First Friday Folder: John Richardson & Isabella Shaw

I've been wondering if this monthly post is worth my time since it is often totally NOT what I'm really working on at the time.  I've even been thinking about dropping the project.  But, recently, Randy Seaver posted about checking his files, and I am now reassured and re-motivated!

This month I picked great-great-grandparents John D. RICHARDSON and  Isabella SHAW because I have to start getting ready for my next big genealogy trip: Hubby and I are going all the way to Morgan County, Missouri to the Richardson Family reunion hosted by Cousin Donald in June!  This is the first First Friday Folder I've done from my Hegwer line.

Third-cousin Donald found me online a few years ago through some comments I'd left at ancestry.com.  We've communicated quite a bit including several long phone calls.  Donald has very graciously offered to show us historic Richardson family sights!  He said there won't be too much genealogy at the reunion itself, but I assured him that I will be very happy to finally meet him in person, see the area, and feel the Missouri earth between my toes!

The Couple
I've written about John D. a bit before and there's even a photo of him here.  The eighth child of Amos Richardson and Elizabeth Hicks/Hix, John D. was born in 1829 in Cooper County, Missouri, just before that area became Morgan County.  Isabella, born in 1828 in Ohio (probably Knox County in an area that later became Morrow County), was the fifth child of Robert Shaw and Sarah Miller.

They married in Morgan County in 1849 and had 7 children before Isabella died in 1877.  John remarried 1880 to Mary Jane Krues.  John D. died in 1908, just shy of 80, and having outlived both wives and two of his children.

The Folder
This folder is about 1/2 inch thick, mostly because of all the census printout for all the kids.  Its organization is in pretty good shape: just 2 pages to reposition.  I did a little census work on son John Franklin Richardson, and then printed a new family group sheet.  I have full, well sourced data on all the kids except for daughter Anna Bell Richardson who married Wallace Mattox/Maddox in 1885.  I don't know what happened to either of them, but she apparently died before 1908 without heirs.

I reviewed my copy (courtesy of Cousin Donald) of John D's 1908 obituary.  While it has many errors in info of his early life, it does give details of his last few years which would have been more likely to be accurate anyway.  I reviewed a photocopy of a 1908 probate document [1], which names youngest son Amos as administrator and names the heirs: the five surviving children and two sons of deceased son James.

Something New to Try
Last weekend, I attended a full day seminar at the local genealogy association.  Lisa Louise Cooke was a wonderful presenter and covered all sorts of tips for Google stuff in genealogy.  I used her directions for using Google Earth with the Bureau of Land Management's General Federal Land Records website and EarthPoint  to get a view of where one of John D.'s original land patents would appear.

The orange line towards the top of this snip is the north side of 43N Township in Morgan County, Missouri.  The purple square is Sec 5.  Both of those came up on Google Earth after following Lisa's directions.  I added the yellow rectangle (again, following her directions) to show John's W1/2NW1/4, about 40 acres, issued in 1853.  I can't wait to try this on other ancestral patents!!

The Plan
I don't think that I need a plan per se for this couple right now.  Info and sources are pretty solid.  I think this review helped with a little tidying up and as a chance to try a new skill with Google Earth.  I think I achieved my main goal of reviewing all info before moving to John D.'s parents next month.

Conclusions

• It's mandatory to review all the data I have on one generation before I tackle earlier generations.  I want all my Richardson data to be as clear as possible in my head for the trip in June!
• Local societies have lots to offer and this seminar was especially useful.  And, as soon as Ms. Cooke started the Google Earth portion of her presentation, I knew I could use that info right away for illustrating John D.'s land patents here. 
• I'm so excited about this trip! I just hope I have time to be fully prepared....

Sources

[1] Morgan County, Missouri, Probate Court.  Will Record, Vol. 3, 1892-1919.  FHL # 983,550; p. 96.

