The antiquarians have been sorely perplexed in determining the relationship of the Cheevers and Reas, as they appear to be connected together as heirs of the Lothrop property, in an order of the General Court of the 11th of June, 1681.

The facts are these:  Captain Lothrop married Bethia, daughter of Daniel Rea.  He died without issue, and had made no will.  As he was killed in battle, his widow undertook to set up a nuncupative will.  A snow-storm, on the day appointed to act upon the matter, so blocked up the roads, that neither Ezekiel Cheever nor his son Thomas, who had charge of his mother’s rights, could get to Salem; and the court granted administration to the widow.  The Cheevers demanded a rehearing:  it was granted; and quite an interesting and pertinacious law-suit arose, which was finally carried up to the General Court, who decided it in 1681.  The widow does not appear to have been actuated by merely selfish motives, but sought to divert a portion of the landed estate from the only legal heir, Ellen, the wife of Ezekiel Cheever, to other parties, in favor of whom her feelings were much enlisted.  There is no indication of any unfriendliness between her and her “sister Cheever.”

Lothrop’s wife had become much attached to one of her connections, who had been brought into the family.  Her husband, having been fond of children, had often expressed great affection for those of her brother, Joshua Rea.  He had also sometimes, in expressing his interest in the Beverly Church, evinced a disposition to leave to it “his ten acre lot and his house upon the same,” as a parsonage.  Perhaps, if he had not been suddenly called away, he might have done something, particularly for the latter object.  It appeared in evidence, from her statements and from others, that he had been importuned to make a will, and that it was much on his mind, particularly when recovering from a long and dangerous sickness the winter before his death; but he never could be brought to do it.  There was no evidence that he had ever absolutely determined on any thing positively or specifically.  His widow, who seems to have been a perfectly honest and truthful woman, testified to a conversation that passed between them on the subject, as they were riding “together towards Wenham, the last spring, in the week before the Court of election.”  In passing by particular pieces of property owned by him, he indulged in some speculations as to what disposal he should make of this or that pasture or plain or woodland.  But she did not represent that his expressions were absolute and determinate, but rather indicative of the then inclination of his mind.  In another part of her statement, she said, “I did desire him to make his will, which, when he was sick, I did more than once or twice; and his answer to me was, that he did look upon it as that which was very requisite and fit should be done.  But, dear wife, thou hast no cause to be troubled; if I should die and not make