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?
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.
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
Age, Place of Birth
Age 75, NC
Living with her son John.
Age 64, Halifax
Her daughter, Nancy, was living with her.
Age 50 to 59
In household of “Burket” Vinson.
In household of Burket Vincent.
Age over 45
Should be 35 – Probably not Elizabeth.
Should be 25 – Probably not Elizabeth.
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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.
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.
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.
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 || 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.
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.
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.
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 – 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)
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>>
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
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.
For some time, I have known that my 3rd great-grandmother, Emily Hendricks’s parents were Vaden and Sylvania (Brown) Hendricks. During my research into Emily, I wanted to find her in all of the censuses during her lifetime. I believe I have found her in both the 1840 and 1850 Censuses.
1850 Census Household of Sylvania Hendricks, Washington county, Illinois[i].
Nancy E Hendricks
Mary J Hendricks
This record suggests many things.
That Sylvania is the head of household suggests that her husband, Vaden, died before the 1850 Census and after Mary was conceived in 1840. Also, because Sylvania was only 33-years-old when Mary was born, her husband likely died before 1845[ii].
The family could have been in either Illinois or Kentucky in 1840 as they probably moved from Kentucky to Illinois sometime between 1839 and 1841.[iii]
Let’s see if we can find the family in the 1840 Census. In 1840, I would expect the following in a household:
Female: Age 32
Male: Age 9
Female: Age 5
Female: Age 1
If they had migrated to Illinois by 1 June 1840, I would expect them to be in Washington County.
During the 1840 Census, there were 87 Hendricks families in Illinois, but none were in Washington County. However, there was a Baden Hendrix in adjoining St. Clair County. Could this be the household of Emily’s father?
Yes, Sylvania fits the female between 30 and 40. The son, William, fits the 5-10 range. One daughter fits into the two daughters under 5. The other daughter was probably 5, but could have easily been 4. The one son, between 10 and 15 would have been between 20 and 25 during the 1850 Census; he is likely to have been enumerated elsewhere. As such, I’m confident that Emily is one of the two girls under five enumerated in the Baden Hendrix Household during the 1840 Census. With that finding, I have discovered Emily in all of the census records during her lifetime and have her Birth, Marriage, and Death information.
[i] “United States Census, 1850,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:M857-FL8 : 12 April 2016), Household of Sylvania Hendricks, Washington county, Illinois, United States; citing family 1241, NARA microfilm publication M432 (Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.).
[ii] Within 4 Year’s of Mary’s birth, I would have expected Sylvania to have had another child if her husband were still living.
[iv] “United States Census, 1840,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHBJ-RD6 : 15 August 2017), Baden Hendrix, St Clair, Illinois, United States; citing p. 322, NARA microfilm publication M704, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 70; FHL microfilm 7,644.
Once I learned that Philip died between 1805 and 1808 (See Article) and that his wife’s name was Mary, it became easy to find Mary in the 1810 Census and gain a glimpse of what her household looked like. And sure enough, her household is as we might expect.
Mary Vincent – – 1 1 – | – – 2 – 1 | – 1
1 Male 16-26 Probably Peter, born between 1784 and 1794.
1 male 26-45 Probably Jarrett, born between 1774 and 1784 (Dec 1778)
2 Females 16-26 Probably Child 5 & Child 6 of Philip Vincent (Names still unknown)
1 Female over 45 Mary
Mary’s son, Burkett Vincent, shows in the 1810 Census with his own household.
That leaves one boy born between 1781 and 1784 whose name I still don’t know.
Also, there is one more female, born between 1784 and 1790, whose name we don’t know. She might have been married or possibly passed between 1800 and 1810.