Full Disclosure

I am not employed by nor do I receive any special consideration from any of the entities named above.  Lisa Louise Cooke follows this blog, we share middle names, I subscribe to her podcast, and I bought her new book package with the very nice seminar discount available to everyone who was there.

Forgotten Settlers of Kansas: To Register or Not?

This group has publications, a nice webpage, and more, both for societies and individuals.  One of their projects is, in essence, a lineage society for direct descendants of so-called "Forgotten Settlers of Kansas."  Certificates are available in the following categories of Kansas residency:

• Territorial  --   before 29 Jan 1861
• Pioneer  --  between 29 Jan 1861 and 31 Dec 1880
• Early Settler  --  between 1 Jan 1881 and 31 Dec 1900

It appears that great-great-grandparents Carl Benjamin Hegwer and Maria Rosina Ilgner, great-grandfather Charles Hegwer, and most of his siblings are eligible for the Territorial category and I could receive a certificate(s) by completing the application, supplying documentation, and paying $12. per individual.  Part of the application and documentation would be published in a book; names would be on their website.

I know Carl, Maria, Charles, and the other Hegwers are NOT forgotten!  While it's still a bit sad to me that all the Hegwer/Ilgner names do not appear on the lists at the website, I don't think I'll join the program.  What do you think?

Lots More Marriage Records: Grice & Gib

I didn't intend to write a series, but here's another example (my first such post is here) of the need to use indexes, regardless of their format, only as finding aids leading to the original records.  Today's example is from  FamilySearch and its England Marriages, 1538-1973 database.

Index Results
Searching for a GRICE and GIB marriage, my 4th-great-grandparents, yields these two index results:

This one gives lots of info;  FHL film # 1,655,691 is cited.  The slight misspellings/transcription errors could be the first hint that something might be a tad askew....

The second search result gives less info, a bit of conflict in the location, and a marriage a day later:

It cites FHL # 990,896 as the source.  I really, really hope that anyone getting these search results takes the time to look at the source microfilms....

FamilySearch Issued a Warning
If you follow the links back from the image screens to those about the database itself, you arrive at the Wiki page for the English Vital Records Index.  It's a fairly detailed description of the record set.  The first section in this wiki is 'Known Issues with this Collection.'  I think FamilySearch made a good decision in making these records available online, even though they knew there were major problems. It's up to the genealogist to carefully evaluate any records and to do a thorough job before drawing conclusions.  In this case, the sources cited for my ancestors give a much more precise picture than the conflicting index entries.

Back to the Source
FHL film # 1,655,691 is Marriage Bonds,1806-1811 for the Church of England, Dean & Chapter of York.  The entire film is images of marriage allegations and marriage bonds.  The indexed "marriage date" of 17 October 1808 is really the date the allegation was made and the bond was pledged.  The "marriage location" was really the couple's cited residences at the time. Later in the bond, it says that John "prayed a License to Solemnize the said Marriage in the Chapel of Luttons Ambo."  It's good data to have, but it's no guarantee that a marriage ceremony occurred that day, if at all.

I was looking only in the Weaverthorpe area.  Without the FamilySearch index leading me to a film about the 'peculiar jurisdiction of the Dean & Chapter of York,' I am not confident that I ever would have found it on my own, even though I knew the jurisdiction existed.  I just wouldn't have looked for it.  This series of films begins with 1613-1704.  I wonder what treasures I could find if I look at more of them?!

and Back to the Other Source
FHL # 990,896 has Bishop's Transcripts: Item 1 for the Parish Church of Helperthorpe, 1631-1870; Item 3 for the nearby parish church of Weaverthorpe, 1631-1852.  The Helperthorpe item is much shorter and Helperthorpe residents all most exclusively.  The Weaverthorpe item includes residents of both areas and  seems to have all the burials for the area.    In Item 3, we find this record:

There are no page numbers -- just general chronological order.  The section is labeled Marriages 1808.  My photo is not that good, but the image was easy to read:

Octr 18th.  John Grice of this Parish, Widower, and Sarah Gib of the same Parish, Spinster, were married in Lutton Chapel by licence [sic]

In this case, the index seems to be accurate in giving October 18 as the marriage date and Weaverthorpe was the parish, but not the exact location.  A very small number of entries in this film specify Lutton Chapel as the location. 

