It's been awhile since I had a Beeks ancestor to write about. Sometimes I just somehow miss these people, and sometimes the first time I looked for information, I couldn't find enough to write about. It's also possible that I've relaxed my definition of "enough". When I started doing these brief sketches, I made it a goal to write 8-10 paragraphs about each ancestor. Now, I'm willing to write even just a little bit, figuring that something is better than nothing. With Joseph, I've found enough to give at least some outline of his life, although there are still big question marks, too.
Joseph was born about 1605 possibly in Crewkerne, Somerset, England, although his parents have not yet been identified. We know he was born about 1605 because in a court case in 1640, Joseph stated that he was 35 or thereabouts. Crewkerne is a very old town, dating back to the time of Alfred the Great. There is a 15th century church there, which Joseph would probably have attended. There was also a school at the time that Joseph lived there, but we don't know whether he attended or not.
Joseph married Rose Allen, daughter of George and Katherine (maiden name not certain) Allen, in England. We know that it was in England becae his son was "of age" when Joseph died in 1647, which means the son must have been at least 18. That puts his birth date at 1629, so this Joseph likely married in or about 1628. The couple had at least five children together, a son and then four daughters.
We don't know for sure when Joseph came to New England but he was in Dorchester as early as 1633 and in Lynn in 1636. By 1637 he was in Sandwich, in Plymouth Colony, where he is considered one of the 61 original signers and one of just 16 long term settlers. The church of Sandwich seems to have not been as Puritan as was liked, and they went for ten years without a pastor. There is some thought that the people of the town, or at least some of them, were early Quaker adherents.
We know Joseph was part of a military band, probably guarding against Indians but we don't know whether he actually fought in any battles. We know he owned property as early as 1639. By occupation, he was a millwright, which may explain why he went from place to place for a few years before settling in Sandwich. He was a freeman in 1643/44constable in 1644, and either he or his son was a surveyor of highways in 1647.
Sadly. that is the last we hear of Joseph, for he died in 1647 in Sandwich. We have no information about his cause of death but he was only about 42 years old, so it was likely an illness of some sort. Fevers and dysentery were relatively common at the time.
His inventory was valued at about 205 pounds, but the estate wasn't settled for another 18 years, as the youngest of the children finally reached maturity. Rose remarried after a few months as a widow, to William Newland, and she died in 1694.
The line of descent is
Joseph Holley-Rose Allen
Mary Holley-Nathaniel FitzRandolph__
Samuel FitzRandolph-Mary Jones
Prudence Fitzrandolph-Shubael Smith
Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham=Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Showing posts with label Dunham. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dunham. Show all posts
Friday, May 15, 2020
Friday, April 17, 2020
Beeks line: Thomas Rees born sometime,, died 1783
Do you remember the cat who would weekly proclaim "I hate meeces to pieces!" I believe Pixie and Dixie were the mice in question but I don't remember the name of the cat. Anyway, "Reeses" rhymes with "meeses". While I don't necessarily "hate" this line, it is enough to make me pull my hair out. Sorry about the vent, but at the moment my local genealogist/librarians are not available to soothe me.
So I'm writing about Thomas Rees today. Several sites say he was born in 1705 and died in 1783. But they also say he was married to Margaret Bowen, and that Thomas Rees and Margaret were married for several (the document says "many") years when Thomas and Margaret asked for a certificate from the Radnor Monthly Meeting to send to the Goshen Monthly Meeting. It states that "Whereas Thomas Reese and his wife Margaret Reese inhabitants within the verge of your meeting have made application unto us for something by way of Certificate unto you. These are therefore to certifie on their behalf that they was both of them educated amongst us and esteemed of us until they joined in marriage contrary to the order and departure of Friends which they these are satisfied unto this that they have been under trouble and exorcised of mind for many years as well as for the conduct of their lives desiring their sorrows for the same and that they took the blame and shame thereof on themselves and that they hoped through divine assistance to take care for the future not to do anything as may bring a reproach upon truth or a grief to friends, so desiring their insofar and that they who make their profession to the Divine Principal of Truth may be conducted and prospered by it to the end of their day, we remain your friends from our Monthly Meeting, at Radnor this 14th of 1st mo year 1722/1723."
