Anna (Howell) Boseman & the 1910 Census

Census Sunday
By Don Taylor

Introduction

Sometimes, while researching through the census records, some realization occurs that makes you smile and say, “oh wow!” Such was the case while I was researching my wife’s great-aunt Anna Lee (Howell) Boseman. During the 1910 census, just like during the 1900 census, women reported how many children they had and how many were still living. In Anna’s case she had 13 children and nine were living. All nine were identified as living with her and her husband, so that means any child born before 1910 and not listed must have died before the census.

1910 Census showing the number of Children for Anna (Howell) Boseman

The Living with William and Anna during the 1910 Census are the following children:

  • William Boseman Jr.      21
  • Jessie Boseman            17
  • Bernice S Boseman       15
  • Mollie M Boseman          13
  • George D Boseman       12
  • Russell L Boseman          8
  • Virginia L Boseman          5
  • Lilie M Boseman              3
  • Martin V Boseman            0

Maggie who was with the family in 1900 is missing in 1910, so Maggie must have died before 1910. The other five children are in both censuses:

  • Anna Lee Howell was born in November 1866
  • She Married William Jackson Boseman in 1886
  • They had 13 children, nine of them were living in 1910; eight of them lived to adulthood.
  • She died in her residence, at the ripe old age of 84, on 31 July 1951 in Weldon, Halifax County, North Carolina and is buried at Cedarwood Cemetery.

Conclusion

I feel that the connections identified by ThruLines as going through Anna Lee (Howell) Boseman are highly reliable.

Mercy (Gay) Sanford & the Early Censuses

Mercy Sanford and the 1840, 1830, and 1820 Census records.

Brown-Sanford-Gay
Census Sunday
By Don Taylor

Following widows in early America can often be difficult, Mercy (Gay) Sanford was widowed when her husband, Ezra Clugston Sanford, died 22 June 1813 in Pownal, Bennington County, Vermont.[i] Mercy died in Byron, Genesee, New York sometime in 1841.[ii] So, the question arises, what happened to Mercy between 1813 and 1841? When did she locate to Byron?

Typically, you start with what you know, and go back in time. However, in the case of Mercy, I needed to start with what I knew and go forward in time. First, I looked at the three census records in question.  Miraculously, I found Mercy in the 1830 Census.

Censuses

1830 – Byron, Genesee County, New York

The Mercy Sanford household consists of 1 Female, 60 to 70 years old and 1 male from 10 to 15 years old.

Mercy was born in 1761, so she would have been 69 in 1830. Living with her is a young male; my suspicion a grandson, or even a great-grandson.[iii]

1820 – Not with Lucy. 

After Ezra died in 1813, Mercy was given guardianship of her daughter Lucy.[iv] Lucy married Levi Case in 1817. My first thought was that Mercy might have been living with her daughter Lucy and her husband Levi during the 1820 Census. No Such Luck.

The 1820 Census record for Levi Case is:

Levi Cass 1 – – 1 – – 1 – 1 – – – 

Males
1 Male  Under 10   Apparently Levi A. (Jr.)
2 Males 16 to 26   One must be Levi. The other is unknown.

Females
1 female under 10 apparently is Mercy G.
1 female from 16 to 26 years of age must be Lucy.

So, it is apparent that Mercy didn’t locate to New York with Lucy and Levi.

1820 – Not with Electa. 

Mercy’s daughter, Electa, died in 1819, so Mercy couldn’t be living with her in 1920.

1820 – Bergen, Genesee County, New York. 

After Electa died, her husband, Dewey Miller, married Electa’s sister Sally. Could Mercy be living with them during the 1820 Census? Yes.[v] The 1820 Census entry for Dewey Miller is:

Dewey Miller  3 – – – 1 – 1 – – 2 1  

Males
3 males under age 10. One is likely Aaron, one is likely Albert, the third one is unclear.
1 male between 26 and 45 is clearly Dewey.

