the said premises being held "in the nature and tenure of gavelkind."

About a year and a half ago the said Thomas Warren died without lawful issue, whereon the said Albert, being his sole brother, or some other on his behalf, did receive the profits of the said messuage and premises [held in gavelkind]. The said sum of £300 in the deed obligatory was not paid by 3 Sept. 1636, nor at any time since, although it has been several times demanded, whereby the said deed obligatory became forfeited, but by reason of the respective minorities of the said Albert and Thomas, the orator could not proceed at the law for recovery of the debt until recently.

On 21 Feb., 21 Chas. I [1645/6], the said Thomas Warren being dead, the orator brought an original writ in an action of debt of £600 upon the said deed obligatory in the high court of Chancery against the said Albert as son and heir of the said William Warren, returnable in his majesty's Court of Common Pleas at Westminster, but by means of the said Albert his delays, the orator could not gain an appearance from him....

=

C8/126/240 [1645]. Parties: Albert Warren v. John Browne. Document: Answer of John Browne to the bill of complaint of Albert Warren

C8/126/240 [1645]. Parties: Albert Warren v. John Browne. Document: Answer of John Browne to the bill of complaint of Albert Warren. Selected details: The defendant says that John Warren was lawfully seised in his de mesne as of fee of and in the manor of Alkham alias Malmand Alkham, and also about 47 acres of land and pasture in the parish of Alkham, Kent. Being so seised, the said John War ren by his deed dated about 12 Jan., 10 Jac. I [1612/3], for a valuable consideration in money paid to the said John by Robert Browne, clerk, granted and sold the said manor to the said Robert Browne and his heirs, which said deed was executed in due form of law and livery of seisin was taken, and so Robert Browne was lawfully seised of the said manor and lands. John Warren, by deed dated about 20 Jan., 10 Jac. I [1612/3], released all his right and title in the said manor to the said Robert Browne. The said Robert did peaceably and quietly possess and enjoy the said manor and lands for several years thereafter. Afterwards the said Robert, by his deed dated on about 2 Oct., 22 Jac. I [1624], for a valuable consideration paid by Thomas Browne and John Browne, son[s] of Robert Browne, granted, enfeoffed and confirmed to the said John Browne and Thomas Browne and their heirs the said manor. And the said John and Thomas were lawfully seised thereof. Then, by another deed dated 4 Oct., 22 Jac. I[1624], he released all the right to the premises to the said John and Thomas, who thereafter enjoyed the said manor and lands. The said Thomas Browne died about 10 years ago, and the said John Browne then held the [non-manorial] lands "in free and com mon socage of the nature and tenure of gavelkind." The said John Browne, by his will, devised two third parts of the premises to the defendant and his heirs (the defendant being the son of the said John Browne), devising the third part thereof to John Browne, son of the said Thomas Browne, and his heirs. Shortly after making his will, John Browne, the defend ant's father, died about the month of March now last past, and the defendant became seised of two parts of the premises, and has held the same ever since and taken the profits thereof. The manor and lands are of the yearly value of £20 or thereabouts.

The defendant says that he does not know that the said John Warren was in his lifetime seised of the premises, as is pretended in the complaint, or that the premises were valued at £40 per year; or that the said John Warren, when he conveyed the premises to Robert Browne, was weak of body or mind, or that the same was about three or four days before his death, or that the same was conveyed to the said Robert Browne by way of mortgage or for any trust or for little or no consideration, or whether the said John Warren made the said Robert Browne his executor, or that the said Robert Browne by that means or otherwise got into his hands all the deeds and evidences concerning the said manor and premises.

The defendant does not know that the complainant is the son of William Warren or tha the said William Warren was the son of John Warren or that the complainants or the said William Warren have or ever had any just right or title to the said manor and premises o to any part thereof, or that the said William Warren was a lunatic, or that his body and land were committed to some friends. Nor does he know that the said Robert Browne did fe any "sleeping title" of the complainants....