Conclusions

• New online databases are wonderful, but there are problems.
• Not everything we need for better results in our research is online.  Microfilms still have great value.
• Having been led to these films by the FamilySearch website and now having read the source films, I've found details of John's first marriage, discovered his probable parents, and found that Jane remarried after John's death.  That totally unexpected discovery even led to finding her in the 1841 census.  Thank you, FamilySearch!

First Friday Folder: Cary & Godfrey

I'm backdating this post a bit, but I did start it before January's first Friday...!  These are two of my eighth-great-grandparents: John CARY and Elizabeth GODFREY.  I picked this folder for this month because I haven't worked on them for a very long time, no one in the line of descent has been a FirstFridayFolder yet, and the folder looked awfully large.  I was hoping there would be lots to weed out, leaving more room in the file drawer!

Organization
Yes, I hadn't studied this couple for a long time: the family group sheet was six years old!  There were several printouts from 2003 of online, unsourced family trees--clearly from my name collecting days--and I discarded them.  Yeah! The file drawer has a little more room!

Updates
I ran the Cary/Godfrey names in searches in the NEHGS databases, printed out a few sheets, and updated the sources in my database.  Darn, now the folder is back to the size it was before I started....

Planning
Reviewing my notes in the family group sheet, I see that there is a good deal of controversy/uncertainty about John Cary's ancestry and early years.  I checked the Great Migration series at NEHGS and see that there is still no Cary sketch.  I checked Hollick's (2006) New Englanders in the 1600s and recorded the sources for Cary in my To Do file.

I need to study more on the best or standard format for locations in the Massachusetts area in the 1600s.  Should I be using colony names?  What was Bridgewater part of in 1644?  It seems to me that there should be a published,  industry standard for all those early towns for specific date ranges.

Line of Descent

John Cary  =  Elizabeth Godfrey

Joseph Cary  =  Maretia Mercie Bushnell

Elizabeth Cary  =  Seth Palmer

Joseph Palmer  =  Abigail Lasell

Zenas Palmer  =  Lydia Marshall

Lydia Palmer  =  David Bascom

Hannah Field Bascom  =  Titus Davison

Clara Eveline Davidson  =  Celim Homer Porter

L Willis Porter

Genealogy Resolutions: 2010 score card & 2011 goals

2010 Resolution Scorecard 
When I sat down to compose this post, my mindset was that I had had a very successful year.  But, having just reviewed my 13 resolutions for last year, I didn't do so well if I just look at the numbers:  one completed and two very well along.  On the other hand, the one completion was a biggie: a research trip to the Salt Lake Family History Library.  Unfortunately, my one completed resolution created more finds to analyze and sidetracked me from my other, more specific, goals.

I had also resolved to eliminate the TO-DO piles.  (Yeah, sure!)  I didn't succeed, but I am very, very proud to have only 2 piles left and they are both much smaller than this time last year.

My other partial success was in finding the parents of the Lucy WAIT who married Asahel DAVISON circa 1792.  I have a couple under study now, and I really think they are the right ones:  I just need a solid piece of evidence to tie them to her.

It wasn't on my list of goals, but I feel very fortunate to have found the birth family for a 90-year-old friend of mine.  Adopted as an infant, she found out she was adopted when the woman she called 'Mom' died.  She has spoken with half-siblings and they are very happy to find out about her.  Also, I found the immigrant grandparents of another friend who thought she'd never know their names.

Alas, that still leaves 7 resolutions virtually untouched and 2 touched but with no substantive change in their status.  I think I need fewer resolutions for 2011!

Goals for 2011 
1.  Keep on the search for the parents of the Lucy WAIT who married Asahel DAVISON circa 1792.  I think I am really close on this one after all these years....