Note: I did not transcribe this, but I sure do thank the unknown person who did. In copying it I have changed capitalizations but not the punctuation, or lack thereof. There are also the signatures of several members of the Radnor Monthly Meeting on this letter. I found this fascinating, but the main point is that Thomas was likely not born in 1705 in order to have married Margaret and be "under trouble and exorcized of mind for many years" by 1722/23. So, either this is not the Thomas Reese and Margaret Bowen who are said to have lived later, or there is another Thomas and Margaret that would be the parents of the Thomas and Margaret I think I'm writing about.
The children of Thomas and Margaret were born mostly in the 1730s and 1740s. It does appear that this was a Quaker family because they are later found at Hopewell Monthly Meeting in Frederick County, Virginia, in the far north "point" of the state. This is in the area of Opequon Creek. Early records there were lost in a fire so we don't know how early the Reese's arrived there. They seem to have been there by 1743, so they would have been in place for the battles of both the French and Indian war and the Revolutionary War. As a Quaker, Thomas wouldn't have been in the militia and he may have had to make a decision as to whether or not he would support the British in the first war and the patriots in the second war. Some Quakers were happy to supply materials and food for the troops, and some were not willing to do so, as they opposed any violence, or supporting any violence. It was a decision each man would have to make for himself. This area would have been under frequent, if not constant, threat of attack by native Americans.
Thomas and Margaret had 10 children who lived to adulthood. Two of them are direct ancestors, through this line. Thomas's uncle, Morris is also in the Beeks line. All of these trace back to David Rees. Theyr may be another line, also, for there is another wife of a Thomas Reese named Rebecca Price, and Price is a common contraction for ap Rhys. (These are Welsh names).
Thomas died in 1783 in Frederick County, Virginia and Margaret died two years later, probably in Washington County, Pennsylvania, where she had gone to visit or live with two of her sons. Obviously, there are still several records for me to look at for Thomas, especially land records and his will or estate records. But this is a start, to help us understand a little a very confusing set of families.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Reese-Margaret Bowen
Thomas Reese-Hannah Reese (she is the daughter of Morris Reese, who is a brother to the first
Thomas)
Solomon Reese=Anna possibly McNeal
Owen T Reese-Margaret Ellen Moon
Eliza Matilda Reese-Samuel Dunham
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshaber
Their descendants
So I'm writing about Thomas Rees today. Several sites say he was born in 1705 and died in 1783. But they also say he was married to Margaret Bowen, and that Thomas Rees and Margaret were married for several (the document says "many") years when Thomas and Margaret asked for a certificate from the Radnor Monthly Meeting to send to the Goshen Monthly Meeting. It states that "Whereas Thomas Reese and his wife Margaret Reese inhabitants within the verge of your meeting have made application unto us for something by way of Certificate unto you. These are therefore to certifie on their behalf that they was both of them educated amongst us and esteemed of us until they joined in marriage contrary to the order and departure of Friends which they these are satisfied unto this that they have been under trouble and exorcised of mind for many years as well as for the conduct of their lives desiring their sorrows for the same and that they took the blame and shame thereof on themselves and that they hoped through divine assistance to take care for the future not to do anything as may bring a reproach upon truth or a grief to friends, so desiring their insofar and that they who make their profession to the Divine Principal of Truth may be conducted and prospered by it to the end of their day, we remain your friends from our Monthly Meeting, at Radnor this 14th of 1st mo year 1722/1723."
Note: I did not transcribe this, but I sure do thank the unknown person who did. In copying it I have changed capitalizations but not the punctuation, or lack thereof. There are also the signatures of several members of the Radnor Monthly Meeting on this letter. I found this fascinating, but the main point is that Thomas was likely not born in 1705 in order to have married Margaret and be "under trouble and exorcized of mind for many years" by 1722/23. So, either this is not the Thomas Reese and Margaret Bowen who are said to have lived later, or there is another Thomas and Margaret that would be the parents of the Thomas and Margaret I think I'm writing about.
