Overwhelmed!

I've been doing a lot of thinking recently about my 4th-great-grandfather Samuel Browning.

Samuel is a cornerstone of this blog.  He is the reason I started doing The Browning Series over in my sidebar and he's the patriarch of the 'Browning Fifteen,' the total of his children with his two wives Margaret Markee and Sarah Ann (Bell) Gaddis.  His parentage is my Holy Grail.

He's also my brick wall.  As in walled up and fortified.  As in a moat....you know, the thing that even keeps dragons out?  I've known about his existence for over 20 years now and his parentage is nearly as clouded in mystery now as it was when I first saw "S & M Browning" on his son James' tombstone.

My original plan when I started this blog was to talk about Samuel's children -- introduce them all one by one -- and then tie them all together by going into detail about Samuel and his wives.  I've accomplished a lot on that already, as you can see by the amount of listings underneath 'The Browning Series' on my sidebar.  I've spoken of many of his children, and his grand- and great-grandchildren.  I just haven't moved as fast as I'd have liked and I haven't really been as dedicated to this blog as I was in the beginning.

That was what I've been thinking about in the last couple of days.  I was asking myself why.

I know why.

Sure, there's the frustration of continually beating my head against the wall that is Samuel.  I find a few things here and there, more details about his life and his movements, and it makes me thrilled and happy and I temporarily grow that much more determined to continue my search.  I know quite a bewildering amount about him, actually!  But he continues to stump me and the excitement fades and I eventually stall out.

There are many reasons.  I feel one of them is my comparative 'inexperience' when it comes to pre-1850 records.  I am sure I have more experience than I feel I do in this regard; I tell myself that my experiences in working the Browning vs. Beck case from 1837 on my sidebar must surely count for something!  However, the players in that case were known to me.

So what about the records that I know about.  Records?  Hah.  You're probably saying, go to wills and probates...but guess what?  Samuel doesn't HAVE any.   I know where he died -- he was living in Windsor, Shelby Co., IL in a log cabin -- and I know within a five year gap, likely within a 3 year gap (1865-1870, though probably closer to 1868) but I've been to the Shelby County courthouse and there were no wills and no intestate papers there.  No guardianship papers for his minor children Laura and Mary Medora, either.  His widow Sarah was still in Windsor in 1870 but around 1873, she moved to Putnam Co., MO to join her adult children from her first marriage.  (I thought about looking in the newspapers but the Shelbyville Democrat begins in 1876 and the Windsor Gazette in 1879. Bah!)

And let's not get me started on trying to find Samuel's father.  Wills, probates, etc., etc. for early Harrison County, Ohio?  Hah!  Good luck.  The same thing goes in Harrison County, but worse.    I have a very good idea that John Browning (found in the 1820/1830 censuses in Harrison Co.) is Samuel's father.  However, proving it?  Apparently a LOT of the county's old records were left out in the courthouse hallways back years ago.  Many were likely just taken from those old boxes by whoever wanted them, and finally they were all dumped out back and the Genealogical Society grabbed as many of them as they could (out of the dumpsters!!!) but goodness knows how many of them are permanently gone. 

I've exhausted a lot of the 'simpler' resources and I feel like I'm wading in a way too deep pool.  That, and I also get the feeling that I'm not completely utilizing the resources that I HAVE found.  This is why I'm writing this now.  I think it's time I stop waiting to blog about exploring all the resources I've got now.

I haven't, though, and as I said before, I know why.  Really why.  Because there was always someone working with me who was my cousin, my fellow Browning researcher, and my friend.   Patricia O'Connor. She was the lady I could always depend on to pick up the phone and listen to my natterings about this resource, or what this tiny clue might've meant, or where to look next.  The lady that understood who I was talking about so I didn't have to explain who the 5th cousin twice removed of this child was.....she knew, too.  We were in it together!  We celebrated finding new things together with laughter and excited phone calls at 6 am.   And Pat's been gone now for a few years and with her went some of my focus.  I just miss her so freaking much.  It's hard to work alone.

I told myself when she died that I'd continue on, for her.  I haven't done that because I feel adrift without her.  Add that to my 'chasing my tail' feelings, the frustration of not knowing where to go and what to do to go about finding Samuel and his father, and there you have it.  I just don't want to feel this any longer.  I want to find this, finally.  So I'm not going to wait to blog about Samuel.  I'll just do it.

So I'm trying to organize my research plan on Samuel and I'm going to lay it out here on my blog.  My intent is to get everything together that I've found over the last years and draw it up in such a way that I can see every step I've made and every step I've not yet explored.  I want to locate all the available records and tick each box off when I've looked.  Maybe that will help me see what I'm missing and maybe, just maybe, there will be a breakthrough.  I'd appreciate suggestions and comments about records that I might not have thought of during the time period of 1790-1840 in Ohio, and places to look in Shelby Co IL concerning death records that I also might have missed.

Bear with me as I do.  I hope I can make it all make sense.

(Almost) Wordless Wednesday - John Wesley Francis Browning's "Folly" in the Scientific American, 1864

This must have a few words of explanation, hence the 'almost' in the title.

John Wesley Francis Browning, the son of Samuel Browning and Margaret Markee, was -- according to one of his two entries in the 1860 census (Pleasantville Twn. in Cumberland Co., IL on 12 Jul 1860 and Pleasant Grove Twn, in Coles Co., IL on 17 Sept 1860) -- an engineer. 

According to my cousin Pat -- John's descendent -- John Wes Browning had built his 'machine' somewhere on property that he and his wife lived on in Cumberland Co. before they moved to Coles Co. and some took to calling it "Browning's Folly" because it never worked. 

If it didn't, perhaps he spent countless hours working diligently and perfecting his invention so that it would.  He was certainly proud of his efforts at any rate, as he had beautiful vellum patent papers drawn up with all his diagrams and he made sure to apply for a patent, filing the application in Mattoon.  The patent, number #44594, was dated 11 October 1864. 

The Scientific American published a small blurb in its magazine about his invention.  It is shown here.

This blurb, and the patent papers, are all that is left of John Wesley Francis Browning.  He seems to disappear sometime soon thereafter.  His wife Matilda is back in Cumberland Co., IL in 1867 but there is no trace of John.  She was living next door to her parents in 1870 -- still no John.

His daughter Sarah Viola 'Kate' Browning apparently had a falling out with her mother and took a picture of John, and his vellum patent papers, with her when she ran away to Terre Haute, IN in the early 1880's.

John is a mystery to me still.    You can read more about him and his family if you follow this link.

(Not So) Wordless Wednesday - Peek-A-Boo!

They say a picture can say a thousand words?  Bah.  I always have one or two more to add to that, ya know!  "Wordless" is a foreign concept for me.  So here's the picture...

