William Saltar
American politician (1732–1802)
William Saltar II (1732–1802) was an American politician in North Carolina that represented Bladen County in the North Carolina House of Burgesses and at the first, second, and third North Carolina Provincial Congresses. He was a director, trustee, and commissioner of Elizabethtown and is buried there. During the American Revolutionary War, he was chosen as colonel of the Bladen County militia but declined it. His wife Sarah "Sallie" Saltar (née Lloyd) spied on a Tory camp led by John Slingsby under the pretense of selling eggs, eggs and socks, or baked goods, later reporting to Thomas Brown and Thomas Robeson Jr. before the Battle of Elizabethtown.
Biography
William Saltar II was born in 1732 and was the son of William Saltar.
Saltar was named as one of the five original directors and trustees of Elizabethtown, North Carolina, in the law enacted by Josiah Martin, the council, and the North Carolina House of Burgesses in 1773. Saltar was also named as one of the five commissioners. Saltar represented Bladen County at the First North Carolina Provincial Congress in 1774 alongside Walter Gibson.
He represented Bladen County at the Second North Carolina Provincial Congress and the North Carolina House of Burgesses in New Bern in April 1775 alongside James White.
“William Saltar” enters the record as american politician (1732–1802). Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what William, Saltar and American can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“William Saltar” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, William, Saltar and American provides the most credible route into that argument.
Biographical claims are most persuasive when dates, appointments and relationships can be traced to records created close to the events described. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 24, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q134524638. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1732, 1802, 1773 and 1774.
Later biographies can compress uncertainty and repeat inherited reputations, so apparently settled claims may still require comparison. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.
- Establishing names and roles
- Building a first chronology
- Locating cited institutions
Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “William Saltar”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow William Saltar primary sources, William Saltar archive and William research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “William Saltar”?
- How has the subject’s reputation changed across later accounts?
- Which claims depend on a single source or contested interpretation?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “William Saltar” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.