Females:

1 female under age 10 appears to be daughter Lucy.
2 females 26 to 45. One must be Sally and the other is an unknown female.
1 female over 45 appears to be Mercy.

Dewey was born in 1787, so he’d be 33 during the 1820 Census.
Sally was born in 1790, so she’d be 30 during the 1820 Census.
Mercy was born in 1861, so she’d be 59 during the 1820 Census.

The marriage of Dewey to Electa, her death, the marriage of Dewey to Sally, and the 1820 census lend themselves to a speculative narrative that Electa got sick. Mercy located to help take care of Electa. Upon Electa’s death, Dewey married Sally, and Mercy was still with the household during the 1820 Census.

1840 – Byron, Genesee County, New York

There doesn’t appear to be a Mercy Sanford in the 1840 Census. However there is a Mary Sanford of the correct age whose neighbors are many of the same people as were neighbors to Mercy during the 1830 Census.[vi] The neighbors include David Shed, Erastus Hamond, and Stephen Clark.  The entry for Mary (Mercy) is:

Mary Sanford – – 1 – – – – – – – – – – –  |  – – – – – – – – 1 – – –

1 Male 10 to 15 – Unknown male.
1 Female 70 to 80 – Mercy (Gay) Sanford

Conclusion

Mercy and Ezra Sanford were married on 11 Oct 1876. His records for the 1790, 1800, and 1810 censuses are the records for Mercy. These three additional census records follow Mercy for the years after Ezra’s death until Mercy’s death.

Endnotes:

[i] Find a Grave, Find a Grave, Ezra Sanford (1763-1813) – Memorial# 43640146. Died 22 Jun 1813. https://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=43640146.

[ii] “Thomas Sanford, the emigrant to New England; ancestry, life,and descendants, 1632-4,” Carlton E.  Sanford, Charles Arthur Hoppin (1911), Page 226 – Sketch 711 – Ezra Sanford. https://archive.org/details/thomassanfordemi01sanf/page/n3.; PDF, Archive.Org (https://archive.org/details/thomassanfordemi001sanf).

[iii] 1830 Census (FS), Family Search, 1830 Census – Byron, Genesee, New York – Page 368 – Mercy Sanford. “United States Census, 1830,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHPN-YDQ: 29 July 2017), Mercy Sanford, Byron, Genesee, New York, United States; citing 368, NARA microfilm publication M19, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 90; FHL microfilm 17,150.

[iv] Vermont; Wills and Probate Records, 1749-1999, Ancestry.Com, Probate – Ezra Sanford (1753-1813) – Page 03 (00390). Guardianship Papers – Assigning Mercy Sanford as guardian for Lucy Sanford, 5 July 1813. https://search.ancestry.com/collections/9084/records/325523/.

[v] 1820 Census (FS), Family Search, 1820 Census – Bergan, Genesee, New York – Page 43 – Dewey Miller. “United States Census, 1820,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHLV-7N5 : accessed 15 February 2020), Dewey Miller, Bergen, Genesee, New York, United States; citing p. 43, NARA microfilm publication M33, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 72; FHL microfilm 193,727.

[vi] 1840 Census (NARA), 1840 Census – Bergan, Genesee, New York, Page 267 – Mary [Mercy] Sanford. “United States Census, 1840,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHT7-SWK : 15 August 2017), Mary Sanford, Byron, Genesee, New York, United States; citing p. 267, NARA microfilm publication M704, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 286; FHL microfilm 17,188.

Andrew J Hailey and the 1850 Census

Census Sunday
Roberts-Scott-Haley
By Don Taylor

Photo of Don Taylor with cat Nasi.Sometimes it takes a leap to find an ancestor in the census records. Such is the case for my third-great-grandfather, Andrew J. Hailey.

