The Lucketts of Portobacco - Author: Harry Wright NewmanA genealogical history of Samuel Luckett, Gent. Of Port Tobacco, Charles County, Maryland, and some of his descendants, with a sketch of the allied family of Offutt, of Prince Georges County, Maryland. Bibliographic Information: Newman, Harry W. The Lucketts of Portobacco. Washington, D.C.: Harry Wright Newman, 1938. Return to PREFACE THE LUCKETTS OF PORTOBACCO NATURALLY much interest is centered in the emigrant ancestor--not only because it is he who is the progenitor of all bearing his name in the States of today, but because there is interest in the motives which actuated his leaving the Old World and beginning life anew in virgin territory. Then much curiosity exists regarding the Anglo-Saxon background of the pioneer and the part his ancestors played in the shaping of England or Scotland which in his day had become the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Often correct conclusions are drawn why the settler left his natal land. Many emigrated to America for political or religious freedom, some to establish trade relations with the mother country and in this instance often a younger son of a merchant in Bristol or London was sent to promote the business of his father. Others came for pure adventure and the opportunity to advance their social position when it was almost impossible to rise above the station in life to which they were born in conservative England of the seventeenth century. Then there were the prisoners of war or the defeated leaders of revolutions, who were sent or sold in America as indentures, as well as the exiled criminal--high crimes and misdemeanors as well as petty crimes against society. Maryland received her share of such criminals, but the greater portion was sent further South, especially to the Carolinas and Georgia. Tradition is interesting and should be regarded, but in the greater number of cases it is the fanciful dream of some one in the past generation and can be disproved after adequate research. Most genealogical writers of the late nineteenth century were endowed with most vivid imagination and had most early settlers, especially those of Maryland and Virginia, the sons and daughters of lords and dukes, parading around the colonial villages and plantations with gold-hilted swords and jeweled snuff boxes. As a consequence, the present generation believes these tales and a great many refuse to accept the truth even in the face of absolute proof to the contrary. The Luckett family also has its traditions. The original Luckett was one of the colonists who settled in Lord Baltimore's Province of Avalon on the Isle of Newfoundland during 1621, and came to Virginia when Lord Baltimore visited that colony in 1629, and there he remained. A few years later in 1634 when Leonard Calvert, son of the First Lord Baltimore, established the Maryland Palatinate, he removed to Maryland to become once again under the sovereignty of his former lordship. Only little credence can be placed in this tradition, for no proof has been found for its authenticity. Regarding the background of the emigrant ancestor, the task is exceedingly more difficult to ascertain or even to make accurate deductions. It seems as if a curtain were drawn when the emigrant came to this side of the globe. Furthermore, the burning of the offices in London during 1820 containing the passenger lists of the ships, the age of the passenger, his place of birth, his oath of fidelity to the Crown has completely destroyed the greatest and most coveted information which we in America are seeking. Experience has consequently shown that the proving of the parents of an American colonist is not only a long and laborious task in searching the preserved records of England, but in most instances it has proved impossible. And in the majority of cases when it is stated that the English ancestry of the forefather is known, it is often questionable and fails to lend itself to absolute proof. Thus, the task of locating the parents of the Luckett pioneer of Maryland has been most difficult and so far with no positive results. The Virginia records disclose one Richard Luckett being transported by William Wildy in 1657 and one Edward Luckett by Edmund Machen, of New Kent County in 1662. These men left no recorded history in the Virginia archives, and it is noted that Richard and Edward were names not found in the first four generations of the Luckett family in Maryland. Furthermore, from the indistinct script of the Virginia archives, the names upon examination could be Suckett as well as Luckett. The records of the Land Office at Richmond disclose that no freeholder bearing the name of Samuel Luckett applied for Virginia headrights prior to 1666. ENGLISH BACKGROUND All authorities on surnames agree that Luckett is a diminutive of the given name Luke--which has also given rise to Lukin, Luckins, Luckings, Luckock, Lucock, Locock, Locard, Lockard, Lockhart, Lockit, Lockitt, Locket, Lockett, Luckit, and Lucket. It has been said that these names are of Norman-French origin, and its earliest known member in England was Locard. He accompanied the forces of William the Conqueror to Britain in 1066 and fought at the decisive battle of Hastings, but failing to return to his native Normandy, he remained in England and founded the families which bear his name in one form or another. While actual documentary proof of the above is lacking, it is known, however, that the earliest family using the spelling Lockett and Luckett, mostly the latter, was by 1530 in County Kent, England, which is the nearest approach to France. It is also known that many Normen settled in Kent after the Conquest as well as a number of Huguenots of a later date. The earliest freeholder found is that of Wilhelmi Lucket, of Chislet Parish, Kent. At the parish church of St. Mary's, his son Ambrose was baptized according to the rites of the Church of England in 1556. The entry reads as follows: "Ambrosius filis Wilhelmi Lucket erat baptisatus 11 die Augusti patrib?? et matr Ambrosius yong thome herdes margeria idivyn Anno D'Ni 1556." The next entry is "Elizabet Locket was chrystyn the XXX day off Januarij Anno Donni 1560". Ambrosius Lucket married on April 22, 1594, Agnes Bricken, and had issue. And contemporary with Ambrosius were John and Thomas. In the register are fifty-three Lukett, Luckett, and Lockett entries of baptisms, marriages, and burials from 1556 to 1679, but not a single Samuel. Thomas appears somewhat frequently and also Thomasine, the feminine form, which indicates that Thomas was a significant name in this family. The absence of Samuel indicates, unless the records of the parish