Some of the explanation is under the picture but I just have to add my few words.  I wish I knew for sure who the woman was sitting on the porch holding the two adorable little pudgy toddlers, but I don't.  It might possibly be Daisie Catherine (Rush) Browning, the first wife of Roy Browning, my grandfather Virgil's brother.  If this is Daisie, she is holding Frederick Leroy Browning (b. 1928) and Esther Mae Browning (b. 1929) and would date the picture to around 1931 rather than the c1929 I have listed. Whoever the lady is, she is smiling a mile wide, though, isn't she?  I also don't know the identities of the older boy to the left nor the older girl to the right with her finger to her lips looking puzzled.  She's clasping the hand of a smaller girl who is only half in the frame.  I don't know who the smaller girl is either.  I also like the wagon off in the distance.

I do recognize my grandfather Virgil Joseph Browning in the big hat.  He's smiling, too.  It must've been a funny moment they captured.  And that lady peeking out behind the barn with an impish look about her?  My grandmother  Beulah Ethel Garrard.  At this point my grandparents weren't married yet -- that didn't happen until 1934 -- but they were dating.

Peek a boo, Grandma!  I see you!

I also recognize the "old home place," the Browning family farm.  Well...I call it the Browning family farm, but it's really the Nichols place.  My 3rd-g-grandfather Joseph Nichols bought the land (in 1849) and built the house and established it.  It was just passed from his daughter Eliza Ursula (Nichols) Swan down to Ursula's daughter Estella Jane (Swan) Browning and then to Stella's sons Virgil, Roy and Emerson Browning. 

I recognize that porch, too, and those dark planks to either side of the door.  I remember those well.  I played many a day on that porch.  This picture sure does make me smile.

Happy 69th, Mom!

My mom is 69 today.

From the beautiful little flaxen-haired girl in the pink dress:

To the young girl smiling in a school photo and playing in a kiddie pool:

....to the newly minted Mrs. Browning.....

to a mother, quite understandably exhausted:

 She's the best friend a person could ask for and a helluva nurse to boot....

...and the most awesome grandmother in the world!

 She's a lot of things to me.  She's not just my mom, she's a friend.  She's the woman I turn to when I need a level head with a splash of cold water or a shoulder to cry on and a comforting word of advice. She's got a will of iron and a feisty soul and more smarts in her little finger than most people I know.  I'm a lucky lady to call her my mom.  I love you, Mom.

Happy 48th, Mom and Dad!

My parents are celebrating 48 years together today.  Congratulations, Mom and Dad!  May you have many, many more.

Happy 71st, Dad!

My dad is 71 today.

From the infant held in his mother's arms:

To the young Elvis lookalike:

 ...and playing in a rock and roll band.....

















To the newly married husband:

To the loving son taking care of his aging mother, my adored grandmother:

And of course, a fabulous father and grandfather!

For the many roles you've played in your 71 years and to the many people in your life that you've touched, I want to thank you. Keep on keeping on.   I love you, dad.

The Browning Series -- Part Five, pt. 2, or The Mystery Effie

I mentioned in my last post that I would talk about a little girl named Effie Spangle who was buried in the Hamilton Cemetery in Otsego Township in Steuben County, Indiana.  She is buried next to Susannah (Crago) Browning, wife of Absalom Browning.  A few stones over are buried Susannah's daughter Sarah Margaret Spangle and two of the three children that Sarah Margaret's had (Franklin and little Belle) with her husband Lafayette Spangle.

Effie intrigues me.  She's a question mark.  No matter how hard I try I can't put her in this family.  Follow along with me and I think you'll see what I mean.

Take a look at the picture to the right.   It shows the burial locations of all the people I'm discussing here; I've labeled them for easy reference.

Sarah Margaret Browning married Lafayette Spangle on 24 Jul 1869 in Steuben County.   The couple had three known children (Franklin b. Aug 1870, Sarah M. b. Aug 1871, and Belle b. Nov 1872) before Sarah died a week after she gave birth to Belle.

Sarah was buried first and when little Belle died in early 1873 she was buried to the left of her mother's stone. When Franklin died four years later (in 1877) he was buried on his mother's other side.

Then there was a lapse in burials until Susannah (Crago) Browning died in 1890.  Hers is the largest stone in the background of the picture.  But as you can see, there's a small stone to the right of Susannah's stone....that's Effie.  But who was she?

The stone itself is nearly impossible to read.  I've included a picture that I've cobbled together of two views of Effie's stone -- the original on the right and a version that I've tried to alter to bring out some sort of relief on the stone.  The kind person who went to the cemetery to read the stones and take pictures for me tried to read it for me and said it was too far gone to do so.

However, there was a cemetery transcription book available that was read some years ago and in it, the inscription is said to read,

"Effie L Spangle D. May 28, 1867 Age 1y. 10m. 9d. Dau of S. M. Spangle"

I don't know about that at all.  To me it looks more like:

"Effie L., dau of LJ & S Spangle died May 28, 1867 aged 1y. 10m. 19d."

I'm not at all sure that it's LJ & S.  Maybe it's LJ & SM.  Or L & M.  Or none of those!  Argh!!

The date of death, however, is clear.  28 May.  The year?  I can't read it.  It "looks" like 186....something.  But here's the thing.  If it is 1867 then whose daughter is this little girl?  Lafayette and Sarah weren't married until 1869.  And if it's 1877 then that's equally bad, as Sarah was dead in 1872.  Perhaps it's 1871 and this little girl is Sarah's twin?  Or perhaps it is 1869 and Sarah Margaret Browning was pregnant before she and Lafayette got married?  Or perhaps the original reader was right and it's 1867 and wow, she was pregnant two years before she got married? 

*sigh*

You got me.  Effie's buried next to all the Spangles is all that I know for sure.  Someday, maybe, if I ever get to Steuben County, I can go see for myself.  I'd love to see what you all think.

The Browning Series -- Part Five, or Absalom 'Abner' Browning and Susannah Crago

With this post I continue what I call "The Browning Series." Samuel and Margaret Browning had thirteen children between them and after Margaret's death, Samuel chose a widow named Sarah Ann (Bell) Gaddis for his second wife. The two of them had two more children together. My plan has been to feature each one of the fifteen children in a separate post and finally tie the family together with a discussion of their parents.

This post is about Absalom 'Abner' Browning, the fifth child of Samuel Browning and Margaret Markee. Absalom was born around the year 1823 in Harrison County, Ohio.

Absalom married Susannah Crago, the daughter of James Crago and Sarah Jennings Fordyce, on 20 Aug 1848 in Tuscarawas Co., OH.  His elder brother, Elias, had married Susannah's sister Elizabeth eleven months earlier in Harrison Co., OH; no doubt Absalom and Susannah met when Elias and Elizabeth married if not before.