Finding Andrew in the 1850 Census has been a challenge. Some facts that I think I  know:

  • Andrew was born in Tennessee in 1836.
  • Andrew’s parents were born in Tennessee.[i]
  • Andrew married Martha Melinda Montgomery in Manchester, Coffee, Tennessee in 1857.[ii]
  • Andrew and Martha lived in Manchester, Coffee County, Tennessee in 1860.[iii]

The 1850 Census indicated one Haily family in Coffee County with children in the proper age group. It has two children, Charles & James, born in 1836 plus/minus a year. Neither seems to be a candidate for my Andrew.

However, in Bedford County, (next to Coffee County) there was a Madison Hailey family with a male in the household of the right age named “Anderson.” Also, both apparent parents were born in Tennessee as I would expect.[iv] Could this “Anderson” by my Andrew?

Anderson or Andrew?

A close look at the census image doesn’t either confirm or refute it. Indeed, what the enumerator wrote looks more like “Anderson” than “Andrew,” but it is so poorly written, it is difficult to tell, it could be “Andrew.”

The 1850 Census doesn’t provide relationships; however, the household looks like it might be a typical family unit with Madison and Anney Hailey as the apparent parents of six children.

Household                              Sex      Age      Birthplace

Madison L Hailey                    M         33        Tennessee

Anney Hailey                            F          35        Tennessee

Anderson J Hailey                  M        16        Tennessee

James C Hailey                         M         12        Tennessee

Elizabeth M Hailey                  F          10        Tennessee

Mary Ann Hailey                     F          8          Tennessee

Hester Ann Hailey                   F          7          Tennessee

John R Hailey                           M         3          Tennessee

If this “Anderson” is my Andrew, and my Andrew was living in Coffee County with his wife, I would expect I can’t find Anderson in any census. The 1840 Census doesn’t have names except for the head of the household. Going back to the 1860 Census, I have scoured the 1860 Census and have been unable to find an Anderson Hailey anywhere. So, I believe that either Anderson died or Anderson J. Hailey is Andrew J. Hailey.

I am going to take the leap and ascribe Anderson as Andrew and Madison and Anney as his parents in my records tentatively. I’ll be able to back it out at any time. In the meanwhile, I’ll continue searching for information to corroborate or refute this tentative association.

Continue reading “Andrew J Hailey and the 1850 Census”

Elizabeth (Rose?) Vincent (1785-186?) & the Censuses

Census Sunday
Howell-Vincent-Rose(?)
By Don Taylor

Women were only identified by name if they were the head of the household in the early (before 1850) censuses. So, following women in the early census records is often conjecture. Elizabeth (Rose) Vincent was born about 1785; she married Burkett Vincent sometime and she died after 1860. In the case of the spouse of Burkett Vincent, I’m not convinced that Elizabeth was the only wife of Burkett or Burkett wasn’t Elizabeth’s only wife. The census records suggest another scenario.

Birth of Burkett’s Wife

Census Record Age, Place of Birth Comments
1860 Census Age 75, NC Living with her son John.
1850 Census Age 64, Halifax Her daughter, Nancy, was living with her.
1840 Census Age 50 to 59 In household of “Burket” Vinson.
1830 Census Age 40-49 In household of Burket Vincent.
1820 Census Age over 45 Should be 35 – Probably not Elizabeth.
1810 Census Age 26-46 Should be 25 – Probably not Elizabeth.

Censuses

1860

During the 1860 Census, 75-year-old Elizabeth was enumerated in the household of her son, John and his apparent family of wife and six children in the Western District of Halifax County, North Carolina. Her post office was Weldon, NC.[i] 

1850

Elizabeth is the 64-year-old head of household, and 25-year-old Nancy Vincent, presumably her daughter, is living with her. Both were born in Halifax and were enumerated in Halifax County in 1850.[ii]

1840

Elizabeth’s husband Burkett Vinson, died about 1847, so Elizabeth is presumed to be the female 50 thru 59 in the household of Burket Vinson in Halifax County.  The household consisted of Burkett and four others. With Burkett and Elizabeth are three apparent children. Burkett (Jr.), age 16; Nancy, Age 15, and either John or James, age 23 or 22.[iii]

