Places – Descendants of Rebellion https://descendantsofrebellion.com Discovering who made us who we are Tue, 17 Dec 2024 00:31:12 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.1 https://i0.wp.com/descendantsofrebellion.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Untitled-2.png?fit=32%2C32&ssl=1 Places – Descendants of Rebellion https://descendantsofrebellion.com 32 32 149595850 Thomas Chisolm of Burke County, Georgia https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2024/12/17/thomas-chisolm-of-burke-county-georgia/ https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2024/12/17/thomas-chisolm-of-burke-county-georgia/#comments Tue, 17 Dec 2024 00:30:33 +0000 https://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=824

Thomas Chisolm[1] of Burke County, Georgia, was appointed Georgia’s first Surveyor General by the Executive Council in 1777, following Georgia’s transition from a province to a state after the Declaration of Independence and the start of the American Revolution. [2] He was a commissioned officer of the Georgia Continental Line.[3]  In 1776, he married Mary Butler, the daughter of Joseph Butler and widow of Thomas Spencer.[4] Thomas and Mary had one son, George Washington Chisolm, who was the progenitor of Chisolms who migrated to Mississippi. [5]  Thomas Chisolm died on his plantation in Burke County in 1789.[6] John Milton and William Few were the executors of his estate.[7]

For the past several decades, it was thought that Thomas Chisolm of Burke County was the same individual as Thomas Chisholm born to Reverend Thomas Chisholm of Teawig in Kilmorack, Inverness-shire, Scotland. A recent article in Clan Chisholm Journal by Robert Chisholm challenged the claim, sparking controversy amongst Chisolm descendants.[8] Thanks newly discovered evidence, the argument can be settled.

The Origin of the Thomas Chisolm Myth

Rev. Thomas Chisholm of Teawig married Magdalen Cuthbert.[9] He had at least nine children, all of whom were born in Scotland between 1719 and 1736, including a son Thomas Chisholm baptized in 1730.[10] The baptism records identified the children’s father as Thomas Chisholm, minister of the gospel at Kilmorack, so there is no dispute about the identity of the father amongst individuals of the same name in Scotland.

Magdalen Cuthbert’s sister Ann Cuthbert[11] immigrated to Georgia and married Dr. Patrick Graham there in 1740. [12] After Dr. Graham’s death in 1755, Ann Cuthbert married James Bulloch[13] and made a will in Georgia in 1762, which left a bequest “to my two nephews John and Thomas Chisolm sons of the Rev’d Mr. Thomas Chisolm late minister of the gospel at Kilmorack…”.[14] 

In 1984, genealogist Meredith B. Colket, Jr. published an article in the National Genealogical Society Quarterly titled “Chisholm Families in the American Colonies.”[15] Colket suggested that Thomas Chisolm of Burke County may be the son of Rev. Thomas Chisholm of Teawig. Colket cited Ann Cuthbert’s will. He suggested it was “plausible that the wife of the Rev. Thomas died or some other situation induced Ann to bring his two youngest sons to this country to bring them up herself.”[16]

Thomas Chisolm in Georgia Society

The link between Thomas Chisolm of Burke County and associates of Ann Cuthbert, who were members of Georgia’s elite and ruling class, supported the assumption that he was Ann Cuthbert’s nephew.  Thomas Chisolm was first documented in Savannah, Georgia, in 1770 when he was recorded as a deputy surveyor under Henry Yonge who married James Bulloch’s daughter Christiana.[17] Henry Yonge succeeded Noble Wimberly Jones whose daughter Mary married James Bulloch after Ann Cuthbert died.[18]

Thomas Chisolm was commissioned as a Captain in Georgia’s Continental Line[19] in 5th Company with Second Lieutenant Daniel Cuthbert.[20] He was appointed a member of the Executive Council when James Bulloch’s son Archibald Bulloch was elected Governor.[21] John Houstoun was a fellow council member and the son of Sir Patrick Houstoun. Ann Cuthbert’s cousin George Cuthbert was one of the appraisers of Sir Patrick’s estate.[22] Thomas Chisolm served as Justice of the Peace and appointed Surveyor General in 1777.[23] In documents, Thomas Chisolm was consistently identified as “Esquire” or “Gentleman,” indicating his position amongst Georgia’s elite.

The Thomas Chisolm Myth is Dispelled

Several years ago, a 1764 marriage in Scotland was discovered between Rev. Thomas Chisholm’s son Thomas Chisholm and Ann McLean the daughter of John McLean minister at Kintail.[24] Ann Cuthbert’s will did not identify where her nephews lived; however, the 1764 marriage proved Thomas Chisholm was still in Scotland when Ann Cuthbert signed her will. The marriage also proved that if Rev. Thomas Chisolm’s son immigrated to America, he did so as an adult after Ann Cuthbert died, rendering Colket’s assumption about the nephews’ immigration as children incorrect. Although the 1764 marriage did not preclude a later immigration to America.

This author then located previously unexploited Scottish records, which revealed a case file about a debt of Ann McLean’s brother Alexander.[25] The first page of a reply filed in 1787 reads:

“…Ann Maclean [sic] residenter at Bridge-end of Beuly [sic] relict[26] of Thomas Chisholm tacksman of Lenzie [sic]…”[27]

Scottish genealogist, Lorna Kinnaird, was consulted to provide historical context, geographical knowledge, and explanations of Scottish terminology.[28] “Lenzie” in the 1787 document is believed to be “Leinassie,” which was near Kilmorack and Beauly in the 18th century.[29] The document states Ann McLean lived in Bridge-end of Beauly, which is in the same neighborhood as Teawig, Kilmorack, and Leinassie.[30]

Two birth register entries from Kilmorack were located for children born to “Thomas Chisholm taksman [sic] of Lenassie [sic]” in 1765 and 1767.[31] The mother is not identified. The birth registers, considered together with the marriage record and the 1787 reply, placed Thomas Chisholm in Scotland married to Ann McLean at least between 1764 and 1787.[32]