I wish I knew more about Ab and Susannah's early life but I don't. I don't really know that much about them at all in comparison to most of his other Browning siblings.  Of all Samuel and Margaret's children, Absalom's descendents are the ones I know the least about. Half of what I think I know about this family is suspect as well.  I'd love to find any descendants of theirs but once you hear their story you might conclude, like I tentatively have, that there might not be any to find.

I do know that, unlike any of the other Browning family members save Ab's sister Rachel (who married John C. McConnell), Ab and Susannah decided to stay behind when the rest of the family moved to Illinois in the late 1840's/early 1850's. Indeed, Ab chose to remain closer to his wife's Crago family than his own and by early 1849 the couple had moved on to Defiance County., OH, where the Crago family lived.

Absalom wasn't completely cut off from his Browning family, however; his elder brother Elias may have lived in Defiance County for a while with his wife Elizabeth (Susannah Crago's sister) in the mid-1850's and his younger sister Susannah Browning definitely lived there in 1855-1865 with her husband Isaac F. Crago (Susannah Crago's brother.)  Isaac F. had made the trip from Defiance County to Crawford County, IL, in 1853-54 to visit relatives and when he returned in early 1855 he brought Susannah Browning home as his bride.  However, Elias and Elizabeth had moved to Crawford County by late 1853, and Isaac and Susannah moved on to Noble County, Indiana by 1865 and Labette County, Kansas by 1879.

(For more information on the family and ancestors/descendants of James Crago, refer to the Crago Connections website maintained by Brian Smith. The Crago family is of interest to me because three of James' children -- Isaac F., Elizabeth and Susannah -- married into the Browning family.)

Ab and Susannah settled in Washington Township in Defiance County and were living there when Susannah gave birth to their daughter Sarah Margaret on 22 Mar 1849.  In 1850 Absalom was working as a laborer two households away from a Ridenour family (George and Catherine) whose distant cousins, Matilda and Minerva Corderman, would later marry Absalom's younger brothers John Wesley Francis and Asbury Taylor.

Absalom and Susannah lived in Defiance County throughout the Civil War.  Absalom was listed as a farmer in the 1860 census as well as in the draft registration records in Washington township (see above) in June of 1863.  I feature this notation about him because it is one of only three records (other than census) that I have about the man!  Anyway, the couple lived in Defiance County until the spring of 1868, when they moved to Otsego Township in Steuben County, IN.  The first sign of their residency in Indiana was a record of their daughter Sarah Margaret’s marriage there to Lafayette Spangle in July of 1869. 

In 1870, Absalom and Susannah were enumerated in the census in Steuben County with a young girl named Priscilla Sewell.  Priscilla was born on 9 May 1860 in Defiance County and was the daughter of Andrew Sewell and Priscilla Crago, Susannah's sister.  The elder Priscilla had died thirteen days after her daughter was born and Absalom and Susannah took their young niece in to raise.

I've never been able to find out whether Absalom and Susannah had any other children but Sarah Margaret.  I suspect they did given the time period, and that if they did all their other children likely died. Despite this, Ab and Susannah spent much of their time raising children.  I've conducted a search but I've never located any gravestones for Browning children that would match up to the couple.  I've located tombstones, all right, but not too many Browning ones....

As I mentioned before, Ab and Susannah had one daughter, Sarah Margaret.  Sarah Margaret married Lafayette Spangle, the son of Henry Spangle, on 24 Jul 1869.  Lafayette was born around 1844 in Ohio and had served in the Union forces in the Civil War in the 29th Rgt. of the IN Volunteer Infantry.

In 1870 Sarah Margaret and Lafayette were living in Otsego Township in Steuben County.  They had three children in very close succession -  Franklin 'Frankie' in Aug 1870, Sarah Margaret 'Margie' in Aug 1871, and Belle in Nov 1872.  Their marriage was only three years old and they had three beautiful children....and then tragedy struck.  Sarah Margaret died a week after little Belle was born.  She was buried in the Hamilton Cemetery in Otsego Township in Steuben County, Indiana.

What happened to the children directly after the death of their mother isn't known for sure but I can infer a little from a comment in Susannah (Crago) Browning's obituary that states she "raised...three grandchildren...and one niece." This tells me that soon after Sarah Margaret's death the children went to live with their grandparents.  Lafayette was surely reeling from the death of his wife and it wasn't easy for a man to take care of three children under the age of three.  Since Absalom and Sarah were available and already taking care of their young niece Priscilla, taking their grandchildren into their household seemed like the best solution under the circumstances.

But tragedy wasn't ever too far away. Little Belle followed her mother into death in July 1873 and Franklin died in Dec 1877.  This left only Margie in the house by 1880, as her cousin Priscilla had married.  Priscilla didn't live much longer (she died in 1885) and the landscape changed again before 1890 when Margie, the last child of Lafayette and Sarah Margaret, also died. They were all laid to rest in the Hamilton Cemetery next to their mother.   While in 1880 Lafayette was still in Indiana, by 1895 he had no children or family in Indiana to stay behind for and so followed his brother Edmund to Kansas.

Oh....before I forget.  There is one more tombstone in the Hamilton cemetery that rests next to Susannah (Crago) Browning -- that of a little girl named Effie Spangle.  This tombstone is a mystery to me because it doesn't seem to match up, date-wise, to any of the others.  The dates are nearly unreadable now, but the transciptions I have from readings taken years ago seem to suggest that this Effie is another daughter of Lafayette and Sarah Margaret.  I will take the time soon to explain this in more detail.

Anyway, back to the story at hand.
Absalom and Susannah's house, once full of children, was empty again.  I can't imagine how it must have felt to lose your only child and then outlive all your grandchildren as well.  Then, as if there hadn't been enough sadness, the final blow came on 24 May 1890 when at age 59, Susannah (Crago) Browning died and was also buried in the Hamilton Cemetery beside her daughter and her grandchildren.  If you'll take a moment to read her obituary you can feel the sadness running through it.  Absalom - Abner - was well and truly alone.

Speaking of the obituaries of Susannah and Absalom (his is seen to the left), I noticed the usage of the name Abner instead of Absalom.  He was called Absalom when a child on the 1850 census, Absalom on the 1860, 1870 and 1880 censuses, and he was called Absalom on his 1863 war draft registration papers.  Yet here, he is called Abner.  Add this to the list of unknowns I have about him.  Absalom Abner, perhaps?  I don't know.

Absalom lived almost nine more years before he died at his home in Hamilton in Steuben County on 15 Jan 1899.  He doesn't seem to have had anyone around that was related to him; his obituary is short and vague on the details.  Nothing personal is included.  "Aged about 80 years," it says.  "Respected by all who knew him."  "Unassuming." 

Sad, is what it seems to me. 

I don't even know where he is buried.  He isn't beside his wife.  Was he indigent?  Did the locals have to bury him?  Did they just bury him in an unmarked grave?  My only clue is the name of the man who conducted the services (Elder Fred A Thomas) and my hope that Ab was likely Methodist, since most of his other Browning kin were.

