Search billions of records on

William Clues

M, d. 1765
     William married Mary Moore, daughter of Richard Moore and Mary Green, in 1740. William Clues died in 1762. He died in 1765.
      The house for William Clues is shown on the original map of the City of Reading, PA on the main street through town, three blocks for the center (courthouse) at Lord and Vigor Streets.

William's left a will on 16-Jan-1762 at Reading, Berks County, Pennsylvania.

to wife Mary, house and land in Reading. Mentions daughters Eleanor, Abigail, Ruth and Step son William.

Children of William Clues and Mary Moore

Philip Rhydderch

M, b. 1628, d. 1730
      Philip Rhydderch was born in 1628 at Caermarthenshire, Wales. Philip married Dorothy (Unknown) at Wales. Philip Rhydderch died in 1730 at Newtown, Chester County, Pennsylvania.

Child of Philip Rhydderch and Dorothy (Unknown)

Dorothy (Unknown)

     Dorothy married Philip Rhydderch at Wales.

Child of Dorothy (Unknown) and Philip Rhydderch

Eleanor Clues

Eleanor Clues||p34.htm#i14517|William Clues|d. 1765|p34.htm#i14370|Mary Moore|b. 1665\nd. 1765|p29.htm#i10583|||||||Richard Moore|b. 1659\nd. 1695|p35.htm#i16762|Mary Green|b. 1665\nd. 19 Oct 1739|p34.htm#i15582|

Relationship=5th great-grandaunt of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=4th great-grandaunt of Virginia Ailene Swift.
     Eleanor Clues was the daughter of William Clues and Mary Moore.

Ruth Clues

Ruth Clues||p34.htm#i14518|William Clues|d. 1765|p34.htm#i14370|Mary Moore|b. 1665\nd. 1765|p29.htm#i10583|||||||Richard Moore|b. 1659\nd. 1695|p35.htm#i16762|Mary Green|b. 1665\nd. 19 Oct 1739|p34.htm#i15582|

Relationship=5th great-grandaunt of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=4th great-grandaunt of Virginia Ailene Swift.
     Ruth Clues was the daughter of William Clues and Mary Moore.

Abigail Clues

Abigail Clues||p34.htm#i14519|William Clues|d. 1765|p34.htm#i14370|Mary Moore|b. 1665\nd. 1765|p29.htm#i10583|||||||Richard Moore|b. 1659\nd. 1695|p35.htm#i16762|Mary Green|b. 1665\nd. 19 Oct 1739|p34.htm#i15582|

Relationship=5th great-grandaunt of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=4th great-grandaunt of Virginia Ailene Swift.
     Abigail Clues was the daughter of William Clues and Mary Moore.

Samuel Sharpless

M, b. 7 Dec 1710, d. 24 Nov 1790
      Samuel Sharpless was born on 7-Dec-1710. Samuel married Jane Newlin. Samuel Sharpless died on 24-Nov-1790 at Middletown, Pennsylvania, at age 79.

Child of Samuel Sharpless and Jane Newlin

Jane Newlin

F, b. 1715, d. 28 Oct 1798
      Jane Newlin was born in 1715. Jane married Samuel Sharpless. Jane Newlin died on 28-Oct-1798.

Child of Jane Newlin and Samuel Sharpless

John Scarlet

M, b. 9 Apr 1691, d. 30 Apr 1772
      John Scarlet was born on 9-Apr-1691. John married Elinor Martin. John Scarlet died on 30-Apr-1772 at age 81.

Child of John Scarlet and Elinor Martin

Elinor Martin

F, b. 20 Apr 1684
      Elinor Martin was born on 20-Apr-1684. Elinor married John Scarlet.

Child of Elinor Martin and John Scarlet

William Fisher

     William married Sarah (Unknown).

Child of William Fisher and Sarah (Unknown)

Sarah (Unknown)

     Sarah married William Fisher.

Child of Sarah (Unknown) and William Fisher

Charles Carroll

M, b. 1724, d. 1783
      Charles Carroll was born in 1724. Charles married an unknown person. He died in 1783.

Child of Charles Carroll

Hannah Scarlet

F, b. 1726, d. before 1799
Hannah Scarlet|b. 1726\nd. before 1799|p34.htm#i14740|John Scarlet|b. 9 Apr 1691\nd. 30 Apr 1772|p34.htm#i14524|Elinor Martin|b. 20 Apr 1684|p34.htm#i14525|||||||||||||
      Hannah Scarlet was born in 1726. She was the daughter of John Scarlet and Elinor Martin. Hannah married Thomas Musgrave before 1766. Hannah married William Iddings, son of William Iddings and Mary Moore, on 26-Jun-1766 at East Caln, Pennsylvania. Hannah Scarlet died before 1799.

Children of Hannah Scarlet and William Iddings

Rose Moore

F, b. 1673, d. 1748
Rose Moore|b. 1673\nd. 1748|p34.htm#i14793|John Moore||p290.htm#i172097|Jane (Unknown)||p290.htm#i172098|||||||||||||
      Rose Moore was born in 1673 at Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. She was the daughter of John Moore and Jane (Unknown). Rose married John Iddings, son of Richard Iddings and Margaret Charles. Rose Moore died in 1748 at Cumrn, Robeson, Berks County, Pennsylvania.
     She and John Iddings removed to at Abington, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, in 1748.

Susannah Moore

Susannah Moore||p34.htm#i14999|Richard Moore|b. 1659\nd. 1695|p35.htm#i16762|Mary Green|b. 1665\nd. 19 Oct 1739|p34.htm#i15582|||||||Thomas Green|b. circa 1640\nd. 1703|p124.htm#i67357|Margaret (Unknown)|b. circa 1640\nd. Oct 1708|p124.htm#i67358|

Relationship=6th great-grandaunt of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=5th great-grandaunt of Virginia Ailene Swift.
     Susannah Moore was the daughter of Richard Moore and Mary Green.

Richard B. Jackson

     Richard married Deborah Moore.

Children of Richard B. Jackson and Deborah Moore

Nancy (Unknown)

     Nancy married James Iddings, son of William Iddings and Mary Moore.

Edward Harry

     Edward married Jane Iddings, daughter of William Iddings and Mary Moore.

Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley

F, b. circa 1616, d. 1650
Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley|b. circa 1616\nd. 1650|p34.htm#i15338|Thomas Stanley|b. circa 1590|p217.htm#i117713|Sarah Burton||p291.htm#i173937|Edward Stanley||p291.htm#i173940|Elizabeth Forster||p291.htm#i173941|Thomas Burton||p291.htm#i173938|Katherine Beyst||p291.htm#i173939|

Relationship=8th great-grandmother of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=7th great-grandmother of Virginia Ailene Swift.
      Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley was born circa 1616 at Knockyn, Salop, England. She was the daughter of Thomas Stanley and Sarah Burton. Elizabeth married Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd, son of John Lloyd and Katharine Wynn, circa 1637. Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley died in 1650.

Children of Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley and Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd

Ann Carroll

F, b. 25 Dec 1765, d. 8 May 1829
Ann Carroll|b. 25 Dec 1765\nd. 8 May 1829|p34.htm#i15468|Charles Carroll|b. 1724\nd. 1783|p34.htm#i14542||||||||||||||||
      Ann Carroll was born on 25-Dec-1765 at Chester County, Pennsylvania. She was the daughter of Charles Carroll. Ann married John Iddings, son of William Iddings and Hannah Scarlet, on 21-Jun-1787. Ann Carroll died on 8-May-1829 at age 63.

Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd

M, b. 1613, d. 17 Jan 1650/51
Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd|b. 1613\nd. 17 Jan 1650/51|p34.htm#i15565|John Lloyd|b. 1575\nd. 1636|p35.htm#i16188|Katharine Wynn|b. circa 1575|p34.htm#i15995|||||||Humphrey Wynn||p292.htm#i173956|Maude (Unknown)||p292.htm#i173957|

Relationship=8th great-grandfather of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=7th great-grandfather of Virginia Ailene Swift.
      Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd was born in 1597 at Dolobran, Montgomery County, Wales. He was born in 1613 at Dolobran, Montgomeryshire, Wales. He was the son of John Lloyd and Katharine Wynn. Charles married Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley, daughter of Thomas Stanley and Sarah Burton, circa 1637. Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd died on 17-Jan-1650/51. He died in 1657.

Children of Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd and Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley

Joseph Cloud

     Joseph married Mary Green, daughter of Thomas Green and Margaret (Unknown), on 6-Jan-1697/98.

Children of Joseph Cloud and Mary Green

Mary Green

F, b. 1665, d. 19 Oct 1739
Mary Green|b. 1665\nd. 19 Oct 1739|p34.htm#i15582|Thomas Green|b. circa 1640\nd. 1703|p124.htm#i67357|Margaret (Unknown)|b. circa 1640\nd. Oct 1708|p124.htm#i67358|Thomas Green|b. circa 1610|p124.htm#i67361||||||||||

Relationship=7th great-grandmother of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=6th great-grandmother of Virginia Ailene Swift.
      Mary Green was born in 1665 at England. She was the daughter of Thomas Green and Margaret (Unknown). Mary Green was born circa 1677 at England. Mary married Richard Moore circa 1685. Mary married Joseph Cloud on 6-Jan-1697/98. Mary Green died on 19-Oct-1739 at Concord, Chester County, Pennsylvania.
     She emigrated in 1686; aboard the ship "Delaware" from Bristol, England.

Children of Mary Green and Joseph Cloud

Children of Mary Green and Richard Moore

Governor Thomas Lloyd

M, b. 17 Feb 1640, d. 10 Jul 1694
Governor Thomas Lloyd|b. 17 Feb 1640\nd. 10 Jul 1694|p34.htm#i15601|Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd|b. 1613\nd. 17 Jan 1650/51|p34.htm#i15565|Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley|b. circa 1616\nd. 1650|p34.htm#i15338|John Lloyd|b. 1575\nd. 1636|p35.htm#i16188|Katharine Wynn|b. circa 1575|p34.htm#i15995|Thomas Stanley|b. circa 1590|p217.htm#i117713|Sarah Burton||p291.htm#i173937|

Relationship=7th great-granduncle of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=6th great-granduncle of Virginia Ailene Swift.
      Governor Thomas Lloyd was born in 1640 at Wales. He was baptized on 17-Feb-1640 at Dolobran, Montgomeryshire, Wales. He was the son of Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd and Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley. Thomas married Mary Jones in 1665 at Friends Meeting, Shropshire, Wales; 9th month 9, 1665. Thomas married Patience Story. Governor Thomas Lloyd died on 10-Jul-1694 at Philadelphia, Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, at age 54.
      Thomas Lloyd, a Welsh gentleman and physician, was the most influential Quaker politician in Pennsylvania during its first decade. A domineering and controversial personality, Lloyd served variously as president, commissioner of state, and deputy governor. Although excluded from the Provincial Council during the tenure of Governor John Blackwell, Lloyd exercised at that time perhaps his greatest power.

Lloyd was born in Montgomeryshire, Wales, into a gentry family which, contrary to the great majority of the Welsh gentry, sided with Parliament and the religious Independents during the Commonwealth. Like his two older brothers, Lloyd attended Jesus College, Oxford, where he studied law and medicine. By his senior year, Lloyd held Quaker sympathies, but kept them secret, perhaps fearing he would be victimized as other Quakers had been by both the town magistrates and the "wild and ungodly Scholars." Learning that his eldest brother Charles, a recent Quaker convert, had been imprisoned in Wales for his beliefs, Lloyd returned home from Oxford in 1663 to visit him. Lloyd's decision to fully embrace Quakerism, which happened during or soon after meeting with his brother in Welshpool jail, must have been wrenching, since it meant abandoning the high social standing and political influence to which his family had long been accustomed. Members of the Lloyd family had served as county magistrates for at least five generations and had long been among the prominent and influential families in the county.

Lloyd achieved a measure of success when, with Welsh Quaker leader Richard Davies, he visited county justices in an effort to secure the release of his brother and other Quakers. The meeting led to the transfer of the prisoners to a "sweet, convenient" house just outside the town and freedom to move about the town, provided they remained away from their homes and returned to their new quarters at night. Despite the ban, Charles Lloyd was able, with Thomas Lloyd, to hold Quaker meetings at the family estate of Dolobran Hall, which Charles had inherited in 1657.

Although Thomas Lloyd probably never acquired a degree, he was a practicing physician with both poor and prosperous patients, many of whom were Anglicans. He appears to have moved several times while in Wales, but he always remained within the vicinity of Welshpool. In 1665 he was imprisoned for refusing to take the oath of allegiance; that same year, however, he married Mary Jones, a fellow member of Shropshire Monthly Meeting. Lloyd's specific period in prison is unclear, but he probably remained a prisoner technically until formally released in 1672 by Charles II's general pardon.

Lloyd was outspoken in his advocacy of Quaker beliefs and opposition to persecution. Shortly after becoming a ministering Quaker in 1663, he disrupted services in a local Anglican church, delivering "a few very seasonable Words" to the parishioners. In 1676 Lloyd suffered the distraint of livestock worth £16 because he opted to lecture a justice and his party on true religion rather than depart an illegal meeting when ordered. In 1677, on behalf of local Welsh Friends, Lloyd travelled to London after a magistrate, irritated at Quaker refusal to swear the oath of allegiance, had threatened to execute them by means of the obsolete writ de heretico comburendo which had been last enforced under Mary Tudor. Lloyd and lawyer Thomas Corbet lobbied against the law with several members of Parliament; whether the result of their efforts or not, the writ was abolished during that session. The same year Lloyd also assisted the London Meeting for Sufferings in lobbying prominent non-Quakers on behalf of toleration.

In 1681 Thomas and Charles Lloyd agreed to hold a public debate with Anglican clergy headed by the Bishop of St. Asaph, William Lloyd, a contest that lasted two days at the town hall at Llanfyllin, and out of which Thomas Lloyd emerged as the principal Quaker spokesman. He made the concluding presentation on the Quaker rejection of the worship, ministry, and sacraments of the Church of England, at one point apparently refuting extempore 38 syllogisms on water baptism presented by the Anglicans. Bishop Lloyd was alleged to have commented that he had not expected "so much could be said by any on that Subject, on so little Warning."