C8/125/201 [1647]. Parties: John Warren of Grays Inn, Middlesex, gentleman, v. George Waller and Albert Warren. Documents: (1) Bill of complaint (date in margin: 7 May 1647); (2) Joint answer of George Waller and Albert Warren (date in margin: 14 May 1647). Selected details from complaint: Whereas William Warren, late of the parish of Riple,

Kent, in his lifetime was indebted to the orator in the sum of £300, and being so indebted, by his deed, dated on or about 24 April, 4 Chas. I [1628], did bind himself to the orator in the penal sum of £600, upon condition that, if the said William Warren or his heirs paid to the orator £300 on 3 Sept. 1636, if the orator be then living, then the said deed obligatory was to be void. In his lifetime, the said William Warren married Katherine Gookin, daugh ter of Thomas Gookin, Esq. And the said William Warren was in his lifetime lawfully seised in his demesne as of fee of a parcel of land called or known by the name of the Millfield or Great Mill Field, containing about 20 acres, in Riple, and one capital messuage, a barn, dwelling house, orchard, cottage and 82 acres of land, meadow and pasture or thereabouts. The said William Warren died in or about the 11th year of the said king's reign [1635-36], having issue two sons only, Albert Warren, the eldest, and Thomas Warren, the youngest, both begotten of the body of the said Katherine, and both infants at the time of the death of the said William. The said Albert, son and heir, or his guardian, entered into the Mill Field property and took its issues and profits until attaining the age of 21 years, which he did not attain until after the first day of April in the 21st year of the reign of the now king [1 April 1645]. And the said Albert and Thomas, or some other on their behalf, entered into the said messuage and premises [82 acres, etc.], and took the profits thereof, the said premises being held "in the nature and tenure of gavelkind."

About a year and a half ago the said Thomas Warren died without lawful issue, whereon the said Albert, being his sole brother, or some other on his behalf, did receive the profits of the said messuage and premises [held in gavelkind]. The said sum of £300 in the deed obligatory was not paid by 3 Sept. 1636, nor at any time since, although it has been several times demanded, whereby the said deed obligatory became forfeited, but by reason of the respective minorities of the said Albert and Thomas, the orator could not proceed at the law for recovery of the debt until recently.

On 21 Feb., 21 Chas. I [1645/6], the said Thomas Warren being dead, the orator brought an original writ in an action of debt of £600 upon the said deed obligatory in the high court of Chancery against the said Albert as son and heir of the said William Warren, returnable in his majesty's Court of Common Pleas at Westminster, but by means of the said Albert his delays, the orator could not gain an appearance from him....

=

C5/34/65 [1658]: Parties: Albert Warren of Ripple, Kent, gentleman, v. John Warren.

C5/34/65 [1658]: Parties: Albert Warren of Ripple, Kent, gentleman, v. John Warren. Documents: (1) Bill of complaint; (2) Answer of John Warren; (3) Reply of Albert Warren. Selected details from complaint: John Warren does pretend that William Warren, the orator's father, did, in April, 4 Chas. I [1628], enter into a bond to the said John Warren, under penalty of £600, to pay the said John Warren the sum of £300 on 3 Sept. 1636, if the said John Warren should be then living, which is now about 22 years ago, which bond the said John Warren has lately put in suit against the orator "as one of the sons and coheirs of the said William Warren, and brother and heir of Thomas Warren, late the other son and coheir of the said William Warren."

In truth, if there be any such bond, the same was obtained from the said William Warren when he was a man of no disposing or understanding. And if there be any such bond, the same was gotten and obtained from the said William Warren without any just or valuable consideration, and by combination between the said John Warren and some other person or persons as yet unknown to the orator. And if there be any such bond and that the same was obtained when the said William was of a disposing memory and understanding and good and valuable consideration, the said £300 or a great part thereof has been long si paid or satisfied by some person or persons unknown to the orator, or there has been so y or agreement given or made concerning the same, if your orator could discover truth thereof, and there is no just cause why the orator should be charged with the security bond, if any such there be,

The said William Warren left a personal estate behind him sufficient to satisfy the bond and all his just debts, which came to the disposal of his executors or administrat whom the said John Warren did, would, or might have sued and questioned in case the bond had been just to be paid.

But the said bond is now put in suit against the orator by the instigation, procurem and at the costs and charges of some person or persons to whom the said John Warre indebted, or is to have some of the money or land to be recovered, if any shall be, and w out such recovery such person or persons have no expectation or little hope of being and there has been some agreement in writing or otherwise between the said John Wa and some person or persons concerning the same, and the said bond, if any such be, been delivered into the hands or custody of some person or persons, who is sure to some benefit by the said bond or recovery thereupon.