He doesn't seem to have left any descendants, does he?  For that reason alone I would like to find him and stand in front of his tombstone if there is one.  I'd like him to know that at least one person remembers his name.

The Browning Series -- Part 9A, the Death of Charles Otho Browning pt 5 - Pics!

I wanted to share a few pictures with everyone today that were sent to me by a cousin of mine, Sharon. Sharon is descended from Thomas Newton Browning, a son of James Browning and Jane Nevitt. Anyone who is curious can read more about Thomas and his interesting life by clicking on my sidebar; he is listed in the Browning Series under James and Jane.

Thomas and my Joseph were brothers and I have every intention of featuring the wonderful pictures and documents that Sharon has been sharing with me at a future date. She's got some great family heirlooms and they provide a window into Thomas Newton's life.

Today, however, I feature something else she sent me on a different branch of the family.

Sharon wrote me after reading some of my more recent postings about Charles Otho Browning and his tragic train accident. It seems that she was on vacation in Springfield, MO (the site of the accident) last year and her husband Wes took some pictures while she was there. Little did she know that she was taking pictures very close -- if not actually on! -- the site of the accident. She explained to me in her email that "we were just down the street from that location during our vacation last year. There’s a really neat pedestrian bridge across the tracks at E. Commercial and N. Jefferson that we walked across."

She said, "I thought you might enjoy some of the photos we took at the Jefferson Street Bridge. I’ve attached two shots looking west toward the accident site, one of which seems to be pretty close to ground zero, plus a shot of the bridge itself."

She's right, I enjoyed them and found it quite interesting that one branch of our family took pictures of the site of the death of another. So, I include the photos here with her blessing. Enjoy!

The Identity of Elizabeth Barr, or Another Correction!

I've been doing a bit of correcting lately, so in the spirit of that I offer one more.

A Barr reseacher I was in contact with last year made me aware of the fact that a theory that I'd posited as to the identity of Elizabeth Barr of Harrison County was likely unsupported by available facts. For my theory, you can go to this post and read about it there.

(UPDATE:  View the comment below!  My original theory DOES appear to be correct.   Disregard some of the following post, but I keep it here for record's sake.)

For many years, as I said in the above referenced post, this researcher had been searching for the identity of Patrick Barr's wife. I thought that I'd found a clue for him when her name was mentioned in the witness list at William Browning's trial. I thought perhaps that Elizabeth might be Hannah (Barr) Browning's mother and Patrick's wife.

This researcher let me know that he'd taken a trip to the Harrison County (OH) Genealogical Society and poured through some old Barr files.

He told me that amongst the cases of his Barr family (several cases of his Thomas Barr - son of Patrick - and believed siblings involved in mostly food thefts: a domestic turkey, a bushel bag of apples, two geese and then there was one shirt) he had seen another slip of paper that had William Browning released from charges of Larceny.

He said he'd initially considered that Elizabeth Barr could be the children's mother based on the subpoena that I sent him, but upon further review he thought better of it. He based his opinion on two censuses of the Barr family -- the 1810 in Fayette Co., PA (with the mother in the same age category as Patrick) and the 1820 census in Harrison Co., OH (with a missing mother.) Since Elizabeth Barr was called as a witness in March 1821 for William Browning's case he said that it was highly unlikely that the Elizabeth in the subpoena was Thomas and Hannah's mother, but might be a possible second wife of Patrick or an older daughter of his.

Makes sense to me.

I did notice the phrase "released from charges of Larceny" as it pertains to William Browning. Perhaps the slip meant released as in done his time and completed all that was required of him? I don't know and I haven't seen the slip in question.

Anyway, the researcher did find a note in one of the cases and sent me the exact transcription of the paper he found. It follows:

Cadiz Township Feb this 26th 1819

Sir I hope you will be so kind as to collect my Witnesses pay into your own hand for Thos Barr 50 Elizabeth Do 50 Hanna Browning 50 Wm Browning 50
and by so doing you will obledge yours

Patrick Barr

(He said he believed the symbol before the 50 was pounds, as it was a stylized s and capital D.)

Lastly, the researcher and I got to talking about my theory that Samuel and William were brothers. He said he thought that for Samuel Browning to stand up for William Browning and assume equal responsibility of the debt owed, he would be inclined to believe them brothers and both sons of John as well, especially since they were all living in close proximity to each other.

I do wish my cousin Pat was here to share in what I believe is a slow inching toward enough circumstantial evidence to FINALLY assign a father to my Samuel. She would be so happy. I know it gives me thrills!

Browning V. State of Ohio, Pt. 2 - William Meets His Fate

When we last left poor William Browning he'd went to court and stood alongside Samuel Browning (my ancestor, whom I believe to be his older brother.) Both young men agreed to a security of $200, funds that would be taken from them in the event that William attempted to leave the county and/or refused to report for trial. William didn't abscond but did his duty and reported to the court during its March term in 1821. At that time the court reporter entered the charge against him (larceny, in which he was accused of stealing 16 pounds (two bushels) of cornmeal from one James Tarbet) and ordered that he stand trial. Subpoenas for witnesses were drawn up and given to Sherriff Reazin Arnold to serve. William B. Beebe was the prosecuting attorney in the case for the State; the attorney that William hired for his defense is unknown (although as we shall see, perhaps William did not hire an attorney and instead represented himself. Let's see if you think that's what he did...)

(Oh, before I forget...Disberry Johnson. Recall him, he was a witness in the case? He was the J.P. who married William and Hannah Barr.)

I wish I had more about the trial itself. I wish I had interviews, witness testimony, or William's own testimony. I don't. Unlike my Samuel's daughter Julia's case in 1837 (which you'll find on my sidebar if you're interested), I don't have any documentation featuring the actual content of William's trial. So while I'll have to make do without all the 'juicy bits,' so to speak, I do have a document about this case and its aftermath that didn't exist in Samuel and Julia's trial. This document provides a choice piece of evidence about William and I'll just have to be satisfied with that!