By about 1682 Lloyd had decided to leave for Pennsylvania, perhaps because of the heightened persecution of Quakers in Montgomeryshire during the previous few years. Lloyd, "a carfull tender husband," delayed leaving for the colony until his wife recovered sufficiently from an illness to undertake the trip. Her health was not assisted by a voyage aboard the America that was marred by violent storms and by a whale who repeatedly assaulted the ship. Lloyd himself managed some respite from these travails by conversing in Latin with the German intellectual and fellow immigrant Francis Daniel Pastorius,* commencing a friendship which Pastorius later celebrated in verse. Mary Lloyd, however, died three months after the August 1683 arrival of the ship in Philadelphia.

A few days before leaving England, Lloyd had acquired from his brother Charles first purchaser rights to 2500 acres to be surveyed in the Welsh Tract. Over the next few years, Lloyd roughly tripled the size of his landholdings, acquiring a 250-acre tract in Philadelphia County, five properties totaling 1760 acres in Bucks County, seven properties totaling 3500 acres in Sussex County, 80 acres of liberty lands, and at least four Philadelphia city lots. Lloyd also invested in West New Jersey, acquiring a share for a term of years in an island near Burlington, and in 1686 a 500-acre property in Gloucester County for £200.

Lloyd quickly emerged as a leader in Pennsylvania. In October 1683 he was chosen foreman of the provincial grand jury that indicted Charles Pickering* on the charge of counterfeiting. Penn appointed Lloyd two months later to the important position of master of the rolls, making him responsible for enrolling laws, commissions, deeds, patents, and other official documents. Given Lloyd's status as among the highest bred and best educated of the colonists, as a substantial landowner, and as a prominent Quaker, his March 1684 election to a three-year term on the Provincial Council for Philadelphia County was unsurprising.

From the beginning, Lloyd became extremely active in conciliar affairs. Along with William Welch* and Thomas Holme,* Lloyd was appointed by William Penn to the pivotal committee that drafted bills for the consideration of the upcoming Assembly. Either Lloyd or Welch prepared the bulk of the bills, of which 21 were approved by the House. Among the eight committees on which Lloyd served were those to transcribe and examine the laws and to receive amendments proposed by the House. Lloyd appears to have been a controversial figure: along with Holme and Welch, he proposed a bill, rejected by the Provincial Council after "great debate," for a separate "Councill for State's Matters," apparently an appointive body responsible to the governor rather than to the electorate, and drafted a bill, rejected by the Assembly, which would have upset the balance of power with the Lower Counties by granting separate political representation to the town of Philadelphia, a development that only became reality well after Lloyd's death.

As if to demonstrate his loyalty to Penn, Lloyd drafted the unsuccessful and controversial bill for preserving the governor's person, and he chaired the Council's committee of the whole that resolved to continue the excise tax on liquor for the support of government. In turn, Penn entrusted Lloyd and William Welch with the task of convincing Governor Thomas Dongan of New York to persuade Lord Baltimore to remove armed Maryland intruders from New Castle County.

Before departing for England, Penn rewarded Lloyd with a predominant share of the important provincial offices that he distributed among 11 colonists. Appointed keeper of the great seal and a commissioner of property, Lloyd was also chosen for the chief political post, president of the Council. Penn's decision was unpredictable--Lloyd had only recently been elected to the Council, he was not as "weighty" a Quaker as James Claypoole* or Christopher Taylor,* nor nearly as wealthy as another leading Quaker, Robert Turner,* and he could not boast of familiarity with Penn in England like Claypoole or Thomas Holme. At age 44 he was among the younger members of the Council. But Penn was evidently impressed with Lloyd's performance there, and he probably recognized that Lloyd possessed a rare commodity for Pennsylvania, some knowledge of the law. In fact, Lloyd was an eager student of legal literature, having received in July a packet of law books concerning "all manner of Precedente" sent by his brother John Lloyd, one of the six clerks in the Chancery Office. Thus when Penn arrived in England, he entrusted Lloyd with collecting depositions in New York to assist with the case against Lord Baltimore. Penn may also have favored Lloyd because he perceived in him a person who, in some respects, resembled himself--a charismatic Quaker aristocrat.

As president, Lloyd chaired the meetings of the Provincial Council. Penn's commission authorized president and Council to appoint county and provincial officials and to promulgate bills in his absence, with the stipulation that he reserved the right to review and veto laws. Since the president and Council jointly acted as deputy governor, Lloyd had considerable power, for his approval, as well as that of a majority of the Council, was needed to promulgate bills and appoint officials. Lloyd, however, wished to separate and expand his office, often arguing that to serve as a councilor would be inconsistent with his role as president, where he represented the governor.

Lloyd's marriage to Patience Story of New York City in December 1684 had unintended consequences for Pennsylvania's government. Although Patience Story had initially intended for the couple to settle in Philadelphia, she became convinced, in Robert Turner's estimation, that the city was not "suffitient for gaine," and thus persuaded her husband by the fall of 1685 to make their home in New York City. Formerly a conscientious member of Philadelphia Monthly Meeting, Lloyd now became active instead in Flushing Monthly Meeting. As for making a living in New York, Lloyd apparently practiced medicine and engaged in commerce. Lloyd's attendance at the Provincial Council wavered; from 30 March 1685 to 3 May 1686 (the day before the Assembly began) he appeared at only 53 percent (35 out of 66) of the meetings. Although his attendance improved dramatically to 81 percent (76 out of 94) from 10 May 1686 to the arrival of Governor John Blackwell on 18 December 1689, the meetings were held with less frequency, particularly during the winter months. Interestingly, after Blackwell's departure and until the Fletcher administration, Lloyd never missed another recorded session, although meetings were still irregular. The infrequent sessions, however, combined with erratic attendance by councilors, may have created a power vacuum at the center of government that enabled Lloyd, as de facto governor, to wield greater authority.

Faced with the persistent maneuvers of the assemblymen to expand their legislative privileges, Lloyd led the councilors in upholding the prerogatives established for them in the Frame of Government. In conferences between the House and Council in the General Assembly of 1686, that were "wholy mannaged" by Speaker John White* and by Lloyd, the latter argued strongly against the amendments to the continuation bill which would have gained for the Assembly the right to repeal laws on its own initiative, and thereby subvert the Frame of Government. When the Assembly persisted, the councilors unanimously agreed to Lloyd's proposal that the Assembly should be dismissed without enactment of legislation rather then permit the "unavoydable mischeiff" a lapse in the laws would cause. The General Assembly then met and agreed with Lloyd's suggestion that the question of repeal should await Penn's return to the colony. During the 1687 Assembly, with Penn not having arrived, the Council simply failed to propose new legislation.

Tensions within the Council were overshadowed not only by the chronic friction with the Assembly over legislative privileges but also by the uproar surrounding Nicholas More's* lawsuits against the Free Society of Traders. President Lloyd appears to have commanded a solid Quaker majority that was rarely challenged, a domination facilitated by the particularly low attendance by councilors from the Lower Counties. In 1687 Phineas Pemberton* informed Penn that the Council, since he had returned to England, "has beene very agreeing and unanimous w[hi]ch has been A great stay to us."

