Martha Mead

1632 - 1695  (62 years)

• Name	Martha Mead
  Birth	8 Nov 1632
  Gender	Female
  Death	1695
  	or there about
  Person ID	I142	Mead Genealogy
  Last Modified	25 Feb 2003

  
  

  Father	William Mead,   b. 1600, Lydd, Kent Co., England d. 19 Sep 1663 (Age 63 years)
  Mother	Martha Davis,   b. 1604, Lydd, Kent Co., England
  Family ID	F50	Group Sheet  |  Family Chart

  
  

  Family 1	John Richardson
  Children	> 1. Bethia Richardson
  Family ID	F175	Group Sheet  |  Family Chart
  Last Modified	12 Mar 2025

  
  

  Family 2	Captain Williams
  Family ID	F255	Group Sheet  |  Family Chart
  Last Modified	12 Mar 2025

  
  

• Notes

  Martha was said to have been epileptic and had a scandalous pregnancy she claimed came about during one of her "fits." The Scandalous Pregnancy of Martha Mead          Martha , sister of John and Joseph Mead was said to have been an epileptic. In 1653 she married John Richardson, about whom there is practically nothing in the records. He knew that she was pregnant before their marriage, and when the time came for her to give birth, he took her away to Roxbury, Massachusetts, to avoid scandal. The baby died a month thereafter. Who was the sneaky one who found out and leaked the news in Stamford?  This wrong doing was considered serious enough for New Haven to handle. Joseph Mead explained about her fits, and Martha herself said that when she was at her master's house, she happened to have a fit and came to find only Joseph Garnsey in the room. There was also a John Ross in the house.  Martha claimed that she was taken advantage of while unconscious and therefore did not know the father's name. Several goodwives-- Knapp, Stuckey, Buxton, Webb, and Emory--testified about her fits. They also admitted that she lied about ever having had the baby.           The court didn't buy Martha's story. They considered it nonsense. The men concurred that a sexual act involved some reaction, particularly a reaction of pleasure. Punishment should have been a severe whipping, but since Martha was pregnant yet again, she was fined ten pounds, which, of course, her brother and husband were responsible for. The death of the baby in Roxbury aroused suspicion, but Joseph said he would present proper documents to prove that the death was a natural one. Though this case is handled or at least written about, in a very cut-and-dried fashion, one can draw inferences from it. Martha was evidently a servant as she refers to being in her masters house. Were many girls so employed? Both her family and her husband wholeheartedly supported her. Was it to protect themselves also from being charged with murder? Did they know the true facts or did they honestly believe her? The full weight of the Puritan Law stands on this case, but the court members seem ready to be lenient. The case also provides a glimpse of Martha's lady supporters, how they defended her, and how they may have enjoyed their moment in an almost gossipy way. Source Unknown