JOHN WHITEHEAD OF NEW HAVEN AND BRADFORD, CONN.
By JAMES SHEPARD, Esq., of New Britain, Conn.

JOHN WHITEHEAD, with his brother Thomas, was brought to this country when a mere child, by Francis Hall of New Haven, at the request of Dea. George Alcocke of Roxbury, Mass., who was uncle to the Whitehead boys. According to the "Halls of New England," by Rev. David B. Hall, Francis Hall and his brother William came from Milford, County of Surrey, England, in the ship with Rev. Henry Whitefield and his party of emigrants from Kent and Surrey, who settled at Guilford, Conn. They arrived in New Haven in time for Francis Hall to attend the meeting in Mr. Newman's barn, June 4, 1639, where said Hall signed the fundamental agreement.

The first record found of the Whitehead boys is on page 60, of Hoadly's New Haven Colony Records, Vol. 1, when at a court held Dec. 1, 1641, " It is ordered that Goodman Hall shall have liberty to dispose of the children well, he brought over till the court have light to dispose otherwise of them, provided that they be well looked unto and well used. And Goodman Hitchcock who is to have one of them is to pay to the Treasurer what is due for the boy and Goodman Hall is to be paid out of it what is due to him."

That this order relates to the Whitehead boys is shown by the next reference to them, on Feb. 1, 1647, on page 365 of the same book, as follows: '-John Thompson attorney for Thomas Allcote in the Bay requireth youths of Francis Hall which he brought from England long since, that is to say John Whitehead & Thomas Whitehead, and say he hath order to send them to the said Thomas Allcote who is their unkell. " Francis Halle saith at the desire of their unkell, Mr. Allcote of Roxberey, since deceased, he brought these youthes over, and was at great charges with them for their passage and other occasions, which he saith Mr. Allcote promised to paye to his satisfaction when he came heare, but when
he came ther uncle was deade, and knew not of whom to seeke his money, if the boys had died he should have lost it, for ought he knows, for he knew of no other uncle they had, but he was blamed that he had not used that means to find out their uncle or send to ther mother as he might have done, (though he saith he hath sent,) but he acquainted the courts then with it, and with their approbation one of them was disposed to Mathias Hitchcoke, the other he kept himself till they might have further light to dispose of them. "

The court being desirous that the children might have no wrong, and also that the parties which have brought them up heitherto, (seeing they were small,) might be justly satisfied, did seriously consider and weigh the charges and hazards the several parties had been at with them, as also the advantages the boys might be unto them. And after a large debate concerning those accounts, in the issue agreed, that Thomas Whitehead which was with Mathias Hitchcocke, be at the end of 5 years and eight months from the time he had him, set free, at which time the said Mathias put the said Thomas to Davide Atwatter for 4 years and 4 months, though he had no right so to do, but now the said Thomas declaring himself willing to abide with his master David Atwatter, till he may hear from his uncle, so he may have just satisfaction for the time to come, so long as he stayeth with him. They both agreed before the court, that he should have 3£ a year, meat, drink and clothes. And concerning John Whitehead, it is ordered that the Francis Hall set him free from time to time, and pay unto him 50S. Elizabeth Whitehead of Lemington Priors wrote Thomas Alcock  25 (8) 1647 concerning her sons, John and Thomas Whitehead then with Francis Hall of New Haven, who formerly lived in Buckintun parish where her uncle Darbie lived." The note book of William Aspinwall is Mr. Pope's authority. This letter explains how the Alcocks were uncle to the Whitehead boys, Mrs. Whitehead being Elizabeth Alcock, sister of said Alcocks, and also shows that she was living at Lemington Priors (now Lemington) in Warwickshire, Eng., in 1647. We find a Bulkington parish but no Buckintun in Warwickshire. This location for Francis Hall casts a doubt on the statement of his English home herein before given. The letter is dated the 8th month of 1647 and as under the old style Feb. would have been the 12th month of the same year, the appearance of Mr. Alcock's attorney in New Haven was evidently the result of the said letter. George Alcock of Roxbury, who died Dec. 30, 1640, was a brother of Thomas Alcock who resided at Boston, Mass., in 1647. Francis Hall's statement that when he arrived here Mr. George Alcock was dead, is contradicted by the record, which shows that Mr. Hall was in New Haven more than a year and a half before George Alcock died; but probably Mr. Hall was negligent, and perhaps Mr. Alcock's death was the first knowledge he had of him after coming to this country. He had, no doubt, learned of Mr. Alcock's death when •' he acquainted the court " with the matter in 1641 at which time Thomas Whitehead was given to Mr. Hitchcock, while John was held by Mr. Hall and probably lived with him until freed by the court in 1647. The five years and eight months when Thomas was to be set free had more than expired when the court order of 1647 was made, and although he was to stay for a time with Mr. Atwater he probably soon left him, for, on the 7th of the following March, '' David Attwater entered action against Mathias Hitchcocke for 10 £ which the said Mathias Hitchcocke received of David Atwater, for the service of Thomas Whitehead for, 4 years and eight months which Mathias Hitchcocke could not perform, he not having a full right to dispose of the said Thomas." (Hoadly's New Haven Colony Records, Vol. 1, p. 370.) What became of Thomas Whitehead is not known, and this is the last record so far found of him.