A 1755 bond was discovered whereby Thomas Chisholm was the surety for his father and brother. The bond contains the original signatures of Rev. Thomas Chisholm and his two sons Thomas Chisholm and David Chisholm. Certified forensic document examiner Brenda Petty[33] was retained to analyze these signatures and compare them to original signatures by Thomas Chisolm of Burke County.[34] Brenda Petty’s expert opinion is that the signatures do not match.[35]

Snippet of the son Thomas Chisholm’s signature from Thomas and David Chisholm vs. Hugh Fraser[36]

Courtesy of National Library of Scotland

Snippet of Thomas Chisolm’s signature from Georgia Bond of Nehemiah Wade [37]

Courtesy of Digital Library of Georgia and Hargrett Library

The Truth About Thomas Chisolm

Despite the mention in Ann Cuthbert’s Georgia will, and the connection between Thomas Chisolm of Burke County and Ann Cuthbert’s associates, new evidence discovered in Scotland exposed that Thomas Chisholm son of Rev. Thomas Chisholm died in Scotland sometime between 1766 and 1787, indicated by the time of his wife’s second pregnancy and the 1787 document identifying Ann McLean as his widow. Records in Georgia prove Thomas Chisolm of Burke County was alive and well between 1770 and 1789. Additionally, signatures on original documents created in Georgia and Scotland do not match.

Thomas Chisholm son of Rev. Thomas Chisholm of Teawig is not the same man as Thomas Chisolm of Burke County, Georgia.

[1] Surname spellings vary, including: Chisholm, Chisolm, Chism, Cheesom, Chissom. In Scotland, Chisholm was used most often. Thomas Chisolm in Georgia is almost always recorded as Chisolm.

[2] Georgia Surveyor General Department Archives and Records Building, Georgia Surveyor General Department, pamphlet (Georgia: Ben W. Fortson, Jr.), p. 1. Also, Allen D. Candler, The Revolutionary Records of the State of Georgia, 3 vols. (Atlanta: The Franklin-Turner Company, 1908), 2:28, digital images, FamilySearch.org

[3] Francis Bernard Heitman, Historical Register of Officers of the Continental Army During the War of the Revolution, April, 1775, to December 1783, (Washington D.C.: W.H. Lowdermilk & Co., 1893), p. 123. In Heitman’s earlier edition of this work published in 1914, the entry for Thomas Chisolm is “Captain 1st Georgia, 7th January, 1776; Major 4th Georgia, 1st February 1777; Lieutenant-Colonel – Regiment, 21st March, 1778, to –.”

[4] Georgia, Colonial Register of Records Bonds, Deeds of Gift, Bills of Sale, Powers of Attorney, book Y-2, Indenture Tripartite between Mary Spencer, Thomas Chisolm, Esq., and Shem Butler, Esq., microfilm drawer 40, box 36. Also, “Colonial Wills,” University System of Georgia, Virtual Vault, (https://vault.georgiaarchives.org : accessed 7 November 2023), image copy, “Butler, Joseph.”

[5] “File II Names Collection,” University System of Georgia, Virtual Vault, (https://vault.georgiaarchives.org : accessed 7 November 2023), image copy, “Butler, James,” p. 1-4; documents removed from original files in the 1930s and placed in alphabetical files, provenance unknown.

[6] “Mortuary Notice,” Georgia Gazette, 24 may 1764; image copy, GenealogyBank (https://www.genealogybank.com : accessed 18 October 2023) Historical Obituaries.

[7] “Advertisement,” Georgia Gazette, 7 January 1792; image copy, Newspaper Arvhive (https://www.newspaperarchive.com/ : accessed 28 August 2024).

[8] Robert Chisholm, “DNA Project Report 2022,” Clan Chisholm Journal (Number 65): 54.

[9] Thomas Chisholm Instrument of Sasine, Inverness, RS003800011, p. 58, 324, 326, “Secretary’s and Particular Registers of Sasines For Sheriffdoms of Inverness, Ross, Cromarty and Sutherland,” scanned image of original document, National Records of Scotland. Teawig was also called Boghouse. A sasine is a Scottish deed of conveyance document for the transfer of feudal lands. In Scottish records, women were recorded with their maiden name, even after marriage.

[10] Robert, Alexander, David, James, John, Anna, Thomas, Jean, and Primrose Chisholm, baptisms, Old Parish Registers (OPR), Parish of Kilmorack, Inverness, National Records of Scotland (https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/ : accessed 20 September 2022), digital images of original documents.

[11] Scottish birth records were inconclusive to prove Magdalen Cuthbert and Ann Cuthbert were sisters. Magdalen Cuthbert was identified as Rev. Thomas Chisholm’s wife in the sasine cited above. Ann’s will identified Rev. Thomas Chisholm’s sons as Ann Cuthbert’s nephews, which suggests Rev. Thomas Chisholm’s wife Magdalen Cuthbert was Ann Cuthbert’s sister.

[12] Allen D. Candler, The Colonial Records of the State of Georgia, vol. IV “Stephens Journal”, (Atlanta: The Franklin-Turner Company, 1906), 526; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org : accessed 1 June 2024). Merton E. Coulter and Albert B. Saye, editors, A List of the Early Settlers of Georgia. (Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1949), p. 76.

[13] Will of Patrick Graham (1755); “Colony of Georgia – Will Books,” database with images, University System of Geogia, Virtual Vault (https://vault.georgiaarchives.org/: accessed 7 November 2023). Also, Georgia, Colonial Register of Records Bonds, Deeds of Gift, Bills of Sale, Powers of Attorney, book O-180, marriage contract between James Bulloch, of Granville Co., S.C., and Mrs. Ann Graham, of Savannah, Georgia; microfilm drawer 40, box 36.

[14] Will of Ann Bulloch (1762); “Colony of Georgia – Will Books,” database with images, University System of Geogia, Virtual Vault (https://vault.georgiaarchives.org/: accessed 7 November 2023).

[15] Meredith B. Colket, Jr., F.A.S.G., “Chisholm Families in the American Colonies,” National Genealogical Society Quarterly, Vol. 72, No. 2 (1984): 83-112.

