Ancestor Sketch – Meredith Mannin (1802-c.1885)

52 Ancestors – Week 2018-39
By Don Taylor

Meredith didn’t follow the typical “go west young man” life of so many of my ancestors. Meredith was born in Virginia about 1802. He went west as a young man to Bath County, Kentucky, where he married.  He then moved west to Missouri. After several years in Missouri, he moved back east to Boone County, Indiana. He returned east again and settled in Carter County, Kentucky. Finally, he appears to have died in Bath County after returning to the place of his youth.

Brown/Roberts Research 2018 – Ancestor #104

List of Grandparents

  1.  Clifford Brown| aka Richard Earl Durand| aka Richard Earl Brown
  2.  Mary Elizabeth Manning(1878-1983)
  3.  John William Manning, (1846-1888)
  4.  Enoch Mannin (1823-1907)
  5.  Meredith Mannin (1802-1870)
  6.  John Bosel Mannin Sr. (1776-1870)
  7.  Samuel Mannin (1756-…)
  8.  Meredith Mannin (1720-c.1751)

Meredith Mannin (1802-c.1885)

Birth

The Mannin family bible clearly indicates that Meredith Mannin was born on 12 June 1802. Sadly, that family bible isn’t a contemporary source record. The bible record is from the Civil War record file of Meredith’s son Zachariah. The record appears to be written by one person at one time. It was clearly written after 1838 and probably not until the 1860s. The 1850 and 1860 Census records indicate he was 48 and 58 years old respectively, suggesting the birth year of 1801. The 1870 and 1880 census records re-establish his birth year as being 1802, consistent with the Bible record.

It is unclear who his parents were. Some sources suggest that his mother, Catherine Barnett, married both John Bosel Mannin and his brother Meredith Mannin. I’ve accepted his father being John Bosel Mannin and know that I need to do much more research in this area.

In any event, I believe his siblings to be:

Charles b. 1796 in Virginia
Martha b. 1798 in Virginia
John b. 1799 in Virginia
Tubal b. 1800 in Virginia
Meredith b. 1802 in Virginia
Samuel b. ca. 1804 in Kentucky
Tarleton b. 1811 in Kentucky
John Bosel b. 1915 in Kentucky
Mary b. 1826 in Kentucky

Childhood

Nothing is known of Meredith’s childhood. Sometime in 1803 or 1804 the family relocated to Kentucky.

Marriage

Meredith and Rachel Fugate’s father signed a marriage bond on 14 February 1825. It is unclear if they married on that date or three days later, on February 17th. See: Marriage of Meredith Mannin & Rachel Fugate. Enoch was born on 3 January 1823, two years before Meredith and Rachel were married. While Rachel was 4-months pregnant with Isaac she and Meredith married.

Meredith and Rachel had 12 children. Their first three children, Enoch, Isaac, and Thomas were born in Kentucky. About 1828, the family moved to Missouri and had three children while in Missouri – Tubill, Reuben, & Katharine. About 1835, the Mannin’s moved 250 miles back towards the east to Boone County, Indiana. There they had four more children, John, Mahala, Sarah, & Elizabeth. Finally, about 1841, the family moved back to Kentucky where their two youngest children, Zachariah & Tarlton, were born.

Adulthood

1830 Census indicates the family is in St Ferdinand, St Louis, Missouri:

3 Males under 5, One presumed to be Isaac, Age 5
                        One presumed to be Thomas Hillry, Age 3
                        One presumed to be Tubill, Age 1
1 male 5 to 10       Presumed to be Enoch, Age 7
1 male 20 to 30.    Meredith Mannin, Age 28.
1 Female 20 to 30 Presumed to Be Rachel Fugate, Age 26.

Map showing Meredith’s land.

In 1837, Meridith Mannin owned 40 acres of land about four miles north of Lebanon, Boone County, Indiana, in Washington Township, the SE ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 12.