2. Attend the reunion of descendants of Amos RICHARDSON in Morgan County, Missouri in June, 2010 ... a carry-over from 2010.

3.  Write/phone the Del Norte Cemetery in Rio Grande County, Colorado to see who is buried in the plot for which I have a bill of sale / deed to Charles HEGWER ... another carry-over from 2010.

4. Arrange for a headstone at the unmarked grave of Celim PORTER [10 May 1913 - 18 Jun 1913] at Cavalry Cemetery in Los Angeles. Celim was the son of L Willis PORTER and his first wife, Josephine Slater, who died barely a month after her only child and is buried about 20 yards away  ... another carry-over from 2010.

5. Keep working on the 2 remaining piles of research to input or analyze. I made great progress on this goal in 2010.  This year I will get it down to one pile that fits in the TO-DO box by this computer!

6.  Blogwise, my goal was 20 postings published and this makes 47!  The only goal I'll make for GreatGreats itself this year is to get the story of finding my grandmother written.  That's why I started this blog and the time has come.

Overall, I think 2010 was a good year for GreatGreats!  May you have a GREAT year and may your greatest genealogy problem be solved in 2011!

First Friday Folder: Goodale & Clough

With all my agony over changing templates last month, I completely forgot to do a First Friday Folder.  Did anyone miss it?

This month, I picked a folder of which I had absolutely no idea what it needed.  It was labeled "Goodale ... Clough," which in my system means that it is a catch-all folder for those surnames and their ancestors: I haven't made folders for the couples and haven't printed out any family group sheets. 

The Goodale/Clough folder has about 23 sheets in it: excerpts from some un-sourced online pedigrees, some book excerpts from Heritage Quest, and some database printouts from New England Historical Genealogical Society.  This seems to be some of the info I used to add the names to my database, but it has no organization and I did not leave myself any notes let anlone anything resembling a plan.  My goal for today is to make folders, print family group sheets, examine sources, and make a general plan for each couple.

So, first, I printed out Mehitable Clough's portion of the pedigree chart:

Then, I checked the file drawer and found that I had followed my system: I don't have a folder for any of these couples.  That means that these names were entered into by database when I was more of a name collector than a genealogist, so there's no telling what these family group sheets will look like....

I've made 9 folders now and printed out the corresponding 9 family group sheets. Most were only 2-3 pages long and have source lists looking like this excerpt:

I guess it could have been worse. It looks as though it's been about 5 years since I've looked at any of these names.  There are very few primary sources but some reputable secondary sources and definitely a good lead for further solid research.

The General Plan
I need to start with Mehitable Clough and Thomas Goodell, finding primary sources for all events for them and their children.  (I believe they are my fifth-great-grandparents.)  Then, I can work back through their ancestors, one couple at a time.

Martin Hollick's New Englanders in the 1600s [1] shows several good sources available for most of these names.  The first thing that strickes me is that 'Goodale' is a varient for 'Goodell.'  I don't think I knew that before. 

Conclusion
This has been a secretarial, housekeeping week: making organized folders so I will have a place ready for filing the new research I need to do.  These lines seem to have a good deal of established research attached to them.  I think I just need to verify and document it.  I think research will be easier now, if only because I didn't have the Hollick book five years ago.

Sources

Pedigree and source excerpts cropped from my personal database, which uses Ancestral Quest software. [I am very proud of finally figuring out a way to easily get a nice looking pedigree chart into this blog!]

[1]  Martin E. Hollick, New Englanders in the 1600s: A Guide to Genealogical Research Published Betwee 1980 and 2005.  Boston: New England Historical Genealogical Society, 2006.

Lots of Marriage Records: John Sweet & Judith Payson

Great-great-great-grandparents Norton Bates and Betsey Sweet have caused me genealogical problems for all the years I've been working on genealogy.  First, it took several years to figure out who Norton's parents were: Moses Bates & Ruth Shaw. Sorting BATES in New England is not easy, but now I have all of his lines back for at least 3 more generations and some for many more.