[16] Ibid., Meredith B. Colket, Jr., p. 86.

[17] Dr. J.G.B. Bulloch, A History and Genealogy of the Families of Bulloch and Stobo and of Irvine of Cults (Washington D.C.: Press of Byron S. Adams), 14. George White, Historical Collections of Georgia (New York: Pudney & Russell, 1855), 40. The reference to Thomas Chisolm on page 40 is part of the chapter “Georgia Roll,” which is a list of names and related data the author transcribed from a privately held original document that recorded men with their occupation.

[18] Ibid., Dr. J.G.B. Bulloch.

[19] Later promoted to Major and possibly Lieutenant-Colonel.

[20] George White, Historical Collections of Georgia (New York: Pudney & Russell, 1855), 94.

[21] Allen D. Candler, The Revolutionary Records of the State of Georgia, 1: 306. Bulloch died 22 Feb 1777, the same day he was elected. A.E. Sholes, compiler, A Chronological History of Savannah (Savannah, Georgia: The Morning News Print, 1900), 57.

[22] Ibid., Allen D. Candler.

[23] Ibid., Georgia Surveyor General Department.

[24] Thomas Chisholm, marriage, Scotland, Old Parish Registers (OPR), Parish of Kilmorack, Inverness, National Records of Scotland, 100/ 10 563 Kilmorack (https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/ : accessed 20 September 2022), digital image of original document. The marriage record identified Thomas Chisholm as the son of Rev. Thomas Chisholm, and it identified Ann McLean as the daughter of John McLean, minister at Kintail, Ross-shire, Scotland.

[25] Three of Ann McLean’s brothers are named in the 1787 document: Alexander, Kenneth, and Hugh. Vital records could not be located for any of the brothers; however, the children of John McLean minister at Kintail are listed by Hew Scott in Fasti ecclesiae scoticanae; the succession of ministers in the Church of Scotland from the reformation. Scott omits a brother named Hugh but Alexander, Kenneth, and Ann are recorded by Scott as children of John McLean. Hew Scott, Fasti ecclesiae scoticanae; the succession of ministers in the Church of Scotland from the reformation, (Edinburgh: Tweeddale Court, 1928), 39.

[26] Relict means widow.

[27] Ann McLean vs. Colin MacLaren, CS271/44161, “Court of Session: Bill Chamber Processes, Old Series” scanned image of original document, National Records of Scotland.

[28] Lorna Kinnaird is an accredited member of the Association of Scottish Genealogists & Researchers, Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, member of Register of Qualified Genealogists; she holds a postgraduate diploma in Palaeographic, Heraldic & Genealogical Studies from Strathclyde University and a Higher Certificate in heraldic & Genealogical Studies from the Institute of Heraldic & Genealogical Studies in Canterbury.

[29] Map of Leinassie, Fairly, Torrin Auchtin, Knock-Bain & Kyle-na-Clea, National Records of Scotland, (https://maps.nls.uk/view/188056163/ : accessed 28 Augsut 2024), digital image of original document.

[30] Lorna Kinnaird, Scotland, to Sherrie Cork, email, 26 July 2024.

[31] Duncan Chisholm 28 December 1765 and Jean Chisholm 4 January 1767, births, Old Parish Registers (OPR), Parish of Kilmorack, Inverness, National Records of Scotland, (https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/ : accessed 28 August 2024), digital images of original documents. Also, Scottish birth records reveal another Ann McLean and Thomas Chisholm pair in Scotland who are the parents of five children born in Kiltarlity parish between 1808 and 1817. This couple can be ruled out as Thomas Chisholm the son of Rev. Thomas Chisholm and Ann McLean the daughter of John McLean minister at Kintail because Ann would be over 70 years old in 1817, too old to bear a child. Barbara Chisholm, birth, 22 April 1808; Donald Chisholm, birth, 4 November 1809; Hugh Chisholm, birth, 6 September 1812; William Chisholm, birth, 21 August 1814; Ann Chisholm, birth, 6 March 1817, Old Parish Registers (OPR), Parish of Kilmorack, Inverness, National Records of Scotland (https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/ : accessed 20 September 2022), digital images of original documents.

[32] Thomas Chisolm died sometime before the 1787 document was written, as evinced by Ann McLean’s being identified as his widow.

[33] Brenda Petty is a Certified Questioned Document Examiner with more than 15 years of experience and has reviewed over 43,890 signatures and handwritings, including historical documents; she is qualified to provide expert testimony in 13 states.

[34] Thomas Chisolm’s original signature appears on several documents held by the Georgia Archives.

[35] Brenda Petty Unlimited LLC “Handwriting Identification Information and Forensic Document Report: Thomas Chisholm aka Thomas Chisolm,” p. 5, report to Sherrie Cork, Fair Oaks, California, 3 July 2024; privately held.

[36] Ibid., Ann McLean vs. Colin MacLaren.

[37] “Telamon Cuyler Historical Manuscripts, 1609-1942,” University System of Georgia, Digital Library of Georgia (https://dlg.usg.edu/record/guan_1170_harg1170-038d-034 : accessed 7 November 2023), scanned image of original document, “Georgia. Governor John Adam Treutlen.”

]]> https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2024/12/17/thomas-chisolm-of-burke-county-georgia/feed/ 2 824 California Archives Online https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2022/11/05/california-archives-online/ Sat, 05 Nov 2022 23:39:22 +0000 https://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=742

I’m a first generation Californian, so most of my family history research takes me to other states. But I used to do research for work at the State of California Archives building. If you’re a research nerd like me, you get immersed in archive collections no matter how relevant they are to your own projects.

California Archive Collections - Online Search

If you’re in the opposite situation and you’re in another state researching your ancestors in California, you might be in luck! California recently rolled out their new online search portal. I know. It’s a little late in the game for a tech savvy state like California. Oh, now you know the closely held secret of California natives: this state is not as tech savvy as you think! Anyway, check out the new portal!