 

1840 Census indicates the family is in Boone County, Indiana:

2 Males 5 to under 10  – Presumed to be John (age 5) and Reuben Calloway, (Age 9)
1 Male 10 to under 15 – Presumed to be Thomas Hillry OR Tubill (Age 13 or 10)[1]
2 Males 15 to under 20 – Presumed to be Enoch (Age 17) and Isaac B. (Age 15)
1 Male 30 to under 40 – Presumed to be Meredith Mannin (Age 38)
3 Females under 5 – Presumed to be Mahala (Age 2), Elizabeth  (Age 1), and Sarah Jane (a newborn)
1 Female 5 to under 10 – Presumed to be Katharine Susan (Age 7)
1 Female 30 to under 40 – Presumed to be Rachel Fugate Mannin (Age 36)

 

The 1850 Census indicates the family is in Carter County, Kentucky

Meradith Mannen – 48 – Farmer 250   VA
Rachel         “       47                                      KY
Tubal          “        20      Laborer                Mo
Reuben       “       17        Laborer                “
Cathrine S   “     15                                       “
John           “        13                                     Ind
Mahala        “      12                                     “
Sarah          “        10                                     “
Zachariah    “       8                                    Ky
Tarlton        “        6                                     “

The 1860 Census indicates the family is in Bath County, Kentucky. Only four of their children are still with them:

Meredith Manning  – 58 Farmer – Born Virginia
Rachel   “             57      Kentucky
Zachah   “            18      Farm Hand – KY
Mahala                21      KY (Apparent Error)
Sarah                   19      KY (Apparent Error)
Tarlton                16      KY

Rachel died on 7 May 1870.

The 1870 Census finds Meredith in Carter County again. Living with him are his daughter Sarah Jane, her husband and their three children. Also, with them are two of Meredith’s grandchildren. One more person, Rodeth Richard, probably Sarah Jane’s sister-in-law, is also living with them.

Merideth Mannin            M      67      Virginia       Farmer
Jane Richardson            F       26      Kentucky     Keeping House
James Richardson         M      26      Kentucky     Farmer
Rachel Richardson         F       7       Kentucky
James Richardson         M      4       Kentucky
William Richardson        M      2       Kentucky
Rodeth Richardson        F       17      Kentucky
Ruben Tapp                  M      15      Kentucky     Farm Laborer
Evaline Tapp                 F       13      Kentucky

The 1880 Census now finds Meredith living in the household of his daughter Sarah Jane, her husband and their six children now in Tanyard, Bath County, Kentucky:

James Richardson Self    M      43      Kentucky, Farmer
Sarah Richardson Wife   F       41      Indiana, Keeping House
Rachal Richardson Dau. F       17      Kentucky
James Richardson Son   M      15      Kentucky, Laborer
William Richardson Son  M      13      Kentucky, Laborer
Meridith RichardsonSon M      8       Kentucky
Charley RichardsonSon  M      6       Kentucky
Melvin Richardson Son  M      2       Kentucky
Merideth Mannon  F-I-L  M      77      Kentucky  (Widowed)

Death & Burial

I have been unsuccessful finding any death or burial record for Meredith.  Several researchers suggest he died after 15 Jul 1885, several others suggest 15 July 1885.

Further Actions / Follow-up



————–  Disclaimer  ————–

Sources

  • 1830 Census (A) (NARA), Com, 1830 Census – Meredith Manning – St Ferdinand. St Louis County, Missouri.
  • 1840 Census (A) (NARA), Com, 1840 – Merradeth [Merediith] Mannon [Mannin] – Boone, Indiana; Roll: 74; Page: 138. Ancestry.com
  • 1850 Census, Com, 1850 Census – Meradith Mannen [Mannin] – District 1, Carter, Kentucky. Online publication – Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2009. Images reproduced by FamilySearch.Original data – Seventh Census of the United States, 1850; (National Archives Microfilm Publication M432, 1009 rolls).
  • 1860 Census, Family Search, 1860 – Meredith Manning – Bath, Maine – Page 131.
  • 1870 Census (FS) (NARA), Family Search, 1870 Census – Merideth Mannin – Precinct 3, Carter, Kentucky. “United States Census, 1870,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MX7P-1PB : 12 April 2016), Merideth Mannin, Kentucky, United States; citing p. 1, family 4, NARA microfilm publication M593 (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.); FHL microfilm 545,953.
  • 1880 Census, Family Search, 1880 – James Richardson – Tanyard, Bath, Kentucky. “United States Census, 1880,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MCCM-LQ1 : 12 August 2017), Merideth Mannon in household of James Richardson, Tanyard, Bath, Kentucky, United States; citing enumeration district ED 7, sheet 362D, NARA microfilm publication T9 (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 0402; FHL microfilm 1,254,402.
  • Find a Grave, Find a Grave, Thomas Hillry Manning – Memorial 41718613 [No Image]. Find A Grave, database and images (https://www.findagrave.com : accessed 15 September 2018), memorial page for Thomas Hillry Manning (8 Mar 1827–4 Oct 1924), Find A Grave Memorial no. 41718613, citing Manning Chapel Cemetery, Carter, Carter County, Kentucky, USA ; Maintained by Norm Nelson (contributor 47026217).
  • General Land Office Records (U.S. Department of the Interior), Bureau of Land Management, Merideath [Meredith] Mannin – Document Number 25537 – 40 Acres, Boone County, [Washington Township] Section 12, SE1/4-NW1/4 Kidder County. Accession Nr: IN1380__.228. https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/patent/default_pf.aspx?accession=IN1380__.228&docClass=STA.
  • Kentucky, County Marriages, 1797-1954, Family Search, Meredith Mannon and Rachel Fugate, 14 Feb 1825 – Bond. Bath, Kentucky, United States, Madison County Courthouse, Richmond; FHL microfilm 273,003. https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:V5ZH-L12.
  • Mannin Family Bible, Copy, Mannin Family Bible – Family Records – Births. Bible Records found in Civil War record file of Zachariah Mannin, son of Meridith and Rachel Fugate Mannin. Zachariah died of smallpox Jan. 7, 1864 at Knoxville, Tennessee. Meridith Mannin applied for Zachariah’s pension and received it. From http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mannin/159.1.1/mb.ashx.

