Children of John Bailey and ELIZABETH WALKER are:
1240 i. John Bailey II, born 1690 in Westmoreland County, Virginia; died Bef. October 1735 in Cople Parish, Westmoreland County, Virginia; married Elizabeth Carr Aft. 1710.
ii. Steven Bailey, born 1695.
iii. James Bailey, born 1695.
John was born in Staffordshire, England on 1695 to John Bailey and Elizabeth Walker. John married Elizabeth Carr and had 6 children. He died in 1731 in present-day Fauquier County, Virginia.
from "Marble's Ancestors Database"
John Bailey II was born in 1690 in Cople Parish, Westmoreland County, Virginia, and died c1733 in Westmoreland County, Virginia.
from Bailey-Britton History and Genealogy (459 pages) by Thomas H. Bailey (Kingsport, Tennessee: 1962) (Ancestry.com members can search this book at Ancestry.com.: Ancestry Search
Page 87: John Jr. Bailey was born between 1685 and 1695, and perhaps had received his share of his father's estate before he made his will, and this would account for his not being mentioned. John Jr died intestate prior to his father's will, and before 1735. He had married Elizabeth, daughter of William and Sarah (Eskridge) Carr, about 1710 to 1713 and had several children.
Page 89: We hark back to John (3) Bailey jr. who married Elizabeth Carr, and who were our immediate ancestors. This John Jr. Died between 1730 and 1735, and was doubtless a son of John (2) "the Elder," son of Stephen 1, our Immigrant Ancestor.
A deed, Cople Parish, Westmoreland County Book 8 page 437, Jun 2, 1730, John Bailey Jr. and his wife Elizabeth Bailey and Joseph Carr to Richard Colean, 50 acres to Elizabeth Carr by her father, William Carr, by his will, being land bought of Samuel Earle, land patented by John Earle, July 2, 1661.
Another Deed, Cople Parish, Book 8, page 229, 1733, John Bailey "the elder" to James Bailey, land in the forrest of Cople Parish, 50 acres, plantation where Edward Young now lives, between Yeocomico and Nominy, part of a tract of 250 acres sold to Eleomas More, 1679 and his wife Margaret, by deed bearing date 1683 - several exchangess - made over unto Stephen Bailey 1684. The 50 acres herein mentioned, Stephen Bailey by will of 1697 to so John Bailey, party of these presents. John "the elder" sees to infer that John Jr was living at this date; however, he was dead by 1735, when his wife Elizabeth made a deed of gift to her son William Bailey, "eldest son of John Jr."
Westmoreland County, Virginia Book 12, page 483. May 3, 1737 Elizabeth (Elizabeth Carr) Bailey, relict of John Bailey Jr late deceased to William Bailey, "eldest son" of Prince William County, Virginia 70 acres in the brances of Nomini. This may have been the 70 acres will to her sister Ann Carr, by their father William Carr. Their mother Sarah Carr willed to her daughters, Elizabeth Baley and Ann Carr.
June 18, 1737 Elizabeth Bailey, wife of John Baly Jr. and her son William of Prince William County, eldest son of John Bailey, Jr. Lease to William Lane, Westmoreland County.
If William was their "eldest son" they had other sons, probably not of age to sign official documents with their brother of according to the law of Primogeniture in these days, the eldest son had the authority over his younger brothers and sisters after his father's death. Perhaps that is the reason the other brothers did not sign the lease.
The names of all the other sons are not definitely known. However, it is conceded by those who are interested that they were John, Carr and others, probably Stephen and James. According to all records of Fauquier County, Virginia, these appear to fit into the picture perfectly.
(End Bailey Britton Page 87)
Tax List: 1740, Westmoreland Co, VA Rent Roll for 100 acres
John Bailey Jr, was living in 1730 but dead by Oct 1735 according to old deeds
Deed, Cople Parish, Westmoreland County Book 8 page 437, Jun 2, 1730, John Bailey Jr. and his wife Elizabeth Bailey and Joseph Carr to Richard Colean, 50 acres to Elizabeth Carr by her father, William Carr by his will, being land bought of Samuel Earle, land patented by John Earle, July 2, 1661.
Source: S-1423244912 Repository: #R-1579099859 Title: Ancestry Family Trees Publication: Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com. Original data: Family Tree files submitted by Ancestry members. Note: This information comes from 1 or more individual Ancestry Family Tree files. This source citation points you to a current version of those files. Note: The owners of these tree files may have removed or changed information since this source citation was created. Page: Ancestry Family Trees Note: Data: Text: http://trees.ancestry.com/pt/AMTCitationRedir.aspx?tid=36105316&pid=149 Repository: R-1579099859 Name: Ancestry.com Address: http://www.Ancestry.com Note:
Source: S1 Author: Ancestry.com Title: Public Member Trees Publication: Name: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc.; Location: Provo, UT, USA; Date: 2006; Repository: #R1 Repository: R1 Name: www.ancestry.com
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with John by comparing test results with other
carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA.
However, there are no known yDNA or mtDNA test-takers in his direct paternal or maternal line.
It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share DNA with John:
PS. I left my last message in response to a question from one of the PMs about why I added myself as manager. It isn't meant as a criticism. These older profiles are the ancestors of many, many members and duplicates sneak by. That's why I am here to help out.
I will work on the bio tomorrow. No problem at all. Great job on getting all those merges done!!
It appears that this John Bailey is linked to his grandparents as parents, skipping his mother and father. His parents should be Bailey-1504 and Walker-3995. If that is corrected then most of the contradictions should resolve.
Bailey-8005 and Bailey-1506 appear to represent the same person because: Same parents, same wife. Place of birth and death are different. Not sure which is correct. I'm only going off if the Ancestry Historical Person search I put in the Bio. Please use which ever you feel is the most correct, and consider merging. Thanks, James