]]> 742 Newspaper Archives https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2019/07/23/newspaper-archives/ Tue, 23 Jul 2019 22:00:53 +0000 https://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=482 Do you want to subscribe to a newspaper archive site such as Newspapers.com and just don’t know which one you need, i.e. which one you should pay for? Well, the short answer is that you might need all of them! It depends on the location of the people you are looking for. I did a bit of cataloging that might help you decide what you need for your Aiken and Barnwell South Carolina research.

I compared the newspapers available on four websites.

You can browse a list of the papers available on each of these websites, filtered by city and state.

Here is a table that shows what is available on each of the four websites for news in the Aiken/Barnwell/Edgefield area in chronological order. This is only a small selection of the newspapers available for the entire state.

As you can see, not one of the websites has them all! By the way, the Library of Congress collection is FREE!

]]> 482 How are Jesse Stallings Jr. and Josiah Stallings related (Part 4) https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2019/05/28/how-are-jesse-stallings-jr-and-josiah-stallings-related-part-4/ Tue, 28 May 2019 23:52:28 +0000 https://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=439 I still don’t know for sure, but…

Because of the common practices at the time (read more about that here), and the fact that at the most they can only be 19 years apart in age, I don’t believe Jesse Stallings Jr. was Josiah’s father.

If Jesse Jr. was Josiah’s father he likely would have worded the 1801 deed such that he identified him as his son. In fact, he did that very thing several years later. Here is a deed whereby Jesse Jr. conveyed property to his son Etheldred in 1814.

The State of South Carolina 
Barnwell District 
Know all men by these presents that I Jesse Stallings of s’d District and State aforesaid. For and in consideration of the sum of five hundred dollars and Love and good will I have for my son Felldread[sic] Stallings I have granted bargained sold and by these presents do bargain sell and release unto the said Felldread[sic] Stallings my son all that plantation or tract of land containing two hundred acres more or less originally granted to Daniel Green situate in the district of Barnwell lying on Tims’s branch on the upper side of the upper three runs waters of Savannah River having such shapes forms and marks as will fully appear by a grant – And be to Remembered and fully understood that at my decease my son Felldread[sic] Stallings shall have possession and not before of said Land. And if I should die before my son Fell Dread Stallings shall have come to the age of Twenty One, then my Daughters Winney Stallings Judith Stallings Candis Stallings Nancy Stallings Happy Stallings Sarah Stallings shall have an equal part of the profits of said land till my son comes of age – Together with all and singular the rights, [illegible] hereditaments and appurtenances to the s’d premises belonging unto the s’d Fell Dread[sic] Stallings his Heirs and assigns and I do bind myself my heirs executors and administrators to warrant and forever defend the said premises against myself and every other person lawfully claiming or to claim any part or parcel thereof as Witness my hand and seal this the 31st Day of December in the year of our Lord One thousand Eight Hundred and fourteen and in the 39th year of the Independence of the United States of America. 
 
Signed sealed and delivered his   
In preasants[sic] of us Jesse X Stallings 
E.B. Bush mark 
Lewis Weathersbee 
 
South Carolina 
Barnwell District 
Personally came before me E. Bryan(t) Bush who being duly sworn sayeth that he was present saw Jesse Stallings make his mark for the purpose within mentioned and that he subscribed his name together with Lewis Weathersbee as witnesses at the same time. 
Sworn to before me this 31st  
Day of December 1814 E.B. Bush 
Wm. Bibb J.P. 

Barnwell County Deed Book I, page 155

I believe it is very likely that Jesse Jr. and Josiah were brothers. Perhaps Jesse Jr. was a legitimate son born from a marriage between Jesse Sr. and his mother (name unknown). Being the only legitimate son would have enabled Jesse Jr. to inherit his father’s property without the need for a probate, and there were no other legitimate heirs to challenge it in a court of equity. There are between 12 and 19 years between Jesse Jr. and Josiah. Perhaps Jesse Sr.’s wife died and he didn’t marry Susannah Moody. Here is a deed whereby Jesse conveyed to his daughters whom he refers to with the surname “Odom Stallings.”

State of South Carolina 
Barnwell District 
 
Know all men by these presents that I Jesse Stallings of the State and District aforesaid for the love and affection which I hear for my five Daughters to wit, Winny Willson Judith Odom Stallings Candy Odom Stallings Nancy Odom Stallings Happy Stallings and for the consideration of the sum of ten Dollars to me in hand paid by my five said Daughters to wit Winny Wilson Judith Candis Nancy and Happy hath bargained and Sold Give Deeded and delivered and by these presents do bargain sell Give Deed and Deliver unto my said five Daughters with this condition that they shall pay unto my Daughter Sarah Stallings when she shall arrive to the Age of twenty One or Married the sum of fifty Dollars then after my death my five Daughters to wit Winny Wilson Judith Odom Candis Odom Nancy Odom and Happy Stallings shall be and remain in full possession of my four Negroes Namely Fany and her future issue Silles and his issue Will and Daniel together with all my Stock of Horses Cattle and Hogs with the increase and also all my Household and kitchen furniture to have and to hold all and Singular the Premises above mentioned unto my said four Daughters (to Wit) Winny Willson Judith Candis Nancy and Happy Stallings their heirs and assigns forever Given under my hand and Seal this 29th day of August 1818. Also all the improvements that is made upon my lands from the 29th day of August 1818 until my death my Daughter shal have an Equal part of the same what it may be valued at and Signed in the presents[sic] of us. 
E.B. Bush his 
Lewis Weathersbee Jesse X Stallings 
mark 
 
South Carolina 
Barnwell District 
 
Personally came before me Bryant E. Bush and he being duly Sworn as the law directs saith on his oath that he was present and Saw Jesse Stallings make his mark to the within Deed and also saw him Deliver the said Deed to Winny Wilson Judith Odom Stallings Candis Odom Stallings Nancy Odom Stallings and Happy Stallings for the use and purpose within mentioned and also saw Lewis Weathersbee subscribe his name as an Evidence of said Deed with my Own name Sworn to before be 29th August 1818. 
Thomas Morris J.P. 
E.B. Bush 
 
Recorded the 11th Sept 1818 

Barnwell County Deed Book K, page 309

It’s also possible that they are cousins. But there does seem to be a close connection between Stallings and Moody and Odom. John and Joel Moody were neighbors of Jesse Sr.’s in Franklin County, NC. (I have never been able to locate Susannah Moody.) And remember the Shadrack Odom Revolutionary War indent?