1830

Elizabeth is presumed to be the female 40 thru 49 in the household of “Brkett” Vincent in Halifax County.  The household consists of Burkett and four others. With Burkett and Elizabeth are three apparent children. Burkett (Jr.), age 16; Nancy, Age 15, and either John or James, age 23 or 22.[iv]

1820

The 1820 Census is somewhat problematic. It shows the household of “Perkit” Vincent consisting of a household with a woman over 45. Elizabeth should be 35 during this census. So, I’m wondering if this woman is a first wife for Burkett.  If so, that would suggest that Burkett possibly had five children with a first wife and that Elizabeth was a step-mother to the older children.[v]

1810

Again, the 1810 Census is problematic. It shows the oldest female in the household of Burket Vincent is 26 to 45 years old. Elizabeth should be 25 at this some, so I suspect that the person enumerated in the 1810 Census was not Elizabeth.[vi]

Conclusion

I’m comfortable that Elizabeth was the spouse of Burkett in 1830. I also suspect she was not the mother of Burkett’s children born before 1820. Alternately, she might be the mother of the children born before that by another man and that, after she married Burkett, the children took his surname.

Further Actions

I have been unsuccessful in discovering a document which indicates provides evidence for Elizabeth’s parents.  About 75% of other researchers suggest that her parents were William Rose (1759-1801) and Sarah Crawley (1775-1863).  Twenty percent suggest that Elizabeth’s parents were Elisha Rose Sr. (1753-1795) and Hannah Sellers (1758-1812). The final 5% suggest her parents were Elisha Rose and Pheroby Powell. A quick look at these other researcher’s trees failed to reveal a document which would provide evidence regarding Elizabeth’s parents. Next, I’ll take a look at Elizabeth’s possible parents and try to determine which pair I believe to be correct.

Continue reading “Elizabeth (Rose?) Vincent (1785-186?) & the Censuses”

Ezra Sanford in the Early Censuses

Brown-Sanford
Census Sunday
By Don Taylor

Photo of Don Taylor with cat Nasi.One essential action in researching an ancestor is to find that individual in all of the census records during their lifetime.  Ezra Clugston Sanford was a frustration for me.  He died on 22 Jun 1813, in Pownal, Bennington County, Vermont, so he should be in the 1810 census.  Search as I would, I couldn’t find him. Finally, I used a FAN (Friends, Acquaintances, and Neighbors) search technique and found something quite interesting.

1800 Census

Looking for Ezra in the 1800 Census was a success[i].  I found:

1800 Census – Ezra Sanford – Pownal, Bennington, Vermont

Ezra is the 7th entry down from the top.

Ezra Sanford in the 1800 Census

Ezra Sanford || 1 – – 2 – || 2 1 – 1 –

1800 Males in Household

  • Under 10     = 1       Ezra (Junior) would have been 8.
  • Age 26-45 = 2       Ezra (Senior) should be 47.
  •                                     Unknown male.

1800 Females in Household

  • Under 10     2       Lucy would have been 1
    Sally/Sarah should have been 4.
  • 10-16            1        Electa would have been 10.
  • 26-45           1       Mercy would be 39.

So, the 1800 Census shows all of the children of Ezra and Mercy that I would expect. It does suggest Ezra is two years younger than he probably is, but I’ll accept that. Finally, an unknown male was living with Ezra and Mercy in 1800.

1790 Census

Ezra and Mercy married in 1786. I would expect the Ezra Sanford Household of 1790 to consist of:

1 (or 2) Free white male(s) age 16 and up and two white females.

Ezra was born in Newtown, Fairfield County, Connecticut, but he married Mercy in Sharon, Litchfield County, Connecticut. Finally, the couple lived in Pownal, Bennington County, Vermont in 1800, so I would expect Ezra and Mercy to most likely be in one of those three locations in 1790.