Nonetheless, the factionalism that later characterized the Council originated during this period. Lloyd and the Quaker councilors followed certain policies that rankled the representatives of the Lower Counties: after August 1684, all Council meetings were held in Philadelphia; in 1685 a law was enacted, with Lloyd's active support, requiring the provincial justices to hear appeals twice annually in Philadelphia, instead of on circuit as previously; all the individuals either proposed by Lloyd or approved by the Council to be provincial justices were Quakers from the upper counties; and the modest proposal of the 1687 Assembly that at least one of the five justices should be from the Lower Counties was rejected. William Markham* and Robert Turner each came to dislike and distrust Lloyd, skirmishing with him over the appointment of officials. After Lloyd "moved hard" in support of the unpopular James Claypoole for the office of register general, Turner argued against the nomination, only to be undercut when Penn decided in favor of Claypoole. Markham, as provincial secretary, was angry with Lloyd's effort "to Make a partie" to oust him out of the clerkship of the Provincial Court, a position Markham argued was his by right of the secretary's office. Upon encountering some opposition in the Council, however, Lloyd retreated and permitted the provincial justices to make their own choice of clerk.

The only major challenge to Lloyd's leadership was sparked by Christopher Taylor, an elderly and eminent Quaker minister who argued that Lloyd's tenure as president ceased when his term as councilor expired in March 1687. In turn, Lloyd insisted that his commission was indeterminate. The impasse continued despite "great Disputes" between the two men, and even after Taylor completed his term, many councilors shared Taylor's conviction. William Markham, despite his own problems with the president, urged Penn to recommission Lloyd before his term expired to avoid a fundamental schism in the colony.

Penn, however, chose a different route. As early as April 1686, in a carefully phrased plea, Penn showed his concern over Lloyd's residing in New York: "I am glad thou affordest the Province thy presence sometimes, tho it is greivous to me to think I should be disapointed, but if it be for thy good, I desire to be contented." Again in September 1686 Penn commented: "I hope Patience will, for my sake, & w[hi]ch is more, for the truths, give thee up sometimes." By November 1686 his confidence in Lloyd's leadership had also eroded, as seen in a letter that month to the president; Penn lamented that he would pay at least £100 to find a man who would, in a true Christian spirit, "stand up for our good beginnings, & bring a savour of righteousness" to the colony. Apparently Lloyd was not that man, having failed in Penn's view to heal the political divisions in the colony. The proprietor made that clear several months later by lecturing Lloyd about the need for magistrates to be reconcilers, rather than the chronic quarrelers they were in Pennsylvania. Yet Penn retained more faith in Lloyd than in any other leader in the colony, the reasons for which remain something of a mystery.

In the 29 months since Penn returned to England, Lloyd sent at least 9 letters to him. Although the letters are apparently not extant, their contents can be surmised to some degree. Lloyd must have expressed considerable sympathy for at least some of Penn's goals for the province and persuaded Penn that he was working to accomplish those ends. Lloyd appears to have written at length about animosities in the province, and to have portrayed himself as a shrewd peacemaker, since the proprietor praised Lloyd on two occasions for following a sober and expedient policy in working to resolve conflicts. Like Penn, Lloyd complained about the financial burden that his commitment to Pennsylvania entailed, specifically the cost of having to maintain a residence in Philadelphia and to travel back and forth to New York. In November 1686 Penn rather deviously assured Lloyd of recompense as long as he either appeased or punished such wrongdoers as John White and Patrick Robinson.*

Penn was alarmed, however, by reports of Lloyd's behavior from Markham, who was both a persistent critic of Lloyd and a potential political rival. The communications from Markham contained much veiled but pointed criticism of Lloyd's leadership of the Council, but what troubled Penn most was Markham's description of Lloyd's behavior in the legal dispute between Nicholas More and the Free Society of Traders. Sitting in a "Great Arme Chear" reserved for him in Philadelphia County court, Lloyd had interrupted and quarreled with More in an undisguised, but futile, attempt to influence the jury into deciding in favor of the Free Society. Lloyd then, during a Council meeting, assisted the president of the Free Society, Benjamin Chambers, in preparing his petition for the right to appeal to the Provincial Court. Lloyd and the Council proceeded to overrule the county court's rejection of Griffith Jones* as security in the prosecution of the appeal. Observing that "both More and Lloyd have parties" arrayed against each other, Markham warned that the situation posed a grave threat to proprietary government if Penn did not return shortly to the colony or otherwise appoint someone to govern "with out passion Favour or affection." Markham further informed Penn that Lloyd justified his intervention in the courtroom on the grounds of an expansive, even exalted understanding of the powers inherent in his position as keeper of the great seal. Lloyd evidently believed that he was akin to the Lord High Chancellor of England, also keeper of the great seal, who presided over the equity court of Chancery. Given the equitable jurisidiction of Pennsylvania's county courts, Lloyd viewed himself as empowered therefore to preside over those courts, a right he claimed when More's trial was held in Philadelphia County court. Lloyd also claimed the right to preside over the Provincial Court, telling the justices in September 1686 that "there would never be a good Decorum untill he satt there as Chancellor, and they as Masters of Chancery, for his assistants." He added that "he did not think to doe it at this time."

Lloyd's partisan and interventionist role in the controversy between More and the Free Society may have been the catalyst that finally prompted Penn's decision to change the form of government by replacing the system of president and Council with a five-man deputy governor. Yet Penn in an ambiguously-worded comment in a January 1687 letter to James Harrison* the month before the commission was sent, indicated that if Lloyd "had kept his place, he might have prevented much of these things." Precisely what Penn meant by "kept his place" is difficult to determine; he may have been commenting on Lloyd's arrogant claims for expanded rights as president and chancellor or simply on Lloyd's residential shift from Philadelphia to New York. Penn's commission, in fact, appeared to confirm both possibilities. On the one hand, by appointing Lloyd, More, Claypoole, Turner, and John Eckley* as commissioners of state Penn hoped to "Ballance factions" in order to "quiet things" until he returned to the colony. In particular, Penn's scheme was designed to mend the dispute between the factions led by Lloyd and More, since as the second man named in the commission, More would have presided over the Council during Lloyd's frequent absences. On the other hand, Penn declared that the new commission was also issued to insure that "there may be a more Constant residence of the honorary & Governing part of the Goverm[en]t."

Lloyd and those with whom he consulted decided to ignore the commission and retain the old form of government, with Lloyd continuing as president. The entire Council, however, was not informed of the commission, since William Clark,* a regular attender, was evidently kept in the dark. Yet according to Penn, he received separate letters from President Lloyd, Arthur Cook,* James Harrison, and Phineas Pemberton assuring him that "all is well, truth in authority in the Government, & better then when I left the place." None of them, however, had mentioned the continuation of Lloyd as president. Penn was skeptical of the good news, since he was receiving contrary reports from other Quaker leaders, although they, too, had not revealed the failure to comply with his commission. Although certainly an independent and disobedient act, the noncompliance by Lloyd and his compatriots was not necessarily disloyal to Penn, since the sharing of power by such proud and temperamental individuals as Lloyd, More, Claypoole, and Turner could only have worked to the detriment of Penn's oft-repeated goal of political harmony in the colony. His utopian scheme was an unworkable arrangement.