One possible reason for the wording in those crazy deeds is so that Josiah and John would thereafter be legally known by the father’s surname. There were no laws to facilitate name changes in the county courts at that time. Name changes in the early 19th century were granted by the legislature. There is no mention of name changes for Stallings, Moody or Odom in the legislative documents to 1836 that I can find.

It makes sense, then, that Jesse Jr. would convey land to “Josiah Stallings called son of Susannah Moody” in order to “legalize” Josiah’s use of the Stallings surname. The fact that Josiah then conveys to “John Stallings called son of Candace Odom” in exactly the same way also may support the theory that Jesse is not Josiah’s father. Josiah is clearly not John’s father, based on their respective ages.

Another reason that it makes sense to conclude they are brothers is that you can see a pattern of naming children after one’s siblings amongst the immediate family members at that time.

One possible fly in this ointment is that Jesse Sr. would need to be alive in 1771 or later, when Josiah was born. John was born in about 1787.

Check out my adventures in sewing at Sew Vintagely.

]]> 439 Illegitimate Children https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2019/05/26/illegitimate-children/ Sun, 26 May 2019 05:31:10 +0000 https://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=433 What do I call you?

In my analysis of Josiah and Jesse Stallings, the issue of illegitimate birth is raised when interpreting those crazy deeds.

It is highly likely that the reason Josiah and John Stallings are identified by the phrase “called the son of Susannah Moody” and “called the son of Candace Odom” is that their respective fathers were named Stallings and were not married to Susannah and Candace.

You may also find the term “common law marriage” used in these situations. Barbara Langdon published a very useful book Barnwell County Marriages, 1764-1859: Implied in Barnwell County, S.C. Deeds. In it, she notes “common law marriage” for any deed that deals with illegitimate children.

I reviewed all the deeds Langdon identified with “common law marriage.” Any time a father conveyed property to his illegitimate children, the deed would state that the child was his and most also included gift deed language: “for and in consideration of the love and affection …”. Following are some excerpts.

“by love and affection, as also by other notions…moving, as also in consideration of fifty dollars in hand paid…unto Margaret, Daniel, Elenor, and William Parker Gordon, sons and daughters of Margaret Parker a tract of land whereon now live…”.

Conveyance by Patrick Gordon, Barnwell County Deeds Book F, page 134

“for and in consideration of the love and affection that I do bear towards Elizabeth Bright and the children I have had by her by living with me…” ..

Conveyance by Thomas Green, Barnwell County Deeds Book M, page 129

“for and in consideration of the love good will and affection which I have and do bear towards my two children namely Also B. Mallard and Sary Ann E. Mallard”

Conveyance by John Middleton, Barnwell County Deeds Book T, page 85

Do I call you a criminal?

One of the reasons deeds were used to give property to illegitimate children is that they could not inherit. Illegitimate children did not have the same rights as children born from a marriage, and having an illegitimate child could result in criminal prosecution.

The act of assembly of 1795, enacts that if any white woman be delivered of a bastard child, and shall, after the birth, voluntarily give information that such child will become a burthen to the district, and will declare who the father is, the magistrate, before whom the information is given, shall issue his warrant to apprehend the putative father, who shall enter into a recognizance, &c. And should the person so accused refuse to enter into a recognizance, &c., he shall be committed to prison until he shall comply; or, should he deny he is the father, a jury shall be charged to try the question whether he is the father or not.

State v. Clark, 4 S.C.L. 386, 387 (S.C. Const. App. 1810)

Better pay up!

If you are investigating a possible illegitimate birth in this early time period, be sure to check out the court minutes. Mothers were called before the judge to identify the father and the father was required to a post bond to offset the government’s financial responsibility of caring for the child. Following is a particularly entry from the minutes of the Winton County court.

The County against Elizabeth Myrick bastardy

Elizb. Myrick came into Court and swore that Dennis Murphey of the Congaree is father of a bastard child called Lany; that the father of John another bastard child is Edward Southwell, deceased; that the father of Mary another bastard child was also the said Edward Southwell and that the father of Sarah, another base born child is William Southwell. The Court fined the said Elizabeth Myrick fifteen pounds proclamation money to be paid within nine months.

The court have ordered that Sieri facias be issued against Dennis Murphey of the Congaree and William Southwell of Winton County to show cause why fines should not be levied on their estates.

…

State vs That/Eli Myrick appear within one month at the clerks office and give security to indemnify the county for the maintenance and support of the following illegitimate children Amy, John, Mary & Sarah fifty pounds each.

Winton County Court Minutes 17th Oct. 1787; 18th Jan 1788
Transcribed in Winton (Barnwell) County South Carolina Minutes of County Court and Will Book 1785-1791
by Brent H. Holcomb

Check out my adventures in sewing at Sew Vintagely.

]]> 433 How reliable is your source? https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2019/04/22/how-reliable-is-your-source/ Mon, 22 Apr 2019 22:20:46 +0000 https://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=395 Records from Josiah’s estate – a digression

My last few articles take a deep dive into analyzing the connection between Jess and Josiah Stallings. I’m going to briefly digress and fast forward in time to Josiah’s death. The last time I talked about that was to tell you that he was shot in the face by his slave in 1836. He died without a will and there are quite a few post-death records with comprehensive details of his estate. The records have been a good test of how well my research will hold up to the standard that expects us to weigh the validity of a source based on several criteria, including who provided the information and how close in time to the event the information was recorded. There are so many details I could dissect here, but the main purpose of this post is to share my transcription of one of the earliest records.

This is a Petition for Sale of Real Estate. The petition was filed in the Court of Common Pleas. These petitions are not available online and are not indexed online. They are also not available at the South Carolina Department of Archives and History. As far as I know they are only available at the Barnwell Courthouse in Barnwell, South Carolina. Side note: If anyone is reading this who lives near there and would like to do some digging, please let me know!