Endnotes:

[1] NOTE: The family should include both Thomas and Tubill, however, it appears that only one of the two is enumerated.

 

Marriage of Meredith Mannin & Rachel Fugate

Amanuensis[i] Monday
Brown-Mannin(g) Line
By Don Taylor

Intro/source

As is so often the case, when you find a record it begs additional questions. Were Meredith and Rachel married on Valentine’s day or three days later?

Transcription [ii]

Bond for the Marriage of Meredith Mannon [Mannin] and Rachel Fugate
Know all men by these presents that we Meredith Mannon & Rueben Fugate are held and firmly bound unto the Commonwealth of Kentucky in the just and full sum of £50 current money of Kentucky which payment well and truly to be made to the said Commonwealth we bind ourselves our heirs & jointly and several firmly by these presents sealed and dated this 14th day of February 1875 the condition of the above obligation in such that whereas there is a marriage shortly intended to be had and solemnized between the above bound Meredith Mannon and Rachel Fugate. Now should there be no lawful Occur to obstruct said intended marriage then this obligation will be void else to remain in full force and notice in law

Marriage Confirmation[iii]

Marriage Confirmation – Meredith Mannon [Mannin] and Rachel Fugate.
Memorandum of Marriages Confirmed by me in Bath County in year 1825.

Willis Moffett & Caroline Stone on the 4th of Jan
Also Rice Burns & Elizabeth Hardin Febr 3rd
Meredith Mannon & Rachel Fugate on the 14th Feb….
….

January the 3rd 1826 – Jonathan Smi…

Discussion

14th or 17th?

The legibility of the “Marriage Confirmed” date leaves something of a question.  It is unclear in my mind if the date is the 14th or the 17th. Both dates make sense. There are no other 7s on this page to compare his 7s against his 4s. Meredith and Rachel’s father, Reuben Fugate, signed a bond assuring Meredith and Rachel were able to marry. That they married on the same day makes sense, unless there was a waiting period. If Kentucky had a marriage waiting period in 1825 then their marriage three days later, on the 17th makes more sense.

Conclusion

I have decided to go with the 14th because Kentucky does not currently require a waiting period. I’ve tried to find Kentucky Laws in 1825, but have been unsuccessful. If anyone has a source for me to check, that would be a great help. If Kentucky had a waiting period in 1825, then Meredith and Rachel had to have been married on 17 February 1825.


Endnotes

[i] John Newmark started the “Amanuensis Monday” category in 2009 on his Blog,  Transylvanian Dutch, and many bloggers have followed suit using the tag. Google provides the following meaning for amanuensis: “A literary or artistic assistant, in particular, one who takes dictation or copies manuscripts.”

[ii] “Kentucky, County Marriages, 1797-1954,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:V5ZH-L12 : accessed 16 September 2018), Meredith Mannon and Rachel Fugate, 14 Feb 1825; citing Bath, Kentucky, United States, Madison County Courthouse, Richmond; FHL microfilm 273,003.