A search for Ezra on Family Search yielded three results for the 1790 Census.

Ezra – Litchfield, Litchfield, Connecticut – 1 – 0 – 3.

Litchfield and Sharon are about 25 miles apart so, and this is possibly them.

Ezra – Redding, Fairfield, Connecticut – 2 – 1 – 3.

Reading and Newtown are about 11 miles apart. Likewise, this is a possible location.

Ezra – Warwick, Orange, New York – 3 – 1 – 7.

Warwick, New York is about 85 miles from Sharon and Newtown and over 150 miles from Pownal.  Also, their having a household with seven females would make this a very complex household.  Based upon the location and household makeup, I’m sure the Warwick Ezra is not mine.

Which is my Ezra – The one living in Litchfield or the one living in Reading?  To clarify, I went to the 1800 Census and looked there for Ezra. (Mine was in Pownal, VT) It shows an Ezra Sanford living in Redding, Fairfield County, Connecticut, in 1800, so my Ezra must be the one living in Litchfield, Connecticut in 1790[ii].

Ezra Sanford in the 1790 Census

Ezra – Litchfield, Litchfield, Connecticut

Ezra Sanford   1  || 0  3.

  • Free white male 16 or older = 1 – Ezra.
  • Free white females = 3           Mercy
  •                                                 Electa (probably born in 1790)
  •                                                 Unknown daughter (probably born 1787-1789)

1810 Census

I returned to searching for Ezra in the 1810 Census.

A search for “Ezra” in Bennington County yielded 11 results. None of them had a surname beginning with San…. or ending in …ford.

A search for “Sanford” in Bennington County yields six results. Four were in Sandgate, and two were in Dorset township. I found it interesting that NONE of the findings included anyone in Pownal. I then browsed the 1810 Census records on Ancestry.Com. There, various townships were listed, but Pownal was not one of them. I manually reviewed all of the pages of a group under, “Township not listed.” I was not successful finding anyone resembling “Ezra Sanford.”

Finally, I looked at the names in the 1800 census that were near Ezra. They included people like Obadiah Dunham (who we’ll see named in Ezra’s probate actions) and Israel Osborn. I was able to find them enumerated in Peru, Bennington County, Vermont. Peru?  Peru is a town at the opposite corner of Bennington County from Pownal could this really be?

<<Insert Peru/Pownal Image>>

Pownal misidentified as Peru on Ancestry.Com

Then I noticed that although the search and Ancestry  Page designation indicated it was Peru, the top of the actual page indicated it was Pownal. Very near in the 1810 Census record for Obadiah Dunham is an entry for “John Samford.”[iii]

John Samford – 1 – – 1 || – 2 1 – 1

This looks like “John Sanford” to me.

My view of the name indicated that “Sanford” was just as likely, if not more likely, as “Samford.” So, I wondered, could this be Ezra? The household consisted of the following:

    • Male 10-16     Ezra (Junior) would be 17 ???
    • Male >45         Ezra (Senior) would be 47
    • Female 10-16  Lucy would be 11
    • Female 10-16  Sally/Sarah would be 14
    • Female 16-26  Electa would be 20
    • Female >45     Mercy would be 49

So, the location and family unit for Ezra Sanford appears to fit John Samford/Sanford. John does not show up in Bennington County, Vermont, in either the 1800 nor the 1820 Censuses, so I believe that “John Sanford” in the 1810 Census is Ezra Sanford. I don’t know if Ezra’s full name was “John Ezra Sanford” or “Ezra John Sanford” or if the census enumerator just got his name wrong, but I am fairly certain that John is Ezra, and that the location of Pownal is correct. Thanks to looking into Ezra’s neighbors, I was successful finding who I believe to be Ezra.

My goal to find Ezra Sanford in all of the census records during his life is successful.  Another good day.

Continue reading “Ezra Sanford in the Early Censuses”