are incomplete, that he was born elsewhere, but it does demonstrate that Samuel was not a strong name on the paternal side, and that it probably came through the distaff side of which no known information is in existence. The visitations consulted on Kent disclose no connections with local armorial families, nor do the publications on heraldry show any arms granted to any member using the spelling of Luckett--they do, however, show arms issued to the branch which adapted the orthography of Lockett. The arms contained in this book described as: "Or, a chevron gules between three stags' heads couped proper." At the Perogative Court held in Charles County during 1684, "Appeared Samuel Luckett of Charles County who intermarried with the relict and administrator of John Gardiner and showeth that he never intermedled with goods". Here proof exists of his marriage to the widow, and also for the belief that he had interferred with the estate of her deceased husband. Elizabeth was the daughter and co-heiress of Thomas Hussey, Gent., and his second wife Johanna. Although Thomas Hussey entered the Province as an indenture, he was styled Gent., indicating in that day that he was a scion of the English gentry. His signature is found on documents which prove that he was educated in letters--an accomplishment not always attributable to many of the early settlers. He became one of the interesting characters of the early days and once wrote to Lord Baltimore that he had been robbed by the Indians "of alle but the clothes on my bodye". He contracted numerous marriages, and while it is not clear whether he professed the Roman or Anglican faith, it is known that his second wife was a Catholic, the religion which was imparted to their two daughters. Thomas Hussey died at the beginning of the eighteenth century, and by his will, proved October 14, 1700, he devised his grandson and namesake, Thomas Hussey Luckett, 1,310 acres of land at Chingamucon (Chicamuxen) which lay in Durham Parish, the western-most portion of the county. The brother-in-law of Samuel Luckett, that is, William Langworth who married Anne, the other daughter of Thomas Hussey, dated his will February 7, 1693, and devised to his "brother Samuel Luckett's three sons"--Samuel, Thomas, and Ignatius--the estate of his three daughters on the condition that they died during minority and without issue. Children of Samuel and Elizabeth (Hussey) Luckett 1. Samuel Luckett married Anne (???). q.v. 2. Thomas Luckett married Sarah (???). q.v. 3. Ignatius Luckett married Jane (???). q.v. 4. Thomas Hussey Luckett married Elizabeth Price. q.v. In January 1695, Samuel Luckett was bondsman for "Major James Smallwood who married Mary the relict of Robert Thompson, Jr., late of Charles County". All were his neighbors on Port Tobacco Creek. He was a member of the Provincial Court during 1696, and in that year signed a Petition to the King as a civil officer of Charles County.2 This fact alone establishes him as a member of the Church of England, inasmuch as beginning with the reign of William and Mary, all members of the Romanish faith were disenfranchised and barred from holding office. On July 3, 1703, he and Colonel William Dent offered bond for Charity Courts and John Contee, the executors of the estate of James Keech, late of St. Mary's County. The will of Samuel Luckett was dated March 5, 1705, and proved in Charles County on July 18, 1705, by Philip Briscoe, Sr., Joseph Venom, and Michael Waterer. From the tone of the will it is concluded that all of his sons were minors except perhaps his eldest child Samuel who was of sufficient age to be named joint executor with his mother Elizabeth. He devised "Smoot's Chance" to his wife, and "Hussey's Discovery" of 200 acres to his son Samuel as well as 150 acres adjacent to the land formerly known to be Captain Josias Fendall and then adjoining the plantation of the widow Elizabeth Hawkins. He willed Thomas 500 acres of land in Virginia near Quantico, Ignatius 100 acres called "Thompson's Square", and personalty to his young son Thomas Hussey Luckett. The residue of the estate was bequeathed to his wife and children "including money due in England". The latter could be receipts from his tobacco crops, yet, there is a possibility that it refers to a legacy or the portion of his parent's estate. The inventory of his personal estate was taken on April 5, 1705, and appraised by Captain Philip Briscoe and Michael Martin at œ829/13/3. The inventory listed articles at "the Old House", which was undoubtedly the smaller and less pretentious home first built, and it may have been a primitive log cabin which the settlers usually built upon arrival. Then there was "Zachia Quarter" where his seven white indentured servants were housed. No negro slaves were listed. In his mansion house there were "the hall; Mrs. Luckett's Roome and the little Roome adjoining; ye Roome chamber; Hall Chamber; and ye two new room Chambers". The outer dwellings were a milk house, salt house, kitchen, ordinary, and a stable stocked with 16 horses. The bondsmen for the executors were Philip Briscoe and Michael Martin. Prior to the death of Samuel Luckett, he was the administrator of the estate of William Earle, of Charles County, but after his death Philip Harrold instituted action against the estate of Earle and obtained judgment. Elizabeth Luckett in court swore that her deceased husband fully administered on the estate of Earle and knew "of no effects in her hands" belonging to the estate and requested time "to the court of 13 November next that she may better inform herself in the matter". Elizabeth lost but little time in acquiring a third husband, and by November 6, 1705, she had married John Hanson. On that date, the latter, his wife Elizabeth, and Samuel Luckett "executors of Samuel Luckett, deceased" rendered an account to the Perogative Court. At the 1705 fall session of the County Court the grand jury, with John Beale as foreman, indicted Nicholas Gulick, a Romanist priest, for "marrying John Hanson and the widdow Luckett contrary to Law". Likewise, John Hanson and Elizabeth his wife were indicted "for being and suffering the . . . to marry". The first husband of Elizabeth Hussey was a member of a staunch Roman Catholic family, but Samuel Luckett was not and furthermore was not converted to her faith, yet there is every evidence that her four Luckett sons were all raised under the Catholic banner. Her third husband was of a family as staunch in their support of the Church of England as the Gardiners were of Rome, yet one sees a scion being married by a Roman priest. And their four Hanson children were raised under the dogma of Rome. | HOME | |