On 6 Mar 2021 Jason F. wrote on Kemp-209:
Hey, I have a theory about this family I want to bounce off of people who know the Robert Kempe genealogy well.
I think there is a possibility that the son named in 1647 his will, Thomas Kemp (b. 1620s) went to Calvert County, Maryland and died there in 1684.
Thomas Kemp of Calvert County was transported in 1651. I've researched this man extensively in the Maryland archives. He made several trips back to England in the 1650s through the 1670s and may have been in London in 1671. He held significant land and appears to have jointly held property in Calvert County with a Robert Kemp, purchased in 1679, likely his brother. Thomas Kemp declared himself bankrupt in 1677 and died in 1684 leaving orphaned children to his (likely) son in law, Simon Stacy.
They pop up in later records of Calvert County--there were at least three sons: Thomas Kemp (d. 1695), Robert Kemp (d. 1694) and William Kemp (d. after 1720).
Simon Stacy moved to Stafford County, Virginia in 1687. Robert Kemp and Thomas Kemp are both named in records of Stafford County between 1691 and 1702 (one of those being posthumous). Both men died across the river in Calvert County, where their probates were recorded.
On May 11, 1692, George Brent (burgess) sued another burgess named Matthew Kemp (c.1655-1717) over the thieving of pigs from his property in Stafford County on Potomac Creek. The thief named was not Matthew but Thomas Kemp. No relationship is spelled out in the suit. Thomas Kemp was found guilty and fined, but the implication seems to be that he was broke and Matthew may have paid his hefty fine for him.
Now its possible that the Thomas Kemp of Stafford was not the man from Calvert but instead Thomas Kemp, Gentleman Justice of Middlesex County (bef. 1666-aft. 1695) whom we know to have been a son of Matthew Kemp Sr. (1630-1683). But I haven't found any evidence he was in Stafford County, and really, why would a Gentleman Justice steal pigs?
If Thomas Kemp Sr. of Calvert County was long lost the son of Sir Robert Kempe 1st Baronet, that would make Matthew Kemp Jr. of Middlesex and Thomas Kemp Jr. of Stafford first cousins. I wonder if Thomas told the court "I don't have any money and my father is dead, why don't you sue my rich cousin?"
There's only one thing that doesn't fit well: Thomas Kemp Sr. gave his age as 52 in a deposition of 1673, placing his birth as 1621. In the will he is named second after his brother Robert, who we know was born Feb. 2, 1627 by his gravestone. It's possible Thomas misremembered his year of birth, but to be off by a whole six or seven years is a stretch. Maybe he was a disinherited older son? He was given only sixty pounds in his father's will, so it makes sense that he had to make his own way in life. The official Kemp genealogies don't seem to know what happened to Thomas, son of Robert, he just sort of vanishes.
Thoughts?
