Myers-Snell Family

Thomas Wilmarth, 1620–1694 (aged 74 years)

Name
Thomas /Wilmarth/
Family with Elizabeth Bliss
himself
Birth: 1620 — aka Wilmore, Williams, Wilmouth
Marriage: September 18, 1640 — Reheboth
Death: 1694
Ancestors Compact tree Descendants Family book Fan chart Hourglass chart Interactive tree Pedigree Pedigree map Relationships Family with spouse Elizabeth Bliss
Thomas Wilmarth
1620–1694
Birth: 1620 — aka Wilmore, Williams, Wilmouth
Death: 1694
wife
Birth: September 6, 1615 27 24 — Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
LDS baptism: September 19, 1615 — in Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
Marriage: September 18, 1640 — Reheboth
Death: February 1675/76 CE — Reheboth, Bristol, MA
Burial: February 1675/76 CE — in Rehoboth, Bristol Co., Plymouth Coloney
Ancestors Compact tree Descendants Family book Fan chart Hourglass chart Interactive tree Pedigree Pedigree map Relationships Family with spouse Thomas Wilmarth
Elizabeth Bliss
1615–1675/76 CE
Birth: September 6, 1615 27 24 — Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
Death: February 1675/76 CE — Reheboth, Bristol, MA
Marriage — September 18, 1640 — Reheboth
Shared note

@ DEMOS P.94: {may not be related to this Thomas/Elizabeth}
Only once did the Court have to recognize that the situation (marriage) might be so bad as to make a final reconciliation impossible. This happened in 1665 when John Williams, Jr., of Scituate, was charged with a long series of "abusive andharsh carriages" toward his wife Elizabeth, "in speciall his sequestration of himselfe from the marriage bed, and his accusation of her to bee a whore, and that especially in reference unto a child lately borne of his said wife by him denied tobe legittimate." ref. Plymouth Colony Records, IV, 93. The case was frequently before the Court during the next two years, and eventually all hope of a settlement was abandoned. When Williams persisted in his 'abuses," and when too he hadhimself... (declareld) his insufficiency for converse with weomen," (ref. ibid., 125) a formal separation was allowed--though not a full divorce. In fact, it may be that his impotence, not his habitual cruelty, was the decisive factor infinally persuading the Court to go this far.

REFERENCE:
Demos, John "A LITTLE COMMONWEALTH" 1970; p.94. /