The next document I have about the case is - unfortunately - its conclusion. The court clerk duly noted the proceedings in the Harrison County (OH) Common Pleas Journal (Bk. B, p. 110.) The State of Ohio's (and by proxy, James Tarbet's) lawyer, Walter B. Beebe, came to court and the jury members impanelled for the case were listed as Samuel Beatty, Robert Givin, John Cramlet, Israel R. Kirkpatrick, Henry Carver, John Jamison, Thomas Caldwell, James Patton, William Ross, Peter Thomas, James Evans, and Barak Dickerson. The only juror's name I recognized was the last, Baruch Dickerson. Baruch served as a Captain in the War of 1812. My Samuel Browning served under his command as a private in the war. The transcription of the court clerk's entry is below:

State of Ohio vs William Browning
Indictment for Larceny

This day came Walter B. Beebe Esq Prosecuting Attorney for the state of Ohio in Harrison County and the said William Browning in his own proper person who being ordained and called upon to plead to said Indictment says he is not Guilty of Larceny in manner & form as he stands Charged in Said Indictment and of this he puts himself upon the County for trial and the said Walter Beebe in behalf of the state doth so likewise whereupon a Jury of the County being Called Came, to wit, Samuel Beatty, Robert Givin, John Cramlet, Israel R. Kirkpatrick, Henry Carver, John Jamison (Sr?), Thomas Caldwell, James Patton, William Ross, Peter Thomas, James Evans, and Barak Dickerson all good and lawful men who after being duly empannelled tried Sworn and affirmed to by the aforesaid (??) Between the state of Ohio and the said William Browning the prisoner at the Bar and after hearing the evidence adduced and the arguments of Council as well on part of the State as William Browning, do say upon their respective oaths and affirmations that the said William Browning is Guilty of Larceny in Manner and form as he stands Charged in said Indictment and that they assess the value of the property so stolen at one Dollar and seventy five cents, Whereupon it is considered by the Court that the said William Browning pay a fine of Ten Dollars and Costs of Prosecution and that execution I here therefore (?), and it is further Considered and ordained by the Court that the said William Browning be imprisoned in the Jail of said County Fifteen days.

As you can see, William didn't have an attorney (or at least, one isn't listed.) The court clerk stated that William appeared in 'his own proper person' and pled Not Guilty for himself. None of the witness subpoenas I have state any lawyer's name, either, like they did in Samuel's daughter Julia's case sixteen years later. I may be reading more into the court documentation than is meant, but it seems to me he represented himself during the proceedings. Perhaps he simply didn't have the funds to obtain a lawyer. If so, I think it might indicate why he took the cornmeal to begin with. After all, in September of 1819 William was likely only about 19 years old with a wife and a child (or with one on the way.) Who knows if he was a good farmer or a lazy or inept one. Who knows if he'd had a rash of bad luck and his own harvest was slim. I'm not condoning his actions -- if indeed he did take the cornmeal -- but if he did, he chose to steal food. All I'm saying is that there's probably a reason for that.

William was also called a prisoner at the Bar. Did this mean he had already been in jail pending trial? Sure sounds like it but I don't believe that was the case. If William had been imprisoned he and Samuel would not have needed to place bail. Bouvier's Law Dictionary states the following about prisoners (as of 1856): "Prisoners in civil cases, are persons arrested on original or mesne process, and these may generally be discharged on bail."

Let's explore the legalese first. What is mesne process? Bouvier says that it is "any process issued between original and final process; that is, between the original writ and the execution," or "a writ or proceedings in an action to summon or bring the defendant into court, or compel him to appear or put in bail, and then to hear and answer the plaintiff's claim." Therefore, mesne process in William's case had begun with the document stating William and Samuel has appeared in court to provide bail and had been completed when the court had stated the accusations against William in his presence. It's unfortunate that I don't have the entire case file or else we might know for sure whether William had spent time in jail prior to his actual trial, but with the evidence I see here -- the securing of bond to prevent him from running -- I would hazard an educated guess that he was not.

Anyway, the jury found him guilty and sentenced him to pay a fine of $10 plus any court costs and to spend a total of fifteen days in jail. Then another writ was drawn up, a writ of Fieri Facias. This writ is a judgement for debt and damages and was served to the sherriff of Jefferson County, Ohio, one county west of Harrison. This small clue gives William's whereabouts in the days following the trial.

This writ is an interesting document. The writ, once served, bound the sherriff to obtain the money due the state from the goods and chattels of the convicted and present them to the judges of the said court on a day named in the writ. According to Bouvier's there were many rules the sherriff had to follow in executing this writ:

1) The sheriff could not break the outer door of a house for the purpose of executing a fieri facias, nor could he break a window. He could enter the defendant's house if it was open, and, being once lawfully entered, he could break open an inner door or chest to seize the goods even without any request to open them.

2) Although the sheriff was authorized to enter the house of the party to search for goods he was not allowed to enter that of a stranger for that purpose, without being guilty of a trespass, unless the defendant's goods were actually in the house.

3) The sheriff was allowed to break the outer door of a barn or of a store disconnected with the dwelling-house, and forming no part of the curtilage. 16 Johns. R. 287. The fi. fa.

4) The writ may be executed at any time before, and on the return day, but not on Sunday, where it is forbidden by statute.

Here is the transcription of the writ in William's trial:


(front cover of Writ of FIERI FACIAS)

Fi da et fev facias Ca Sa. To July Term 1821 STATE of Ohio vs. William Browning Indictment for Larceny
Fine ---------------$10.00
Costs ----------------$16.26
fifa Ca Sa& -------- $ .35
_______________ $26.61

Add the jail fees before sentence.......

C.P. 121 Calculate Interest from March 23, 1821 W.B.Beebe Atty for State

(in different handwriting) Rec'd this writ March 29th, 1821

(upside down) May 26th 1821 Made in full, Rezin Arnold, Sherriff --

(body of the Writ of FIERI FACIAS)

State of Ohio Harrison County The State of Ohio to the Sherriff of Jefferson County in said State

Greeting -------------------- We Command you that of the Goods and Chattels Lands & tenements and body of William Browning within your County you cause to be levied the Sum of Ten Dollars being a fine, and the Sum of Sixteen Dollars & twenty two cents Costs of Prosecution together with Interest thereon the Costs of this writ and all legal accruing costs, which the State of Ohio lately in our Court of Common pleas for said of Harrison County to wit at the March Term thereof A.D. 1821 by the Consideration and Judgments of our said Court recovered against the said William Browning in a certain action of Indictment for Larceny --. Whereof the said Wlliam Browning is convict as appears of Record in our said Court and have you that Money on the body of the said William Browning before our said Court at the next Term to be holden at Cadiz in said Harrison County on the thirtieth day of July next to render unto the said State of Ohio for the fine and Costs aforesaid, and have you then there this writ. Witness the honourable Benjamin Tappan President of our said Court at Cadiz this twenty ninth day of March Anno Domini ---- 1821.

William Tingley Clerk


As you can see, the writ was received on 29 March 1821 (received by whom, I'm not sure, for it doesn't say; my assumption is that it was received by the Jefferson County sherriff.) However the writ was served and executed, there is a upside-down notation on the front cover of the writ by Rezin Arnold, the sherriff of Harrison County, that it was "Made In Full" on 26 May 1821.