The petition lists all the pieces of property that Josiah owned at the time of his death and who purchased each parcel. This is an extremely important document, as this information was recorded within months of Josiah’s death. A case was filed later in the Court of Equity that also lists the property and the purchasers. That case was filed in about 1852. More on all that later, but it could be that the information in this record is more accurate than in the later case.

I transcribed the document from photos a very nice lady took for me. Because I don’t know the order that the pages were found in the bundle, I simply noted “[page]” at the beginning of each new page. One of the photos was too blurry to read.

]]> 395 How are Jesse Stallings Jr. and Josiah Stallings related? (Part 1) https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2019/04/18/how-are-jesse-stallings-jr-and-josiah-stallings-related-part-1/ Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:16:05 +0000 https://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=389 One need only dig up all the early Barnwell County, South Carolina, Stallings records to conclude that there must be a close familial connection between Jesse Stallings and Josiah Stallings. Are they father and son? Brothers? Cousins? Uncle and nephew? Let’s start with estimating when they were born to narrow it down.

You can read my analysis of the earliest Jesse Stallings records here. Based on my analysis of those records, I estimate Jesse Jr.’s birth year to be about 1759. Based on the data reported on three censuses, Josiah Stallings was born between about 1773-1775.Therefore, I would guess that Jesse and Josiah were not father and son because they would only be about 16 years apart. Of course, it’s not impossible that Jesse was Josiah’s father, but it is somewhat unlikely. I also concluded that it is likely Jesse Sr.’s sons were not born before 1746 because they were no sons 16 years of age or older on the 1762 tax list. Of course, this could also mean that Jesse’s sons were old enough to have moved out on their own. However, that is not consistent with the other data that supports Jesse Jr. being born in about 1759.

Of course any analysis to determine 18th century birth years, absent birth or baptismal records, requires making some assumptions. When looking at Josiah’s estimated birth year, one must assume that the 1810, 1820 and 1830 federal censuses for Barnwell County are correctly marked. If we look at the age range marked on these censuses for the Josiah Stallings household, together with the estimated birth year of his oldest child, we might conclude that Josiah was born between 1771 and 1775.

Let’s break that down. Josiah’s oldest child that we know of who survived was Sarah. She is reported to be 53 years old on the 1850 federal census, enumerated in September. Therefore her birth year is estimated to be 1796. Let’s assume Josiah was at least 21 years old when she was born. That would mean he was born no later than 1775. Here is a chart to demonstrate the ages within the range marked on the three censuses.

Est. birth year 1775 1774 1773 1772 1771
1810 census 26-44 35 36 37 38 39
1820 census 26-44 45 46 47 48 49
1830 census 50-59 55 56 57 58 59

It does fit rather nicely together.

As I mentioned earlier, it is unlikely that Josiah is the son of Jesse, Jr. Could he be the son of Jesse, Sr.? In my earlier article, I mentioned a possibility that Jesse, Sr. died between 1768 and 1771. Hey – it looks like Josiah could be the son of Jesse, Sr! It was not unusual to have children 16 years apart. Josiah’s oldest and youngest child were 28 years apart. But then what about that outside-of-probate transfer of property that would usually only happen if Jesse Jr. was the only heir? Well then if Jesse Sr was the one who moved to South Carolina this could work. Still no probate though. Hmmmmm…

]]> 389 Jesse Stallings, Sr. and Jr.? https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2019/03/02/jesse-stallings-sr-and-jr/ Sat, 02 Mar 2019 05:15:12 +0000 https://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=324 From Franklin County, NC, to Barnwell County, SC

What about that Jesse Stallings from Franklin County, North Carolina anyway?

On May 29, 1761 John Anthony received a grant of 383 acres of land in Granville County, NC. After county boundary changes, this land was located in Franklin County.[1]  On May 7, 1762, Jesse Stallings purchased the 383 acres from Anthony for 22 pounds, ten shillings. [2]  Beginning in 1767 parcels of this Anthony grant were sold in three separate transactions.

The sale of the parcels are as follows:  (1) In 1767 Jesse sold 308 acres to Moses Stallings[3]; (2) 42 acres to William Symmons[4]; and (3) in 1787, Jesse sold 40 acres to Rueben Stallings[5]. All three deeds were signed by mark. Was it the same Jesse Stallings who was the grantor of all three deeds?  In the 1787 deed only, Jesse is identified as being from South Carolina.

A Jesse Stallings acquired land in Barnwell County, South Carolina between 1784 and 1786.[6] There are no other Jesse Stallingses in South Carolina at this time. This seems to imply that the Jesse Stallings who sold the land in Franklin County, NC in 1787 to Reuben Stallings is the Jesse Stallings who acquired land in Barnwell County, South Carolina 1784-1786.  But is the Jesse Stallings who acquired the land from John Anthony in 1762 the same Jesse Stallings who sold the property in 1787 and moved to Barnwell County?

While it was legal for a minor to own land, for the following analysis I will assume Jesse was at least 21 when he acquired the land from Anthony because a minor could not have sold land. Therefore, if Jesse acquired the land in 1762 and was 21 years old, Jesse would have been 46 in 1787 and born in about 1741.

The Barnwell County Census

On the 1800 Barnwell County census there is one Jesse Stallings. There are two adult males in the household. One is age 16 – 25 and the other is age 26 – 44.

On the 1810 Barnwell County census there is one Jesse Stallings. There are again two adult males in the household. One is age 16 – 25 and the other is 45 and over.

If the same Jesse who acquired the Anthony land is the same Jesse who appears on the Barnwell County 1800 census, the census would be incorrect. Even using the oldest age of 44 wouldn’t make Jesse old enough to be 21 in 1762. In fact, he would only be four years old. The 1810 census would be correct because he could be any age over 45.