The children of Thomas and Margaret were born mostly in the 1730s and 1740s. It does appear that this was a Quaker family because they are later found at Hopewell Monthly Meeting in Frederick County, Virginia, in the far north "point" of the state. This is in the area of Opequon Creek. Early records there were lost in a fire so we don't know how early the Reese's arrived there. They seem to have been there by 1743, so they would have been in place for the battles of both the French and Indian war and the Revolutionary War. As a Quaker, Thomas wouldn't have been in the militia and he may have had to make a decision as to whether or not he would support the British in the first war and the patriots in the second war. Some Quakers were happy to supply materials and food for the troops, and some were not willing to do so, as they opposed any violence, or supporting any violence. It was a decision each man would have to make for himself. This area would have been under frequent, if not constant, threat of attack by native Americans.
Thomas and Margaret had 10 children who lived to adulthood. Two of them are direct ancestors, through this line. Thomas's uncle, Morris is also in the Beeks line. All of these trace back to David Rees. Theyr may be another line, also, for there is another wife of a Thomas Reese named Rebecca Price, and Price is a common contraction for ap Rhys. (These are Welsh names).
Thomas died in 1783 in Frederick County, Virginia and Margaret died two years later, probably in Washington County, Pennsylvania, where she had gone to visit or live with two of her sons. Obviously, there are still several records for me to look at for Thomas, especially land records and his will or estate records. But this is a start, to help us understand a little a very confusing set of families.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Reese-Margaret Bowen
Thomas Reese-Hannah Reese (she is the daughter of Morris Reese, who is a brother to the first
Thomas)
Solomon Reese=Anna possibly McNeal
Owen T Reese-Margaret Ellen Moon
Eliza Matilda Reese-Samuel Dunham
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshaber
Their descendants
Friday, January 17, 2020
Beeks line: Benjamin Dunham 1681-1715
For a man in the ancestry of Barack Obama, there is still a lot of mystery about him. Was his name actually Singletary? I've not found any reference to that name in the vital records and histories of Woodbridge, New Jersey that I've seen, but many genealogies have him listed as either Dunham alias Singletary or Singletary alias Dunham. That story is too complicated to go into here, especially since I am not confident of the answer. Another mystery is the name of his wife. Many trees list her as Mary Rolph or Rolfe, but I can find no supporting documentation for that. Most experts now give her name only as Mary.
We do know that he was born August 22, 1681, in Woodbridge, New Jersey, the son of Jonathan and Mary Bloomfield Dunham (alias Singletary?). He was one of possibly as many as 12 children born to this couple, so he had lots of companions growing up, even in a small village such as Woodbridge was. His father, Jonathan, was a miller and probably one of the more prosperous people in the town. The Dunhams may had been friendly with the Quakers who also settled in Woodbridge, but our family appears to have been congregationalist in belief, or at least in practice.
Woodbridge was on the frontier when it was settled. There are references to wolf pits built within the township, which actively trapped wolves, and of course the early settlers would have hunted them, or at least had firearms handy, to protect their families. Benjamin's father built a house in 1700 that was built of brick and still stands, known as the Jonathan Singletary Dunham house. If Benjamin wasn't living with another family prior to his marriage, he would have lived here for a few years in his late teens and early twenties.
Marriage records for Benjamin have apparently not been found, which makes it a bit mysterious as to when and where it was decided that he had married Mary Rolfe. However that may be, a marriage evidently occurred about 1705 or 1706, and his wife does seem to have been named Mary.
Of Benjamin's adult life, we know three things. He was considered to be wealthy, he was actively involved in starting an Anglican house of worship and providing a place for a small church to be built, and he served in the militia. I don't yet know his occupation. His impetus for starting the Anglican church seems to be that he was unhappy with the presbyterian government of the church as it was set up at the time, and he failed to see eye to eye with that pastor. The militia would have been called out whenever there was a scare from the native Americans, which did happen from time to time.
The marriage, and Benjamin's life, was a short one, producing just four children. Benjamin died on December 31, 1715 of unspecified causes, in his thirty fifth year. There is an abstract of a will from 1706 that is being accepted as his will, although I haven't read the original. If he wrote the will in 1706 and didn't die until 1715, it makes us wonder whether he survived an early illness or injury that perhaps made him aware of the brevity of life. It's also possible that he died of a lingering illness or condition. Or perhaps he wrote the will during the early months of his marriage, at the request of his wife or in-laws. We just don't know.