What happened to William and Hannah after the trial? I really don't know. There are a few William Browning's enumerated in close counties in 1830 (one in Tuscarawas County living close by James Markee, who was Margaret (Markee) Browning's brother) and another in Coshocton County, Ohio, but I can't be certain that either of these are William and Hannah. If I had to guess which one he'd likely be I would guess the Tuscarawas County one, but that's just a guess. So in conclusion, other than the fact that William was in Jefferson County, Ohio, in March-May 1821, I don't know what became of him and Hannah.

It sure was an interesting trial, though!

Browning v. State of Ohio: Meet William!

Long time readers of my blog are familiar with a court case my ancestor Samuel Browning and his daughter Julia were both involved with in 1837. The links to the case (Browning v. Beck) are on my sidebar so I won’t go into the case here. What I intend to explore today is another court case, one involving a man named William Browning that I located at the same time as the one involving Samuel. Both cases were found in the files of the Harrison County (OH) Genealogical Society.

The recent morsel of information I received from another researcher about Hannah Barr’s father (Patrick Barr from Ireland) and the location of a consent slip for her marriage to William stirred up memories about this other court case. I’d intended to further explore this case just after the Browning v. Beck one but you know what they say about intentions! Who knows, perhaps I wasn’t meant to explore it until after I received this tidbit. You’ll see why soon.

Before we begin, let me say I’m certain the case file I have isn’t a complete one. As I’ve said before, many of the cases that the Harrison County Genealogical Society have in their files were rescued from the dumpsters behind the Harrison County courthouse some years ago. There are at least two documents missing from this particular case that I know of – a witness subpoena and interviews with the victim and the accused. Unless these documents are filed under the name of the plaintiff in the case, they’re likely gone. Although I’m sad because an interview with the defendant in this case would have been lovely, I’m thrilled to have what I have.

I’m afraid I don’t know much about William Browning, the major player in this case. If I did, perhaps my Samuel wouldn’t be as much of a mystery!

William first shows up in Harrison County, OH on 28 February 1818, the day he marries Hannah Barr, the daughter of Patrick Barr of Ireland. The permission slip I mentioned in my last post states that William was the son of John Browning. John signed the slip giving his consent for William to marry Hannah on 6 November 1817.

William next shows up in the 1820 census within two households of Samuel and two households of John. His age in this census is in a range between 16-26 and he has a son below the age of 10. Strangely, he has another male between 16-26 living with him and a female aged 26-45. I am given to understand that the age of consent was 21, so even if both William and his bride were 21 at the time of their marriage that still puts them a little younger than the 26 listed here. I’m not sure if the census is in error, or I am. I’m open to either possibility. At any rate, this range would place William’s birth from 1794-1804. I’m inclined to lean more towards a tighter range of 1798-1801.

He appears again in Dohrman Township in neighboring Tuscarawas Co., OH on the 1830 census – at least I “think” it’s him. Here he is age 20-29, as is his wife, and the couple have three children, two boys (one 5-9, one 0-4) and a girl 0-4. This census would place his birth more in the 1800-1801 range, which I find more likely given his consent to marry form in late 1817. This William is 15 houses down from James and Rhoda (Johnston) Markee. James Markee is Samuel Browning’s brother-in-law. James’ wife Rhoda is almost certainly the daughter of Disberry Johnston, a man who lived in Harrison County and will become important as we explore the upcoming case.

I don’t find a William Browning on the 1840 census and on the 1850, the only William I find was William M. Browning, b. 1810 in Montgomery Co., MD and who married Eliza Johnson (b. 1810 Ireland, the daughter of Irish immigrants) in neighboring Jefferson Co., OH in 1832. This family later moved to Henry Co., IA. I can’t say for sure that this William is not the William of the case (after all, in 1819-1821 a young boy of 9-11 can sure steal things and his age is never given) but other clues in the case itself make me rule him out with almost a certainty.

So where did William and Hannah go? I don’t know. I have one small clue that this case provided, but other than that I’ve never been able to find out what happened to them.

Now on to the case itself.

The case began on 12 December 1820. On this day, William Browning and Samuel Browning made an appearance before the Harrison Co., OH Court of Common Pleas. The boys came to answer a charge of larceny levied against William and agreed to a bail of $200 to ensure that William would not skip town and appear before the next term of court to stand trial. You can see the document to the upper left and a transcription below:

State of Ohio

Harrison County

On the 12th day of December A.D. 1820 personally appeared before me the Subscriber one of the Associate Judges of the Court of Common Pleas for said County William Browning and Samuel Browning and Severally Acknowledged themselves indebted to the State of Ohio in the Sum of two hundred Dollars to be levied on their Goods & Chattels lands and Teniments if Default be made in the Condition following,

The Condition of this Recognizance is such that if the above bound William Browning shall appear at the next term of the Court of Common Pleas of said County to be holden at Cadiz on the 19th day of March next on the first day of the Term and then & there answer to what at that time shall be objected against him on a Charge of Larceny and abide the order of the Court thereon and not depart without leave then this Recognizance to be void & of none effect otherwise to remain in full force and virtue in law --

Taken and acknowledged before me at Cadiz the day and year above writen.

Alexr. Henderson, Assoc. Judge

The next documentation we find on the case is at the March 1821 term of court. William appeared before the court as he was requested to do. I have not included a picture of the list of witnesses (I've covered that here in the transcription) but the document itself is here. Following is a transcription of the proceedings:

State of Ohio vs. Wm. Browning

Indictment for Larceny

Witnesses

James Tarbot

Patrick Barr

Disberry Johnston

A True Bill

(?) McMillan

Plea Not Guilty

Recorded

State of Ohio

Harrison County

At A Court of Common Pleas begun & held at Cadiz in & for said Harrison County on the nineteenth day of March in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred & twenty one The grand Jurors of the State of Ohio summoned to enquire for the body of law Harrison County upon their respective oaths & affirmations do precent & find that William Browning late of the township of Cadiz in said Harrison County on the twenty day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred & nineteen at the township aforesaid in the county aforesaid with force & arms one bag made of cloth with two Bushels of corn meal therein contained of the value of two dollars of the goods & chattles of one James Tarbott then & there being found claimant did steal take & carry away contrary to the statute in such case made & provided & against the peace & dignity of the state of Ohio.

Walter B Beebe atty for State in Harrison County

So it’s pretty black and white. William was accused of larceny by James Tarbott/Tarbet. A very cursory search on Ancestry says that James was born c1784 in York Co., PA, and married Margaret ‘Peggy’ McCullough in 1807 in Belmont Co., OH. James was living as late as 1850.

According to the accusation above, on 20 September 1819 William had filled a cloth bag with two bushels (about 16 pounds) of James Tarbet’s cornmeal. While it might seem like a silly thing to get all bent out of shape about nowadays – after all, we can head to the local supermarket and pick up a few pounds of cornmeal for a few dollars – it wasn’t at all funny or silly back then. Think for a minute about how many hours of labor went into that cornmeal. Planting it, tending it, harvesting it, and taking it to the mill to be ground? Months and months of labor in total. It’s not a wonder these things weren’t taken lightly.