[iii] “Kentucky, County Marriages, 1797-1954,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:V5ZZ-J2T : accessed 16 September 2018), Meredith Mannon and Rachel Fugate, 14 Feb 1825; citing Bath, Kentucky, United States, Madison County Courthouse, Richmond; FHL microfilm 273,007.

Top 10 Surnames in my Roberts-Brown Research

Roberts-Brown-2017
Saturday Night Genealogy Fun
Surname Saturday
By Don Taylor

Photo of Don Taylor with cat Nasi.In a recent “Saturday Night Genealogy Fun,” Randy Seaver suggested we look at our surname list. My Roberts-Brown tree has 6,084 individuals. I manage the tree using Family Tree Maker 2017.  A Surname Report is available under person reports. Two clicks and the report is done is less than a second. The first click was to include all individuals in my file, not just the immediate family. The second click was to sort by surname count. It doesn’t provide a total of the number of unique surnames. But, again a couple clicks do it easily. A click on Share then select export to CSV.  The system asks where you want the report, you save it, then the system asks if you would like to open the Exported Report. I did and my computer launched Microsoft Excel. Entries are every other line. The last surname on the list was line 2801.  Subtract 3 for the three lines of header and divide 2798 by two and I learned I have 1,399 unique surnames in my tree.

I was surprised by the some of the results.

  Surname Count
1 Mannin 424
2 Roberts 243
3 Raidt 183
4 Brown 147
5 Krafve 120
6 Bryant 109
7 Warner 98
8 Wolcott 95
9 Unknown 75
10 Manning 70

Surprises

Raidt is the surname of my son’s maternal grandfather. I have done quite a bit of research on him, but I didn’t realize it was that extensive. For my Raidt research to be number 3 was quite a shock. I should, probably, break this research into a separate project.

Even more shocking was the Krafve surname.  Hildur Krafve was my step-grandmother and is the grandmother of two of my siblings. I didn’t think I researched that family much and was surprised that I have done so much research on that line. I have followed that family name through six generations. With all the children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and so on, there were many names. That it rated high makes sense, but I was still surprised.

I was also surprised by Wolcott. My 5th great-grandmother was Mary Wolcott Parsons.  I have tentatively followed her ancestry back seven more generations to my earliest known ancestor, back in the 1500s.  But still, I had no idea that I had that many known Wolcotts.

Not Surprised

Before I knew who my biological father was, I did a lot of research on the Roberts surname. I was looking for and following potential connections based upon Y-DNA results and other people’s trees. Most of these Roberts entries are not related to me in any meaningful way. That I have over 200 individuals with the Roberts surname didn’t surprise me.
Search Military Records - Fold3

My number one surname was Mannin and that my number 10 surname was Manning didn’t surprise me much. Mary Elizabeth Manning was my great-grandmother and I have done a lot of research in her ancestry. Her husband was Arthur Durrwood Brown. Seeing Brown, and the related surnames if Bryant and Warner, wasn’t much of a surprise either.

Sadly, my number 9 surname, “Unknown,” highlights mistakes in my tree. For a while I used “unknown” when I didn’t know an ancestor’s surname. For married women, whose maiden name don’t know, I’ve begun using their husband’s surname in brackets instead of “LNU” or “unknown.”  That gives me a better idea of where they fit in the tree without needing to see all the other details of the individual. That I have 75 individuals for whom I’ve entered their surname as “unknown” suggests that I need to so some cleanup.  Certainly, “unknown” could be the appropriate entry on occasion, but rarely is it the best entry. As an example, “Ann Laurie Unknown” doesn’t tell me as much as “Ann Laurie [Fannin].”  As long as I remain consistent, I think I’m okay using bracketed names in an unconventional manner.

Conclusion

I enjoy Randy Seaver’s Saturday Night suggestions. They make you think about your family tree in different ways.  In this case, looking at the surnames in this exercise reminded me that I need to be consistent in how I handle unknown surnames.

Enoch Mannin – Homesteader

Enoch Mannin (1823-1907)

Adding maps to my genealogy research is always fun. The Bureau of Land Management records lend themselves to adding maps to better understand an ancestor’s life and history.

The 1895 Minnesota State Census indicated that my third great-grandfather, Enoch Mannin, had moved to Cass County in February 1888. I wondered if that move was relative to homesteading land there.