Lloyd also had to contend with Penn's instructions to the commissioners. Previously, Lloyd and the Council had selected which of Penn's commands they chose to implement. That selectivity was due in part to Penn's tendency to write to them almost as equals and to couch his instructions simply as advice. While respecting his occasional recommendations for office and his concerns that the Assembly's privileges not be extended, Lloyd and the Council had not implemented such requests as proposing a new coinage bill or shutting down the caves of Philadelphia. Nor had they satisfactorily responded to Penn's letter to Lloyd sent in September 1686 requesting payment of the money pledged in the voluntary subscription of 1684, and also desiring a temporary annulment of the laws followed by reenactment with alterations, a maneuver to keep the provincial laws largely intact while satisfying the demand that they be reviewed by the Privy Council within five years. But when Penn changed the form of government, he also abandoned the gentle approach as impractical and issued instead abrupt commands to the commissioners of state that were to be obeyed, including the temporary annulment and reenactment of the laws.

In April 1687 Lloyd and the Council voted unanimously against a temporary annulment of the laws, at least until they heard further from Penn. Presumably the Council feared that by permitting the Assembly to review and reenact the laws, as would have been necessary after an annulment, the House would inevitably have pressed for an expansion of its rights. Lloyd and the Council evidently hoped that the matter could be delayed until Penn's return to the colony.

In December 1687 Penn informed Lloyd that he had granted his request to be discharged from the government. Although Penn had become highly suspicious that Lloyd had failed to comply with the commission, he nonetheless expressed his sorrow that his "esteemed Friend," a person so "young, & active, & Ingenious," should seek a dismissal. Yet Lloyd continued to act as president of the Council, and when Penn's commission was finally implemented in February 1688, with Arthur Cook and John Simcock* replacing More and Claypoole, the intrepid Lloyd took his seat as commissioner of state. Whether Lloyd had formally requested a dismissal from government is unclear. Perhaps Penn misinterpreted one of his laments about the burden and charge of government, or possibly such ardent supporters as Phineas Pemberton and Arthur Cook persuaded Lloyd to change his mind. Lloyd reportedly was "very un-easy & dis-satisfyed" by his recent correspondence with Penn about his demotion from president to commissioner of state, Lloyd feeling "eclipsd" by the other commissioners. Lloyd was also vexed by Penn's demand for official communications from the commissioners of state, instead of contradictory private letters, arguing that as "Cheiff in Authority," his many letters to Penn should be considered as official government correspondence. In the past, Penn had considered that method sufficient.

Penn still retained a remarkable faith in Lloyd, and in March 1688, with Pennsylvania still suffering political turmoil, he beseeched Lloyd "by all that is reverent, tender, & friendly" to accept the position of deputy governor for the sake of "that poor Province." Penn then received, however, a letter from Lloyd requesting a dismissal from government; whether the letter was written before or after Lloyd received Penn's offer to be governor is not known. Lloyd and some of his supporters had previously urged Penn to appoint a deputy governor, so there may have been a misunderstanding between the two men, Penn perhaps thinking that Lloyd wished dismissal from all governmental service, while Lloyd simply wanted to resign as a commissioner of state. Certainly, Lloyd's behavior when Governor John Blackwell arrived suggests a jealous leader deprived of power. In any event, in July 1688 Penn appointed Blackwell governor of Pennsylvania, although the old commission continued in force until the new governor's arrival in December.

William Markham, who still referred to Lloyd as "President," left little doubt in his letters to Penn in 1688 that despite the power-sharing arrangement, it was Lloyd who governed, or more accurately in Markham's estimation, misgoverned. Markham described Lloyd as overbearing and haughty, and also as manipulative, often evading responsibility by failing to sign documents after persuading others to append their signatures on the pretense that he would sign later.

Lloyd's relations with Markham and with Robert Turner continued to deteriorate. He had a particularly sharp dispute with Turner over the conduct of Francis Cornwell, the sheriff of Sussex County, who was vigorously defended by Lloyd when accused of failing to provide a return for Luke Watson* (d. 1705), a duly elected member. Markham, in the meantime, left no stone unturned in criticizing Lloyd to the proprietor, even hinting that to some degree Lloyd shared the growing antipathy among many councilors to a number of Penn's policies and decisions, such as his presumed right to veto laws, his ruling in favor of John Tatham in the prolonged dispute with Joseph Growdon,* and his instruction to establish a court of Exchequer in Pennsylvania. In each case, particularly those of Growdon and the court of Exchequer, Lloyd took positions opposite to that of the proprietor. In Markham's view, Lloyd's hunger for power had overwhelmed and diminished his loyalty to Penn. Markham stated his belief to Penn that in Lloyd, "the Flames of Ambition Envies that Spark that Comes not from its owne Fyre."

Whatever Markham's motives might have been for attacking Lloyd, he could not have critized his adversary for his firmness towards the Assembly, a policy advocated by Penn. As one of the commissioners of state, Lloyd had been instructed by Penn to forbid any conferences with the Assembly except for the discussion of legislation proposed by Council; this command represented a marked change in tone from Penn's earlier advice to Lloyd to "soften them that bustle in Generll Assemblys." Since the House had become accustomed to debating its "privileges" and other matters with the Council, Lloyd and his fellow commissioners were in an unenviable position. The already testy relationship between the Council and Assembly escalated when this instruction was enforced in 1688. According to Markham, Lloyd was the chief antagonist during two conferences in which the assemblymen "Stood Stiff For their Supposed previliges, but were Knock'd Downe, Rather then gently laid." The assemblymen were particularly irritated when Lloyd refused their modest request, at the first conference, to look at Penn's original commission to the commissioners of state, Lloyd insisting that even the most inferior officers were not obliged to show their commissions, much less such "Grand Magestrates" as the joint deputy-governor. At the second conference, Lloyd "sharply Reproved" the assemblymen for "touching upon many things not belonging to them." His position, however, was supported by a committee of the Council, which denied any right to the Assembly to form committees on its own initiative.

While Penn would have supported Lloyd's comments, he would not have been pleased at his treatment of Governor John Blackwell. When Blackwell sent Lloyd a gracious letter announcing his appointment, Lloyd ignored his request for an escort from New York City and instead orchestrated a rude reception for the new governor when he arrived in Philadelphia. Despite sending notification of his plan to meet with the commissioners and the councilors, Blackwell found the Council chambers deserted at the appointed hour; when Lloyd finally arrived, Blackwell received, instead of an apology and a welcome, a snide comment that he should have "more perticularly advertized, & formally summond" those in authority. Blackwell heard later that the lack of civility towards him on that first day was ordered by Lloyd.

Matters did not improve when Blackwell delivered to Lloyd, as keeper of the great seal, a new commission for Philadelphia County justices, requesting his advice and expecting him to seal it. Blackwell instead was "intertayned ... with an harrangue of severall things, out of some Law book, touching the formes of Commissions." Lloyd refused to seal the commission, claiming that at least two clauses either violated or were not sanctioned by provincial laws. The clauses in question apparently required that records of all fines imposed were to be sent to an appropriate proprietary officer to insure collection and abolished the discretionary power of justices to decide when appeals were permissable to a higher court. Assuming the powers of the Privy Council, Blackwell believed he had the right to rule any commission or law invalid which violated his understanding of the laws of England. Enraged by Lloyd's noncompliance, Blackwell issued the commission under the lesser seal.