It also makes me wonder about the circumstances of the theft. Did William even do it? He said he didn't, but if he did, why? Was he lazy, was he drunk, was it on a dare, did he dislike the man he stole from? Or was he simply hungry? It's not something that ever gets explained from the documents I have. If I had William's testimony, perhaps I'd have some idea.

But aren’t the witnesses interesting? Patrick Barr! Disberry Johnston! So let’s get to the witnesses, shall we?

I don’t have all the witnesses that were subpoenaed for this case. I don’t have the subpoena for Patrick Barr or for James Tarbet, but I do have Disberry’s. I’m sure even more witnesses were called but unless there is a file for James Tarbet in the Harrison County Genealogical Society and the files happen to be filed there instead, we’ll likely never find them. I know that more witnesses were called even without the other case files because I have another one, one that wasn’t listed on this witness bill. Elizabeth Barr!

Now it’s been recently proven that Patrick Barr is Hannah (Barr) Browning’s father. The man who sent us the consent slip had been looking for Patrick Barr for 14 years and was equally desirious of learning the name of Hannah’s mother. Well…..I believe I’ve just found it for him. I believe that this Elizabeth Barr is Patrick’s wife and Hannah’s mother. Seeing them both listed as witnesses in this trial -- and at least in Elizabeth's case, "on part of William Browning" helps further cement my belief that they are Hannah’s parents and that this William Browning, is, indeed, the William that married Hannah Barr.

(Update (3/30/2012): I have learned that Elizabeth Barr was likely Hannah's sister, not her mother. See more here. Ah well...the search continues.)

Disberry Johnston, if you'll recall, was mentioned before as the almost certain father of Rhoda (Johnston) Nevitt Markee. Rhoda was not only the wife of James Markee (the brother of Margaret, wife of Samuel Browning) but she was also the mother of Jane Nevitt, the wife of Margaret and Samuel's son, James Browning. That Disberry was a witness in the trial is yet another connection between the families of my Samuel Browning and the William in this case.

One other thing, though. I hope you all noticed that the man who stepped up with William to provide bail was Samuel Browning? Tell me true, now, genealogist to genealogist….would you all be inclined to a presumption that if Samuel Browning stood up for William, and William is John Browning’s son, that these two boys, close in age (Samuel would've been about 24, William likely 20-22) and having no other male Browning in the immediate area that could be their father, would you also come to a hesitant conclusion that Samuel could also be John’s son?

My gut says yes, and I see it as another small bit of circumstantial evidence. Believe me, I’ve been doing the happy dance around here lately.

More about the trial to come!

Rachel's Picture Found! Now Let's Date It!

I'm excited to report that this week I made contact with a McConnell family researcher through Find-A-Grave. He let me in on a few corrections to the family of John C. and Rachel (Browning) McConnell and we began talking more and more about the family and their children. While he was descended from John and his first wife Jane Boals/Boles, he knew an awful lot about John's second family because he'd been interested in genealogy from a young age and managed to talk to many of the 'old ones' before they passed on.

In the course of our converstions I mentioned that I had a picture of John C. McConnell given to me by a few surviving relations. He was curious about the photo, saying he had a few photos himself (a set of four consisting of a man and wife and two boys) that he'd always been suspicious were McConnell's but who weren't identified on the backs as such. He'd run into another McConnell descendant who'd owned the same set but his weren't identified either. I sent him the picture of John I had as a comparison, hoping that there would be a match. His next email was an excited YES! (truthfully, there were a lot of hallelulahs and praise Jesuses too!)

I was just as thrilled as he was, because as I said, he had a set! He had John......and RACHEL!

I haven't seen pictures of too many of Samuel and Margaret's children. I only have two: Ezra C. and John Wesley Francis. I also have pictures of the two girls, Laura and Mary, that Samuel had with his second wife Sarah (Bell) Gaddis Browning. Out of fifteen, I only have four. Rachel's picture makes it five. It's a very thrilling addition to the fold.

Once I received the photos I wanted to analyze them to establish a date range. John C. McConnell died in 1873 so that gave me a topmost range to work with.

First, the things that you can't see. This photo has been cropped; I know this because the sender told me. No worries, though, because I also have the photos of John C. and the two boys. The photos of the boys haven't been cropped and the sender told me that the pictures of Rachel and John are framed exactly like those of the boys. The boy's photos are all on thin paper stock and all have two golden double lines encircling them. The sender says there are no photographer's stamps or studio names on them at all.

The pattern on Rachel's dress is quite striking and she is wearing a matching cape. Her sleeves bell outwards between her elbows and shoulders but become less so at the wrist. Are they leg'o'mutton sleeves? I can't tell because of the way the cape covers her shoulders but I don't think they are. They seem more bishop style, tighter near the wrist with some sort of trimming near the cuff. I think I see just the barest hint of a small row of buttons down the front of her bodice -- perhaps a double row, hidden by the cape? -- and I'm questioning whether her skirt isn't of a split style, with some sort of pleated panel in the front and the pattern to each side. She has a simple but delicately scalloped wide white collar with a brooch or cameo in its center. Her hair is center parted and smoothed neatly behind her ears into a bun.

The boys are both wearing shawl collar vests that are higher up on their necks than the one John is wearing. The boy on the left, who I judge to be the elder by a few years, is holding a work or mechanic's hat. I can't tell whether John is wearing a bow tie or some sort of cravat tucked into his vest because of the length of his beard but both boys are wearing small bows tucked underneath their collars. Both boys have sack coats on -- the eldest's of tweed or patterned wool, the other's dark -- and the seams of each are falling off their natural shoulder. John's coat seems longer than the boys' coats but that might just be a trick of the edge of the photo. John sports a single button on one side. His is more fitted to his shoulders and it appears that part of his coat collar is made or trimmed in velvet. All three are wearing their hair parted to the side. The boys seem to have oiled their hair and pushed it up off their heads but John has a full length chin beard. His hair is thin and a little full at the sides.

Looking at the pictures as a whole, I would say that they were taken by the same photographer on the same day. All four appear to be seated on a simple wooden chair; the tip of it can be seen in Rachel's photo and its seat in the elder boy's. The background is the same in all the pictures, though in the pictures of John and the boys a white strip (perhaps a baseboard?) can be seen to their bottom right. I believe the fullness of Rachel's skirt is blocking the view of that strip in her photo.

It will help at this point to have some information about the McConnell family. Rachel was born in 1825 and John in 1807. Their eldest, Theodore, was born in January 1850 and their second son, John W., was born in December of 1853. I believe that Theo is the elder boy holding the hat. Does he look about 15-16 to you? He does to me. I think the other boy looks about 12-13. The elder boy has the look of Rachel in his nose and the set of his mouth while the younger has more the look of his father.