I think Benjamin is an interesting man. I'd like to know why he was considered wealthy, what his occupation was, how often he saw military service, and why he decided to become Anglican. There are things we'll never know, but there's always the possibility that more information will come to light.
The line of descent is
Benjamin Dunham-Mary
Jonathan Dunham=Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham=Hannah possibly Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham=Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
We do know that he was born August 22, 1681, in Woodbridge, New Jersey, the son of Jonathan and Mary Bloomfield Dunham (alias Singletary?). He was one of possibly as many as 12 children born to this couple, so he had lots of companions growing up, even in a small village such as Woodbridge was. His father, Jonathan, was a miller and probably one of the more prosperous people in the town. The Dunhams may had been friendly with the Quakers who also settled in Woodbridge, but our family appears to have been congregationalist in belief, or at least in practice.
Woodbridge was on the frontier when it was settled. There are references to wolf pits built within the township, which actively trapped wolves, and of course the early settlers would have hunted them, or at least had firearms handy, to protect their families. Benjamin's father built a house in 1700 that was built of brick and still stands, known as the Jonathan Singletary Dunham house. If Benjamin wasn't living with another family prior to his marriage, he would have lived here for a few years in his late teens and early twenties.
Marriage records for Benjamin have apparently not been found, which makes it a bit mysterious as to when and where it was decided that he had married Mary Rolfe. However that may be, a marriage evidently occurred about 1705 or 1706, and his wife does seem to have been named Mary.
Of Benjamin's adult life, we know three things. He was considered to be wealthy, he was actively involved in starting an Anglican house of worship and providing a place for a small church to be built, and he served in the militia. I don't yet know his occupation. His impetus for starting the Anglican church seems to be that he was unhappy with the presbyterian government of the church as it was set up at the time, and he failed to see eye to eye with that pastor. The militia would have been called out whenever there was a scare from the native Americans, which did happen from time to time.
The marriage, and Benjamin's life, was a short one, producing just four children. Benjamin died on December 31, 1715 of unspecified causes, in his thirty fifth year. There is an abstract of a will from 1706 that is being accepted as his will, although I haven't read the original. If he wrote the will in 1706 and didn't die until 1715, it makes us wonder whether he survived an early illness or injury that perhaps made him aware of the brevity of life. It's also possible that he died of a lingering illness or condition. Or perhaps he wrote the will during the early months of his marriage, at the request of his wife or in-laws. We just don't know.
I think Benjamin is an interesting man. I'd like to know why he was considered wealthy, what his occupation was, how often he saw military service, and why he decided to become Anglican. There are things we'll never know, but there's always the possibility that more information will come to light.
The line of descent is
Benjamin Dunham-Mary
Jonathan Dunham=Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham=Hannah possibly Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham=Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Friday, September 27, 2019
Beeks line: Pieter Janse Meet, Immigrant 1614-1697
I've found another Beeks ancestor that I overlooked,, and I've found almost enough to actually write a paragraph or two about him. I always enjoy finding these ancestors from The Netherlands, who were some of the first settlers of New Amsterdam, later New York city. It helps remind me that America was not just Puritans and Cavaliers, but has other heritages also, dating back to the first settlements of the continent. (Yes, I know there were Swedish settlers, French Huguenots and missionaries, and early s Spanish settlers, too, and I know there were native Americans who were here first). But ever since grade school, the Dutch settlers have interested me. And I'm a little bit jealous that these folks belong to my husband's family, and not mine!
It's possible that this was originally a French or Walloon Huguenot family, and it's possible that Jan Meet was father, a man who appears in English records. But actual proof as to his parentage and origins is lacking. The first we really know of him was that he married Styntje Jacobs on September 22, 1654 in Amersfoort, Utrecht, The Netherlands. The town had a Protestant majority, but a large Catholic minority and there must surely have been religious tensions there. Whether or not that was the reason the Meets emigrated to New Netherlands, we don't know.