The censuses do sometimes contain mistakes; however, note that on the 1800 census, the only adult female in the household is also marked age 26 – 44. Also note that the age of 45+ on the 1810 census logically follows the 26 – 44 age range on the 1800 census. Also, 15 years is a big age difference to have been mis-marked. Therefore, this census data alone doesn’t exhibit any discrepancies.

Early North Carolina Records

Let’s look at other records for Jesse.  Some North Carolina records available in the relevant time frame and county are the Oath of Allegiance of 1775-1776, court minutes, juror lists and tax lists.

To narrow down where to look, let’s chart out where Jesse would be during the relevant time frame. Bute County was formed in 1764 from part of Granville County. In 1779, Bute County was split in half to form Warren and Franklin County. The 1787 deed being in Franklin County indicates that the land was in the area of Granville County that eventually became Franklin County. Therefore:

Granville County Bute County Franklin County
  Earliest to 1764   1764 to 1779   1779 to 1787 or later

The 1762 tax list for Granville County, NC, reports Jesse Stallings as the only taxable person in the household and living in St. John’s District. Also living in St. John’s District is a John Stallings. Jesse Stallings is also reported on the list of insolvents.

Jesse appears on the 1766 tax list for Bute County, NC.

Research Tip for Colonial North Carolina Tax List

A note here that might help if you’re using Ancestry.com to search North Carolina tax lists. They have two searchable records in their catalog called “North Carolina Taxpayers, 1701-1786” and “North Carolina Taxpayers, 1679-1790. Vol. 2.” These are both abstracts by Clarence E. Ratcliff. However, the Granville County 1762 tax list information that I stated above is not included in either of them.  So make sure you look at all available sources.

And did you know that The Colonial records of North Carolina: published under the supervision of the trustees of the public libraries, by order of the General Assembly has been digitized by Family Search and is text searchable? Check it out here.

The 1771 tax list for Bute County can be viewed on FamilySearch.org and also in a book 1771 Bute County, North Carolina tax list, published by Mountain Press.  Jesse does not appear on the 1771 tax list.

A transcription of the oath of allegiance for Bute County is available online here. The oaths were signed between 1775 and 1776.  Stallings men who signed were Elisha, Moses, Elijah, Josiah, Reubin, Elias, Moses, all in Captain Milner’s district. Jesse’s name is not on the list.

Jurors are reported in the Bute County, North Carolina: Minutes of the Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions, 1767-1779

Jesse is listed as a juror in 1768.

How important are omissions from the records?

Not as important as we like to think. What is important is that we not read too much into what we find, especially in abstracts, books where someone copied from original records and in the old records themselves because they are often copies as well. For example, many colonial records are lists that were copied from little strips of paper that tax collectors, ministers and others wrote their notes on. Even the “original” census images we look at are copies of the census takers’ true original notes.

So just because Jesse isn’t on the oath list that is a copy of a copy, doesn’t necessarily mean he didn’t take the oath. Same goes for the tax lists, and the accompanying information.

Yes there are two Jesses

Because the Jesse who is in Barnwell County in 1800 can’t be the same Jesse who acquired the Anthony land in 1762, we can conclude that there are two Jesses. We can also conclude that the Jesse who sold the Anthony land is the Jesse who moved to Barnwell County. We also know that the Jesse on the 1800 Barnwell County census was between the ages of 25-44.

But who sold the Anthony land?

Either Jesse Sr. or Jesse Jr. sold the Anthony land in 1787.

It is possible that Jesse Sr. died some time between 1768 and 1771, when he dropped off the tax list. If so, Jesse Jr. could have been Jesse Sr.’s only heir. The land could then pass to him outside of probate. (No will or probate has been located for Jesse Sr.) And Jesse Jr. could be the one who sold the land to Anthony and moved to South Carolina. However, there are two things that bother me about this. One is that we can’t really rely on the omission from the 1771 tax list on its own to support this theory. Two is the chain of title to the Franklin County property. There is never any indication on the deeds that there are two Jesses. No “Jesse the older” and”Jesse the younger” or “Jesse Sr.” and “Jesse Jr.” In fact the 1787 deed reads exactly the same as the 1767 deeds.

It is possible that Jesse Sr. was still alive in 1787 and he sold the Anthony land, moved to South Carolina with Jesse Jr. and died before the 1800 census.

Jesse Stallings, Jr. – when was he born?

If Jesse Jr. sold the Anthony land, he would have to be at least 21 in 1787 (birth year 1766). However, if he was at least 21 when he received the grant of land in Barnwell in 1785, he would have been born in 1764. On the 1800 census, the column for a male age 16-25 is marked. If this is Jesse’s son, Jesse would have to have been born in 1763 to be 21 when a 16-year-old son was born. If he was born in 1763, Jesse would be 37 in 1800, which fits with ages 25-44. He would be 47 in 1810, which fits with the 45+ that is marked on the 1810 census.

If Jesse Jr. truly did not take the oath of allegiance because he wasn’t old enough, he would be born no earlier than 1759 to escape that responsibility, assuming he would have taken the oath no later than 1776. If the 1762 tax list is correct and was supposed to report sons 16 years or older, he would be born no earlier than 1746. If he was born in 1746, he would be 54 in 1800 and that doesn’t match the census. If he was born in 1759, he would be 41 in 1800 and the census matches. I think it is safe to say that Jesse Jr. was born approximately between 1759 and 1763.

But which Jesse sold the Anthony land?

I have no idea.

[1] An index entry of the Anthony grant is located online at the North Carolina Archives. An image of the patent is located online at nclandgrants.com.

[2] Granville County, North Carolina Deeds. 7 May 1762. Deed book F, page 166. Sold for 22 pounds, 10 shillings. Signed by John Anthony and Patience Anthony. Witnessed by Henry Bonner, John Cook, Harmon Holliman, Benjamin Cook.