Map of Section 22, Township 134, Cass County Minnesota
Section 22, Township 134, Cass County Minnesota

A quick search of the General Land Office Records at the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management site yielded 7 properties for Mannin in Cass county, including one for Enoch Mannin.[i] He was granted a patent for 160 acres (the Northeast quarter) in Section 22, Township 134, Range 31 West of the 5th Principal Meridian on 1 Feb 1894. To see exactly where the property is, I zoomed in to see it’s relationship to modern features (like streets and roads).

I also can also use the search results to identify others that lived nearby. I learned that Isaac Mannin (probably Enoch’s son) lived adjacent and Samuel Mannin (probably another of Enoch’s sons) lived catawampus from Isaac. As such, it looks like it was a community that was tightly knit with lots of family nearby.

Map of
Mannin’s in Section 22 & 26, Township 134, Cass County, Minnesota

It took a little looking but I found that Township 134 is now May township. A Wikipedia search informed me that May township is extremely rural. It has no towns and has only 12 people per square mile.

I also used Google Maps to see what the property looks like today.[ii]  It is definitely out there – about nine miles northeast of Motley and 10 miles north by northwest of Pillager. There is no evidence of a house on Enoch’s homesteaded property today.

Location of Enoch Mannin’s 1894 Homestead

My 3rd great-grandfather, Enoch Mannin, was one of the 1.6 million individuals[iii] who tamed the western states by homesteading.

Endnotes

[i] U.S. Department of the Interior – Bureau of Land Management – General Land Office Records – Search Documents: Mannin in Cass County, Minnesota:  https://glorecords.blm.gov/results/default.aspx?searchCriteria=type=patent|st=MN|cty=|ln=Mannin|sp=true|sw=true|sadv=false

[ii] https://goo.gl/maps/CwJBk6eL9t92

[iii] History.Com – “Homestead Act” by History.com staff. Published 2009, accessed 27 Jan 2017, http://www.history.com/topics/homestead-act

 

Keep Trees Wide, Not Deep – Example: Mannin/Barnett

Brown-Montran Research
DNA Research

Mannin/Manning/Brown

During the last meeting of the Maine Genealogical DNA Interest Group, someone asked if it is better to have a tree that is deep or a tree that is wide. I mentioned that, for autosomal DNA test matches, a wide tree is best.  The sheer number of potential 5th and 6th cousins is daunting. But, more importantly, the likelihood of your sharing DNA with a 4th cousin is only 69% and the likelihood of sharing DNA with a 5th cousin is only 30%.[i] Consequently, knowing your 10th great grandparents is of little use in matching DNA cousins.  (Consequently, knowing your 10th great grandparents is of little use in matching DNA cousins. There are two exceptions to this, Y-DNA tree (paternal only) is useful for connecting trees on a Y-DNA match.  Also, X-DNA can provide a similar usefulness.)

23 & Me Shared Matches
23 & Me: Shared Matches

The importance of having a wide tree was exemplified recently.  I was contacted through 23 and Me by a, potentially, 2nd to 4th cousin (I’ll call B.J.) I took a look at the match using 23 & Me‘s new She and my aunt Barbara shared 88cM across five segments. My mother shared 50cM across two segments; interestingly enough, I also shared 50cM across two segments. Looking at what segments all four of us share is an excellent example of how sticky DNA segments are.  All three of us shared the same sticky chunk of DNA.

Screen Shot - Chromosome 3 comparison
Screen Shot – 23 & Me – Chromosome 3 comparison showing sticky clump shared among all of us.

 

 

 

We exchanged basic tree information, she mentioned her ancestors were a Mannin and a Barnett. When she said that, I knew we were related and I was pretty sure I knew exactly how.  Nancy Ann Mannin married Jessie Monroe Barnett about 1867 in Kentucky. They later moved to Minnesota and settled May Township in Cass County, Minnesota.

A couple more email exchanges and I learned that B.J. and my Aunt Barbara were third cousins their common ancestor was Enoch Mannin. Enoch was one of those pivotal people in my genealogical research and I knew a lot about him and his descendants. I even had B.J.’s mother (but not her father nor her) in my family tree records.

Thanks to 23 and Me for providing the tools to connect with another cousin.

———-  DISCLAIMER  ———-

I have tested my mother, my aunt, and myself with 23 and Me – Have you?


Endnotes:

[i] Internet: DNA Land – “Face it: DNA cannot find all your relatives” https://medium.com/@dl1dl1/face-it-dna-cannot-find-all-your-relatives-f68089b8e1e9#.1yar6d4d6