Now to the dating. It's important that we look at these pictures as a unit as well as individually where that's concerned. Rachel's wide white collar, the double row buttons, and the bishop style sleeves all point to a date of the early 1860's. The dress styles of both the boys and John look to be near the same dates but I think, given the style of ties the boys are sporting, might be more toward the middle of the decade. I would be content to think that Rachel, being a woman in or nearing her 40's, might wear styles a couple of years out of fashion. All in all, I would say this set of photos dates about 1865 or 1866.

But the real kicker is something I questioned about her photo the moment I saw it. Most of the dresses I've seen on women in this date range have skirts that are full and consistently patterned. Rachel's dress has a pleated middle section. Now it could be that she's simply a heavy-set woman, but is it possible that she's pregnant?

Rachel had children born in 1850, 1851, 1853, 1855, 1859, 1860, 1862, and 1864. She was also possibly pregnant one other time (either in 1857 or around 1866 -- but the child in this case was either stillborn or died as an infant (I say this because in the 1900 census Rachel stated she was the mother of nine children and I can only account for eight.) If she IS pregnant in this photo, it might date the image to around 1865 and it would match the ages of her sons Theo and John W. If this image is older (say, 1870-ish) it would still match the ages of her sons (though their identification as Theo and John would certainly be in question) but Rachel would not be pregnant, just heavy.

So what say you all? Is this c1865-6, or closer to 1870?

Pt 7, cont (pt 1) -- the children of James Hoy and Margaret Browning

At the conclusion of my last post, James and Margaret (Browning) Hoy had both died by 1870 in Crawford County, Illinois. (At least that's my assumption - it's possible that James Hoy just left his wife and children - but barring any proof to the contrary I'll continue to operate on the presumption that he'd died.)

I mentioned the couple's crazy kids. Let me explain.

Pinning down exactly how many children James Hoy and Margaret Browning had and where they went after their parent’s deaths has been a real challenge for me. One source I have that helps with this family is a transcribed family bible record written in 1925 by Ruhama (Cliff) Harris, the daughter of Emma Alice Hoy. The bible is in the possession of Emma's descendants. A copy of this typed transcription is to the right. While I know that a few things in the bible are inaccurate, confused, or just plain missing (the date of James and Margaret's marriage is off by one year, a fact I checked with the transcriptioner to make sure it wasn't a transcription error) and I can guess that a few other things are, I feel the bible record is for the most part a good starting point and a fair account of Emma's sisters and brothers. I used it, along with the only census of this family with names (the 1860) and the other two censuses without names (the 1855 and 1865 IL census) to try and reconstruct their family.

Follow along with me, for here's where it gets fun. Ha!

According to the bible records, James and Margaret had a total of seven children: Sarah Ellen, James Franklin, Emma Alice, Edward J., Mary Jane, Charley, and William. But is this true?

Well, the 1855 IL census (taken in October) shows the couple with two boys under ten and two girls under ten. At the time of this census, these children from the bible record would fit:
22 May 1851 Sarah Ellen Hoy (age 4.5 yrs)
19 Apr 1852 James Franklin Hoy (age 3.5 yrs)
3 Jan 1854 Emma Alice Hoy (age 18 months)
1 Apr 1855 Edward Jasper Hoy (age 6 mos)

So far so good, right?

Fast forward five years later, to July of 1860. Here we find the couple living with their children, a family that has expanded to six children. But we see some new names here and a lot of jumping around in ages. Emma is missing completely. Sarah has suddenly lost two years and James has gained two years. Who is Susan and how did she suddenly become nine years old? Edward's age coincides just fine. We've added two more children, a girl named Jane and a son named "Advickus." The bible record calls this child Charley, which will make a lot more sense when we learn later that his full name was Charles Victor:
22 Jan 1857 Mary Jane Hoy (aged 3 yrs)
13 Dec 1859 Charley (aged 1 yr)

Before we take to analyzing the data, let's go on to the 1865 census, also taken in July. This is the last census we have to look at the James and Margaret (Browning) Hoy family as a whole. In this census, there are a total of ten people in the household. Subtracting the two adults, that meant eight children -- four males and two females 10 and younger, and one male and one female over ten and under twenty. From this census, we can attach the listed children from the bible like so:

over ten-under 20
22 May 1851 Sarah Ellen Hoy (age 14 yrs)
19 Apr 1852 James Franklin Hoy (age 13 yrs)

10 and under
3 Jan 1854 Emma Alice Hoy (age 11 yrs) -- doesn't quite fit
1 Apr 1855 Edward Jasper Hoy (age 10 yrs)
22 Jan 1857 Mary Jane Hoy (age 8 yrs)
13 Dec 1859 Charles Victor Hoy (age 5 yrs)
26 Nov 1860 William D. Hoy (age 4 yrs)
c1863 (Zara Hoy, aged appr. 2 yrs)

Ah, but we have one more census to look at -- the 1870. This census was taken after the deaths of both James and Margaret (Browning) Hoy. This is the point where I wish that I could find some sort of guardianship records. Their children were apparently scattered to the four winds and it has been extremely difficult to find all of them. I've only found a few:

Mary HOY, aged 13, b. IL, living w/Thomas and Martha (Botts) Corbin in Palestine, Crawford Co., IL (personal est. valued at $300)
Edward HOY, aged 15, b. IL, living w/Dr. Nathaniel and Hannah (Kitchell) Steele in Palestine, Crawford Co., IL
Emma A. HOY, aged 15, b. IL, living w/John & Rachel (Browning) McConnell in Washington Twn., Harrison Co., OH
William HOY, aged 9 b. IL, living w/Roland & Elvira (Allison) Fuson in Honey Creek Twn., Crawford Co., IL

I've found one more, I think:
Sarah E. HOY, age 25 b. IL, William HOY age 8 b. IL, and Zarah HOY age 6 b. IL, all listed as paupers and living in the poorhouse that William Beers ran in Hutsonville, Crawford Co., IL

I haven't been able to locate James, Susan, or Charles in the 1870 at all.

To wrap up today's post, the bible record seems to fit quite well with most of the census records. There are a few exceptions to this -- a) Emma's age is just so slightly off in the 1865, b) Susan Hoy (mentioned in the 1860) doesn't appear at all in the 1865, and c) the number of children listed in the bible is off by one because Zara isn't mentioned at all. All that aside, though, the bible record does seem to fit well overall and it makes me feel comfortable with it as a decent recollection of the Hoy family.

The 1870 census brings up a few more questions. Why is Sarah Ellen suddenly so old? Why is William Hoy listed twice? Where are Charles, and James, and Susan? Who are the people the kids are living with? How can we be sure that Zara Hoy is even James and Margaret's child?

For this, the census isn't enough. We need more proof, more records. And next time we'll start asking some other questions.