[3] Bute County Deed Book 3, page 115

[4] Warren-Bute Deed Book 4, page 104

[5] Franklin County Deed Book 6, page 190

[6] South Carolina State Grant vol. 13, page 453; also Barnwell County plats

]]> 324 Women’s Property Rights in Early America https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2018/02/02/womens-property-rights-in-early-america/ Fri, 02 Feb 2018 17:00:48 +0000 http://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=239 What’s up with women and land ownership you ask? It’s complicated. There are also a lot of myths about marriage and women, which will further complicate your research. That’s why it’s important to learn the facts and laws. We often look at  property transfers to find connections between families. I’ve learned that my interpretation of the document and relationships implied therein is only as good as my understanding of the relevant laws, especially those related to the property rights of women in early America. The law of dower is of particular interest. Determining property rights can be a complex question, and I am only scratching the surface here.

Among the several great resources I found are law treatises published in the early 19th century (See A Treatise on the Law of Dower; Particularly with a View to the Modern Practice of Conveyancing by John James Park, available on Google Books). Some online blogs and articles were very helpful as well. Bob Baird has some great articles on his website “Bob’s Genealogy Filing Cabinet.”[1]

You will often read the phrase “at common law” when researching legal issues, especially relating to early American history. America is still a common law country, meaning that its laws are made when decisions are rendered by judges (precedent). When the English settled America, they brought English common law with them.  Over time, new laws were established in America that repealed or revised English law.  When territories became states, they each adopted their own laws.  It’s important to research the laws that were in effect at the time and place of the document that is the subject of analysis.

One such law that came to America from England is the law of dower. Dower (not to be confused with dowery) is the right of a widow to a life estate in her deceased husband’s property.  Dower did not amount to ownership. Dower was a widow’s right to the usage, income and enjoyment of the property.[2]  If the couple had children the dower share was one-third; if no children, the dower share was one-half. Requirements that the wife consent to relinquish her dower when her husband sold property were enacted in America in the early 18th century.
Understanding marriage in early America is a prerequisite to understanding women’s property rights.

Marriage as a civil contract, rather than merely a religious ceremony, was the result of policy to prevent women and children from being a burden on the government. A husband was bound by law to support his wife and children. Dower facilitated continued support for the widow and children after a husband died.  Marriage also meant that the husband and wife were one legal entity and that the wife could no longer own property of her own, nor could she sell property or enter into contracts. In an early treatise on English common law, marriage was described thusly:

“By marriage, the husband and wife are one person in law: that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband: under whose wing, protection, and cover, she performs every thing; and is therefore called…a femme-covert.”[3]

An unmarried or widowed woman could own property, but a married woman could not.
­­­While dower deals with the husband’s property, what if the wife owned property when she got married or inherited it while married? That question would eventually bring us to another set of laws to research: the law of curtesy. For the sake of brevity and to keep the focus on dower, the simplified answer is that the husband could sell the property if he wished. The wife would not have a dower right to property that she once owned or inherited. However, buyers may have asked for both husband and wife’s signature on a conveyance. If the wife survived the husband, property that she previously owned would become hers again. She could own it because she would no longer be married; she would be a widow.
Here is a simplified breakdown of each scenario:

Husband’s property:

  • Husband could do whatever he wanted with the property.
  • Wife retained a dower interest in the property while she lived.
  • The wife could consent to relinquish her dower if husband wanted to sell the property.
  • If husband sold the property, there should be a relinquishment of dower included with the deed.

Wife’s property:

  • Husband would acquire a life interest in the property.
  • Husband could sell it but couldn’t leave it to anyone in his will while his wife was alive.
  • If husband sold it, wife had no dower right, but a buyer may want both husband and wife’s signature on the deed.
  • If wife died first, husband could do whatever he wanted with the property.
  • If husband died first, ownership of the property reverted back to the wife.
  • There would not be a relinquishment of dower connected to the sale of property that was once owned by the wife.

How can this be applied to the documents you’re finding? Depending on the place and time, if you see a deed that is only singed by the husband and a wife has not relinquished her dower, it may mean that he is single or widowed. If a deed is signed by both the husband and wife together, but dower is not mentioned, the deed may be conveying property that once belonged to the wife or was inherited by the wife. If property was conveyed to a woman, she was single or widowed.
[1] Bob’s Genealogy Filing Cabinet. Southern and Colonial Genalogies, 2010-2018, www.genfiles.com. Accessed 2 Feb. 2018.
[2] “Dower and Curtesy.” Bob’s Genealogy Filing Cabinet, 2 Feb. 2018, www.genfiles.com/articles/dower-and-curtesy.
[3] Blackstone, William, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Chicago rpt, 1979.

]]> 239 Barnwell County Plats https://descendantsofrebellion.com/2017/11/04/barnwell-county-plats/ Sat, 04 Nov 2017 01:27:45 +0000 http://descendantsofrebellion.com/?p=211 Barnwell County plats are available on the FamilySearch.org website. As with the deeds, which are also available (see my blog post), review can be tedious because the index and plats are not searchable by name. The information below will help you find what you’re looking for more quickly.
Here is the link to the general index and plat books 1 – 9, which cover the years 1784-1868: https://familysearch.org/search/catalog/383457?availability=Family%20History%20Library
When you click on the link, select the camera icon next to the index. The table below will help you locate the first image of the list of names grouped together alphabetically by last name of the property owner.  The first page or so of each letter is a summary index that lists the page number that each name is on. This is also helpful. Even though the page number doesn’t match the FamilySearch image number, it can get you close.
General Index to Plats 1785-1949

Last name starts with Image number
A 8
B 16
C 35
Commissioner 45
D 50
E 58
F 63
G 70
H 79
I 92
K 99
L 104
M 112
N 128
O 130
P 137
R 146
S 156
Stallings 166
T 171
Harley (out of place) 177
U 179
V 181
W 183
Y-Z 196

Once you locate a book and page number on the index, go back to the main list and click the camera icon for the book you need. The table below will help you get to the book you need quickly. If you toggle back and forth between single page view and multi-page view, you can find the page you are looking for more quickly.

Plat book number Image number
1 (1784-1792) 7
2 (1807-1817) 187
3 (1828-1841) 404
4 (1788-1826) 7
5 (1794-1801) 160
6 (1816-1841) 334
7 (1841-1858) 7
8 (1784-1816) 7
9 (1858-1868) 419

 

]]> 211