Lloyd's defiant act was not supported by the councilors, who adopted without dissent John Simcock's proposal that Lloyd, still commuting to New York, could leave the province only if the great seal was left with the Council during his absence. This order reflected a severe diminution in Lloyd's influence, since all the councilors present, except for Markham, were Quakers from the upper counties--the group upon whom Lloyd relied for his support. These councilors evidently shared Blackwell's opinion that the sealing of commissions by the keeper was a ceremonial function to be performed on the command of the governing authority in the colony.

Lloyd disagreed sharply with that view and with the Council's resolution. In a remarkable speech before the Council, Lloyd insisted that as keeper of the great seal he was the constitutional arbiter of the province: "The duty of my place is to advise, and with you to Endeavour that nothing be attempted by any person or persons here, to the Subvertion of the Frame of Governm[en]t." Viewing his office, held by letters patent, as a form of property, Lloyd asserted that the resolution was "destructive of Right, and inconsistent with property," and that Blackwell and the Council were ruling by arbitrary methods. Alarmed and hurt that "Sincere minded" councilors had uncharacteristically acted in a manner "unbecoming the wisdom and dignity" of their position, Lloyd also sensed that they were relieved to be freed from his overbearing presence. But while admitting to having been "a great Drudge In my Sphere," Lloyd added that he had endeavoured to act in the best interests of the colony and was undeserving of their abuse.

Lloyd was further isolated when he tried to hide from Blackwell instructions sent by Penn to the commissioners of state. Lloyd claimed that the public content of all the letters had been disclosed to the governor and that Turner, Cook, and Simcock concurred. They, in fact, denied Lloyd's claim and the Council then unanimously ordered that all previous instructions be transcribed and delivered for the Council's perusal. Lloyd probably feared that Blackwell, seeing Penn's instruction to temporarily annul the laws, would reshape the colony's legislation to his own liking.

Lloyd's fear was well-founded; for example, Blackwell used Penn's order as part of his rationale for insisting that a 1685 law granting power to the governor and Council to appoint provincial justices should be replaced by an earlier law vesting that right only in the governor. The subsequent commission from Blackwell gained the support of the Council. Lloyd promptly refused to seal the commission, declaring it "more moulded by Fancy, then Formed by law."

Blackwell, however, insisted that the great seal had to be applied to legalize the Provincial Court, which was desperately needed to dispense justice on circuit in the Lower Counties. With such councilors as Robert Turner and Griffith Jones denouncing Lloyd's usurpation of power, the Council censured the keeper for a high misdemeanour of office in refusing to seal the commission.

Lloyd's intransigence did not hurt him with the Bucks County freeholders; at the March 1689 election, all but one of those assembled voted for Lloyd to serve a three-year term in the Provincial Council. The tide of opinion now swung towards Lloyd when Blackwell, overruling the right of the Council to determine the qualifications of its members, denied Lloyd his seat. With Blackwell also denying places to John Eckley and Samuel Richardson,* the majority of Quaker councilors, who had shown their increasing uneasiness over Blackwell by scattered dissents and infrequent attendance, were galvanized into active opposition.

Nor was Blackwell finished. On 2 April 1689 he presented the Council with 11 "high misdemeanors, Crimes and offences" against Lloyd, including his refusing to seal commissions, withholding Penn's instructions, illegally commissioning David Lloyd* as clerk of Philadelphia County court, engaging in factional intrigues with councilors, and neglecting his duties as master of the rolls and keeper of the great seal before Blackwell's arrival. At a stormy meeting during which some councilors expressed "in-ordinate affections" for Lloyd, the governor's proposal to form a committee to prosecute Lloyd was hotly debated and defeated "in such warme Expressions as are not fitt to be Recorded." Arguing that the governor and Council were powerless as long as Lloyd held the great seal, Blackwell threatened to try him without the Council's sanction.

Unperturbed and clearly unwilling to ease tensions, Lloyd came to the next meeting to assume his seat, refusing Blackwell's commands to depart and inciting his opponents with "sharpe & unsavoury Expressions." On 9 April 1689 Blackwell dismissed the Council for legislative purposes after a bitter debate with Quaker councilors who challenged his refusal to allow the Council to determine whether to seat Lloyd, Richardson, and Eckley. Eight Quaker councilors, including two from the Lower Counties, then wrote to Penn, accusing Blackwell of threatening the liberties of the people, in part by his "great Charge" against Lloyd, who had, they added, "faithfully served thee & the Countrey at his owne Charge." In a complete turnaround, they defended Lloyd's refusal to seal the commissions as an act of "good Conscience" because he believed the commissions were "not warrantable by law." They also warned that Blackwell sought the death penalty for Lloyd, a not unreasonable assumption given Blackwell's conviction that Lloyd's actions were seditious.

On 20 May 1689, on the final day of the tumultuous Assembly, a group of councilors, including Lloyd, met with the remaining assemblymen apparently to prepare a paper of grievances. Blackwell, however, stopped William Yardley's* attempt to introduce the "unduly hatch'd" paper, at which time Lloyd, Eckley, and Richardson entered the Council to claim their seats; Blackwell demanded they depart, whereupon Lloyd attracted a crowd outside the Council chambers when he persisted in "Lowd talking," stopping only after Blackwell threatened to shut the door.

The governor, however, achieved a minor victory when he persuaded nine councilors, including Yardley, to issue a declaration continuing in force only those laws enacted during Penn's tenure in the colony. The document, issued in lieu of a continuation bill, criticized Lloyd and his supporters for falsely accusing Blackwell and the Council of seeking to subvert the Frame of Government and "to Rule by an Arbitrary Power." Lloyd replied with A Seasonable Advertisement to the Freemen of this Province, copies of which, according to Blackwell, Lloyd was "scattering" about the province. Lloyd argued that the declaration was illegal, for it continued laws without consent of the Assembly, and he warned the colony's freemen that if they permitted such a document they effectively surrendered their rights, including "the Power of making Laws, erecting Courts of Justice, Raising of Monies."

Blackwell felt powerless without firm backing from Penn; in May he had requested his dismissal if the proprietor did not dismiss Lloyd and order the seal sequestered. In August his resignation was accepted by the beleaguered proprietor, who also ordered Blackwell to drop the prosecution of Lloyd and to mend, not punish, "Former inconveniences," an admonition which Blackwell considered "Very soft Expressions, touching a person so Criminall."

News of Blackwell's resignation may have convinced Lloyd to settle with his family in Philadelphia; in any event, he moved about this time from New York City, although retaining several properties there. In the fall of 1689 he resumed his membership in Philadelphia Monthly Meeting, in which he became moderately active. Lloyd evidently was a more dynamic figure in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, which called upon him to help write the epistles to English Quakers in 1685, 1687, 1691, and 1693. Possibly suffering financial insolvency or simply desiring to retrench, Lloyd divested himself of a significant share of his real estate. Between 1686 and 1693 Lloyd sold at least 2400 acres in Sussex County, 870 acres in the Welch Tract, and a High Street lot in Philadelphia. However, Lloyd also made some purchases, acquiring a 30-acre tract in Philadelphia County, and, more notably, obtaining first purchaser rights to another 1250 acres in the Welsh Tract. Where Lloyd lived in Philadelphia upon moving from New York is uncertain, but after August 1694 he may have resided at Third and Chestnut streets, where he purchased a house at that time for £250.