Betsey Sweet is still a problem.  I think of her not so much as a brick wall but more like a climbing wall with footholds and handholds out of reach and me with no safely line....  I've been collecting SWEETs for many years, studying families and hoping for possibilities, while eliminating most of them.  Recent additions to the familysearch.org databases gave me a new location for Betsey's possible parents: Adams, Berkshire, Massachusetts.

CAUTIONARY WARNING: I am NOT saying that the following couple are the parents of my Betsey Sweet.  They are simply one more lead that I am currently exploring.

From the Massachusetts Marriages, 1695-1910 database:

This looks like a very good lead, given Betsey's death record listing parents' names John & Judith Sweet and a calculated birthdate of about 1794.  Last weekend, I traveled to the newly remodeled Los Angeles Family History Library (yes, they've changed names again) and got to see the source film, FHL# 760,652.  Sure enough, there where it was supposed to be on p. 23 was entry #124:

But, it's not quite as advertised: it says "intended," not "married," and is the only entry on that page without a notation of when a certificate was given.  I was very sad to see that I did not have a solid marriage record here, but I kept reading the film, mostly because it was such easy reading.  I was not hopeful since the familysearch.org search function had not turned up any other records. Then, just a few pages later, I found this one:

 Aha! Over two years later, they again made their intentions AND got a certificate another month later!  The difference in her name is not a deal breaker; it just gives me additional names to watch.  But, now I'll need to watch for issues around Betsey's birthdate in relation to the marriage of her parents.

I kept on reading, hoping to see some children for the couple.   There were some children listed pages later for other families, but none for any Sweet family nor Payson family.  But then, the format of the document changed again and it went back to some marriage records where I found this one:

Aha! Aha!  And 'they' thought they could fool me!  This entry sure makes it look as though this couple actually married on 4 September 1796.  These three entries were the only SWEET or PAYSON names I saw on the whole film.  There weren't even any of either name among the recorded earmarks!

I still can't link this couple to my Betsey Sweet with any confidence, but they are the best candidate now and the best candidates I have ever had.

I'm sharing this research to show that the familysearch.org databases are not perfect.  I tried again today to form a search that turned up either the second or third entry in the online index.  After quite a bit of effort and knowing the records are indeed on the film, I was able to find my second record:

Again, it's indexed as a marriage rather than intentions.
And, finally, I was able to force the third one to show up in a search:

Note that it was indexed as 'Tason' rather than 'Pason,' an understandable indexing interpretation if one had not been reading pages of that handwriting and looking at how known Ps & Ts compared.

This all showed me again in just one day that I must always, always go to actual sources.  This experience also reinforced the idea that just because a search in an online database doesn't turn up the people I'm looking for, it doesn't mean that they aren't there!

Sources

Births, Marriages, and Intentions of Marriage, ca. 1766-1847 [Adams, Massachusetts].  FHL # 760,652.

https://beta.familysearch.org ; database: Massachusetts Marriages, 1695-1910.

Digital photos of the microfilm images off the microfilm reader by MHD.

A New Celebrity Cousin!

I admit it's interesting to me to find a distant relative is a celebrity or historical figure, but I don't go looking for them.  I've often thought that I'd much rather be related to a professional or serious genealogist!  If only Steve Danko had a Silesian Hegwer in his Polish lines....  At least I've got Pauline Litton in my Carr line, as I've written previously, and I'm very proud of that!

But wait, today there is news:  Randy Seaver of Genea-Musings and I are cousins! I'm so excited!  Alright, it's only 8th cousins, but that's something!  

I just saw Seaver's recent post  on his Peirce Surname.  We share 7th great-grandparents George Stearns and Hannah Sanderson of my New England Porter line.  I am not totally surprised, though, since I've been reading his series of surname lines and I had seen several names that I knew were neighbors of several of my great-greats. I saw him last year at Jamboree but didn't talk with him; if he comes this year, I'll be sure to introduce myself!