The orator requests that the said John Warren set forth on his oath whether the William Warren did enter into such bond unto the said John Warren or not, and money or other consideration was given or paid for the same....

=

C6/138/217 [1634]. Parties: John Warren, one of the younger sons of John Warren, late of the parish of Ripple, Kent, gentleman, deceased, v. Edward Boys of Bonnington in the parish of Go donstone, Kent, gentleman. Documents: (1) Bill of complaint; (2) Writ; (3) Abbreviated copy of bill of complaint; (4) Answer of Edward Boys.

Selected details from complaint (1): The said John Warren, the orator's father, has or had by Anne, his wife, eldest daughter of Sir William Crayfford of Wingham, Kent, knight, eight children: sons William, Thomas, John (the orator), and Edward, and daughters Anne, Elizabeth, Alice, and Afra. The said John (the father), on or about 27 Sept., 10 Jac. I[1612], made his will, and thereby left to his sons the said Thomas, the orator, and Edward £300 each when they attain the age 24 years. (If any of the sons die before attaining 24 years, their portions to be equally divided between the survivors.) He made his said wife Anne his sole executrix, and bequeathed to her all his moveable goods, except some particular parcels of household stuff and plate given to William, the eldest son. He also bequeathed to her the profits of all lands and houses leased to others, until the said William should attain 24 years. And he particularly assigned that Anne his wife should pay the portions to the two eldest daughters, Anne and Elizabeth, and the two eldest sons, Thomas and John (the orator), £300 each, in all £1,200, with other provisions in the will for the payment of £300 to each of the four younger children.

Shortly after making the said will, the orator's said father died, and at the time of his death was possessed of a great and plentiful personal estate, amounting to £1500, sufficient to pay all debts and all legacies, including the £300 bequeathed to the said orator and the £300 bequeathed to Thomas, the orator's brother. The orator's mother proved the said will and possessed herself of all her late husband's goods and personal estate. Soon after in about May, 19 Jac. [1621], the said Anne married Edward Boys of Bonnington in the parish of Godonstone, Kent, gent., upon which marriage it was agreed that, as the said Edward Boys would then have the greatest part of the personal estate of the orator's father, he should pay the legacies in the will, and Anne should take the profits of the orator's father's lands. However, the said Edward Boys has taken away the said money and refused to pay the legacies....

---

The house in this photo, at Smith’s Fort Plantation was determined to have been built in a later century. It is now called the “Faulcon House” except in older references. The official website for Smith’s Fort has more details. The house and grounds are generally open for tours. The remnants of the Fort are about a half mile walk away from what I understand.

Source: https://www.wikitree.com/photo/jpg/Warren-1125

---

References

1. Dorman, John Frederick. 2004. Adventurers of Purse and Person, Virginia, 1607-1624/5. Genealogical Pub. Co. 4th edition. Vol 3, Page 227, book lookup by Hill, C. [03/02/2024]
2. Virginia Immigrants and Adventurers, 1607-1635: A Biographical Dictionary By Martha W. McCartney. < GoogleBooks >
3. A History and Genealogy of the Warren Family in Normandy, Great Britain and ...By Thomas Warren. Page 387. < GoogleBooks >
4. https://groups.google.com/g/soc.genealogy.medieval/c/gOPNY5OY0h0/m/... Thomas Warren (1621-1670), a seventeenth-century burgess in Surry County, Virginia, has long been thought to be a son of William Warren, Gentleman, of Ripple, Kent, England by his wife Catherine Gookin.[1] William Warren did indeed have a son christened Thomas at Ripple on 30 January 1624[/5].[2] In Virginia, Thomas gave his age as 40 in a deposition dated 1661, calculating an approximate year of 1621 for his birth.[3] It would fit chronologically for him to be the Thomas Warren whose headright Capt. Daniel Gookin [Jr.] claimed in Virginia in the 1640s.[4] Daniel was Catherine (Gookin) Warren’s first cousin.[5] In this scenario, Thomas would have been a first cousin once removed to Daniel Gookin. But that is not the case. …
5. "Preservation Virginia: Smith's Fort". < link >