After Blackwell's resignation, Penn presented the Council a choice in their form of government, sending two commissions both of which permitted the councilors to select their principal leader. As a result, Lloyd's position became, from then on, more dependent on the support of the majority of the Council than on Penn's patronage. In a gesture of conciliation, such former Blackwell allies as William Markham, William Clark, and Griffith Jones joined with the dominant Quaker faction in electing Lloyd president of the Council in January 1690 and permitting him as keeper of the great seal to sit "Ex-officio in any County Court," thereby recognizing a right that Lloyd had long assumed. Lloyd and the Quaker majority, however, turned on Blackwell's supporters, invalidating the commissions of Markham and Robert Turner as clerk of Philadelphia County court and register-general, respectively, on the grounds that their terms had expired with Blackwell's resignation. Markham refused to surrender the county seal and records, while Turner complained bitterly to Penn about the failure to encourage such deserving individuals as Griffith Jones, Patrick Robinson, John Claypoole, and himself.

This partisan policy, along with festering grievances over the dispensation of justice in the Lower Counties, led to a November 1690 meeting of six councilors from the Lower Counties, who issued unauthorized commissions for provincial justices for the province and the territories, and who demanded veto power over county appointments. Lloyd and the other provincial councilors condemned the "Clandestine meeting" as an attempt to establish an alternative governor and council "which is an absurdity not to be tolerated."

After Penn added another option in the form of government from which the Council could select, ten councilors chose the commission for deputy governor, and elected Lloyd to the position, a choice precipitating a walkout by seven Lower Counties councilors, for whom Lloyd was a symbol of Quaker arrogance and urban chauvinism. They made their feelings clear in a letter to Penn which, among other accusations, charged Lloyd with stating that "it would not be well" until all judicial appeals were heard in Philadelphia and with spreading rumors that "he was a thousand pounds the worse for the Governm[en]t." In fact, they argued, "the People thoug[h]t the Governm[en]t was much the Wo an unknown person se for his being So much Concerned in it."

Lloyd condemned what he viewed as the formation of a separate Council "without any Just cause," but motivated instead by "obstinacy, willfull neglect & self interest," and he offered little consolation when he promised their return would be "lovingly" received and that they would not be forced to pay a penny for his services as governor. The boycotting members refused to return. But Lloyd had the strong backing of ten Quaker councilors, including two from the Lower Counties; they wrote to Penn that Lloyd's appointment was "to the generall satisfacion of the Inhabitants of the Province." Why they chose Lloyd is uncertain, although he reflected the growing disenchantment in the colony to the proprietor's increasingly futile efforts to exercise dominion over the legislature. A case in point was the letter sent by the ten councilors to Penn on 11 April 1691 that repudiated his critique of the Assembly's actions in the John White affair of 1689, that chastized him for countenancing their enemies, and that strongly defended the Council's choices of provincial and county officers. Yet the councilors assured Penn that Lloyd would not permit the Assembly to exercise or insist upon full legislative privileges, he having "some years since soe managed it in thy favour that many were not well pleased with him, thinkeing he strained that point beyond either thy Instructions or Charter."

In the fall of 1691 Penn named Lloyd and Markham deputy governors, respectively, of the province and the Lower Counties, with separate powers of appointment but joint powers of promulgating legislation. The following April Lloyd, Markham, and 15 councilors informed Penn that they were working amicably together in preparing legislation. In the General Assembly of 1692, however, Lloyd and Markham ignored Penn's harsh instructions to disallow the Assembly from having a speaker and clerk, or the right to debate and suggest amendments to laws--practices which Penn had countenanced when he resided in the colony. Instead, they allowed the House to review and amend laws that had lapsed, a continuation bill not having been enacted the previous Assembly, and thus in effect, permitting a right to repeal laws.

The conciliatory atmosphere was undermined by a proposed provincial tax in 1692 that aroused widespread opposition and rumors that it was primarily intended to supply a salary for Lloyd, who ultimately dismissed the Assembly before any legislation was enacted. Yet Lloyd received sympathy and assistance to ease his financial predicament from John White who, as Robert Turner scornfully reported, was "goeing about with a bagg, & paper for subscriptions for [Lloyd]." On the surface, the Lloyd-White alliance seemed unlikely, considering White's role in expanding Assembly privileges against Lloyd's strenuous opposition, but the common struggle against former Governor Blackwell had apparently brought them together, as also seen by Lloyd's conciliar order in 1690 for White to be continued as clerk of New Castle County court.

Another challenge to Lloyd's authority also occurred in 1692 with the Keithian dispute. Although eventually singled out (along with Samuel Jennings) by the Keithians as their greatest persecutor and opponent, Lloyd appears initially to have been a moderating influence, confident in the prospect of keeping Keith's supporters within the Quaker fold. By the summer of 1692, however, Lloyd was no longer sanguine about the prospect of reconciliation; he served on the six-member committee of the Meeting of Ministers and Elders that forbade Keith in June 1692 from preaching until he condemned his intemperate speeches against particular Friends. At about that time, Lloyd and Keith engaged in a heated debate over the sufficiency of the Inner Light for salvation, prompting Keith to utter disparaging remarks about Lloyd as a magistrate. Keith focused on Lloyd, at least in the estimation of Hugh Roberts,* because "he thought if he could but run him down he could deal well inufe with [the] rest," a commentary on Lloyd's political preeminence and his reputation for being a skilled debater. The summer witnessed further disputations between the "two scolars."

The publication in August 1692 of An Appeal from the Twenty Eight Judges shifted the focus from religion to politics by arguing that Quakers who served as magistrates betrayed their religious principles. Late that month, six Quaker justices of Philadelphia County court charged Keith with having defamed magistrates, and in particular "our worthy Friend Thomas Lloyd," by having called him "an impudent Man ... not fit to be Governour," and whose name "would stink." The justices also ordered both the seizure of the Appeal as subversive of government and the arrest of the publishers. Lloyd and eight Quaker councilors then called upon the provincial judges and county justices in September 1692 to prevent and suppress books and pamphlets that encouraged sedition, subversion, or the bringing of the proprietary or magistrates into contempt.

On 19 April 1693 royal governor Benjamin Fletcher wrote to Lloyd from New York that he would be taking office in ten days. Fletcher arrived three days early and while Lloyd welcomed "the prospect of a recess," he claimed to have received no word of the change from Penn nor any royal order to surrender the government. Nor would he partake in the publishing of the commission, particularly as most of those present were the same "Rabble" and enemies to "the Church of Xt [Christ]" who had created the circumstances prompting the overthrow of proprietary government. Lloyd retained his office as keeper of the great seal and obstructed Fletcher as he had Blackwell by refusing to seal either Fletcher's commission as governor or commissions for officers, and by turning down Fletcher's shrewd offer of the "First Place att the Councell Board," the governor "well Knowing hee would not Accept it." But Lloyd remained essentially in the background and Fletcher, although annoyed, avoided being drawn into the kind of confrontation with Lloyd that had plagued Blackwell.

Lloyd's taste for the struggle had waned, for his relationship with Penn had become severely strained, and he had wearied of political service without a salary. In a letter answering Fletcher's request for a supply for the defense of New York, Lloyd noted their parallel situations, as neither of them could expect relief from assemblymen who had long considered taxes unneccessary for the support of government. When Lloyd predictably declined Fletcher's offer of first place in the Council, he may have done so less as a protest or act of pride than as a desire to retire, for his letter to Fletcher also requested dismissal from government service which burdened but did not relieve him. That Lloyd also felt slighted by Penn left him with little incentive to challenge such a formidable foe as Fletcher, who had the full weight of the English government behind him. Lloyd was hurt that Penn had not replied to his letters, and was dismayed that the proprietor was sympathetic to George Keith and to the political faction in Pennsylvania opposed to the dominant Quakers. At one point, Penn mocked Lloyd for allowing personal irritation at proprietary silence to "Lett things drive to their present period." Penn blamed Lloyd, unfairly perhaps, with intentionally provoking the division between the province and Lower Counties in order to achieve his overweening ambition to be governor, and with also creating by his divisive leadership a political faction so anxious to be rid of him that it was willing to cooperate with Fletcher. Penn reprimanded Lloyd for not having challenged Fletcher in the same spirit that he had Blackwell; instead of meekly surrendering the government to Fletcher, he should have "stood upon his commission, Grounded upon a Legal & Solemn Patent."

Lloyd was deeply stung by this scathing attack. In reply, he stated that his love for Penn and faithful service to him would continue despite his animosity. "I am not the Man thou takest me to be," he ruefully added. Lloyd was not alone in his defense. In January 1694 Arthur Cook, John Simcock, Samuel Richardson, James Fox,* George Maris,* and Samuel Carpenter* rallied behind him, staunchly defending to the proprietor Lloyd's motivations and leadership. They stressed that Lloyd had accepted the position of deputy governor only after repeated and insistent requests, and that rather than seeking his own self-interest he had "wasted his Estate in thy Service" only to be rewarded with "thy hard thoughts." Moreover, Lloyd had proved his loyalty to Penn, by "his zealous prosecution" of proprietary instructions to uphold the prerogatives of Council, despite resultant unpopularity, and more recently by his refusal to serve under Fletcher.

Generally speaking, Lloyd's support came from those provincial leaders, that also included Caleb Pusey,* Phineas Pemberton, and Isaac Norris,* who were most sympathetic to Penn and his interests, indicating that while Lloyd charted an independent course for the colony he was unassociated with disloyalty to the proprietor. Since Lloyd presented himself as loyal, albeit misunderstood, his supporters were able to follow his lead while maintaining their allegiance to Penn.

Stricken with "a malignant fever" on 5 September 1694, Lloyd died five days later. His will, written on the day of his death and probated on 22 October, divided his estate among his wife, Patience, and seven children, and named as executors his wife, son Mordecai, son-in-law Isaac Norris, and kinsman David Lloyd. The will also stipulated that five slaves and their offspring be hired out to provide a steady source of income for his wife and children.

In December 1694 Patience Lloyd complained against David Lloyd at Philadelphia Monthly Meeting for his handling of the estate. At the heart of this lengthy and bitter dispute, in which the widow, with the support of Arthur Cook, threatened to sue, was her anger over the insistence by co-executors Isaac Norris and David Lloyd that little money, if any, would remain once all the estate's debts were satisfied. In 1701 Penn assisted Patience Lloyd, probably in compensation for Thomas Lloyd's political services, by providing her with an annual pension of £10. Penn was unforgiving toward her husband, however, blaming Lloyd as late as 1705 for proprietary financial woes by his having "complimented some few selfish Spirits" in allowing the repeal of the 1683 law for an excise tax on liquor "without my final consent." In 1716 Lloyd's estate had still not been completely settled. No inventory of the estate has been found.

He was graduated on 29-Jan-1661 at Jesus College, Oxford, Oxfordshire, England; degree of Bachelor of Arts. He studied medicine. He was converted to the Society of Friends under the teaching of George Fox 1663. He was imprisoned for being a Quaker. He was in prison off and on until 1672 in 1664. He emigrated on 10-Jun-1683 from London, Middlesex, England; He was from Westpool, Montgomeryshire, Wales. He immigrated on 20-Aug-1683. He held the position of master of the rolls between 2-Dec-1683 and 1694. He held the position of Provincial Council between 1684 and 1686 at Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. He held the position of commissioner of property between 1684 and 1686. He held the position of President of the Provincial Council between 1684 and 1687. He held the position of keeper of the great seal between 1684 and 1694. He held the position of Justice of the Peace in 1690 at Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. He held the position of Provincial Council in 1689/90 at Bucks County, Pennsylvania. He held the position of Deputy Governor between 1691 and 1692.

John Lloyd

M, b. 1639, d. 1695
John Lloyd|b. 1639\nd. 1695|p34.htm#i15602|Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd|b. 1613\nd. 17 Jan 1650/51|p34.htm#i15565|Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley|b. circa 1616\nd. 1650|p34.htm#i15338|John Lloyd|b. 1575\nd. 1636|p35.htm#i16188|Katharine Wynn|b. circa 1575|p34.htm#i15995|Thomas Stanley|b. circa 1590|p217.htm#i117713|Sarah Burton||p291.htm#i173937|

Relationship=7th great-granduncle of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=6th great-granduncle of Virginia Ailene Swift.
      John Lloyd was born in 1639 at Wales. He was the son of Supposed Father of Margaret Charles Charles Lloyd and Supposed Mother of Margaret Charles Elizabeth Stanley. John married Jane Gresham in 1668. John Lloyd died in 1695.

Thomas Moore

Thomas Moore||p34.htm#i15605|Richard Moore|b. 1659\nd. 1695|p35.htm#i16762|Mary Green|b. 1665\nd. 19 Oct 1739|p34.htm#i15582|||||||Thomas Green|b. circa 1640\nd. 1703|p124.htm#i67357|Margaret (Unknown)|b. circa 1640\nd. Oct 1708|p124.htm#i67358|

Relationship=6th great-granduncle of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=5th great-granduncle of Virginia Ailene Swift.
     Thomas Moore was the son of Richard Moore and Mary Green. Thomas married Wanda Rice, daughter of Hubert Rice.
      From Virginia Houser, 1195 Longwood, Troy,OH.

Mary Wynne

F, b. 19 Nov 1733, d. 1776
Mary Wynne|b. 19 Nov 1733\nd. 1776|p34.htm#i15729|Jonathan Wynne||p331.htm#i239064|Ann Warner||p331.htm#i239065|||||||||||||
      Mary Wynne was born on 19-Nov-1733 at East Nantmeal, Chester County, Pennsylvania. She was the daughter of Jonathan Wynne and Ann Warner. Mary married Henry Iddings, son of William Iddings and Mary Moore, on 23-Mar-1752 at Philadelphia, Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. Mary Wynne died in 1776.

Katharine Wynn

F, b. circa 1575
Katharine Wynn|b. circa 1575|p34.htm#i15995|Humphrey Wynn||p292.htm#i173956|Maude (Unknown)||p292.htm#i173957|||||||||||||

Relationship=9th great-grandmother of David Kipp Conover Jr.
Relationship=8th great-grandmother of Virginia Ailene Swift.
      Katharine Wynn was born circa 1575 at Dyffryn, Wales. She was the daughter of Humphrey Wynn and Maude (Unknown). Katharine married John Lloyd.
     Katharine Wynn was also known as Elizabeth (Unknown).

Child of Katharine Wynn and John Lloyd