He and his wife and family of four children left Amersfoort, Netherlands in March of 1663 in the ship "Rosetree". They arrived at a time of great political unrest, as the colony was about to be taken over by the English. By October of 1664, Pieter Meet took an oath of allegiance to the English King Charles II, and so began adjusting to a new continent and a new political reality. It's unclear how much impact this had on the every day lives of the settlers. Pieter was a resident of what became Brooklyn for perhaps 16 years but if found on a tax "rate" page for Bushwick in 1683. He purchased land there in 1680.
It's not clear whether it was his son or whether it was Pieter himself who moved to land near Hackensack, New Jersey. Some records say he died there in 1697 and some say he died at Bushwick. He was apparently not active in town government. We don't know that there was any conflict with the native Americans during his lifetime, in his towns. we just don't know much about him at all. But we do know he cared enough for religious or economic freedom to come to America and worship as he pleased, with the chance to give his family a solid economic base.
We can be grateful for all the families that made this trip, no matter where they went or when they arrived. They are part of the history of America, and of the history of the Beeks family.
The line of descent is:
Pieter Janse Meet-Styntje Jacobs
Jan Pieterse Meet-Gerritsje Jillsae Mandeville
Maretie Meet-Peter Demarest
Lea Demarest-Samuel David Demarest
Sarah Demarest-Benjamin Slot
William Lock-Elizabeth Teague
Sally Lock-Jeremiah Folsom
Leah Folsom-Darlington Aldridge
Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Gretta Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Note that the first person probably not of Dutch heritage in this list was Jeremiah Folsom.
It's possible that this was originally a French or Walloon Huguenot family, and it's possible that Jan Meet was father, a man who appears in English records. But actual proof as to his parentage and origins is lacking. The first we really know of him was that he married Styntje Jacobs on September 22, 1654 in Amersfoort, Utrecht, The Netherlands. The town had a Protestant majority, but a large Catholic minority and there must surely have been religious tensions there. Whether or not that was the reason the Meets emigrated to New Netherlands, we don't know.
He and his wife and family of four children left Amersfoort, Netherlands in March of 1663 in the ship "Rosetree". They arrived at a time of great political unrest, as the colony was about to be taken over by the English. By October of 1664, Pieter Meet took an oath of allegiance to the English King Charles II, and so began adjusting to a new continent and a new political reality. It's unclear how much impact this had on the every day lives of the settlers. Pieter was a resident of what became Brooklyn for perhaps 16 years but if found on a tax "rate" page for Bushwick in 1683. He purchased land there in 1680.
It's not clear whether it was his son or whether it was Pieter himself who moved to land near Hackensack, New Jersey. Some records say he died there in 1697 and some say he died at Bushwick. He was apparently not active in town government. We don't know that there was any conflict with the native Americans during his lifetime, in his towns. we just don't know much about him at all. But we do know he cared enough for religious or economic freedom to come to America and worship as he pleased, with the chance to give his family a solid economic base.
We can be grateful for all the families that made this trip, no matter where they went or when they arrived. They are part of the history of America, and of the history of the Beeks family.
The line of descent is:
Pieter Janse Meet-Styntje Jacobs
Jan Pieterse Meet-Gerritsje Jillsae Mandeville
Maretie Meet-Peter Demarest
Lea Demarest-Samuel David Demarest
Sarah Demarest-Benjamin Slot
William Lock-Elizabeth Teague
Sally Lock-Jeremiah Folsom
Leah Folsom-Darlington Aldridge
Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Gretta Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Note that the first person probably not of Dutch heritage in this list was Jeremiah Folsom.
Friday, August 2, 2019
Beeks line: John Rolfe, Immigrant 1634-1681
No, he wasn't that John Rolfe, not the one who was married to Pocahontas, not the one who figured large in the early days of Virginia. But nevertheless, he is a John Rolfe who is an early immigrant, and who has a story to tell.
The story starts in England, where John was born or baptized May 10, 1634 in Whiteparish, Wiltshire, England. Whiteparish is a small town about seven and a half miles southeast of Salisbury, and at the time of John's birth was a sheep raising area, with textile manufacturing in Salisbury providing an outlet for the wool produced there. His parents were Henry and Honor (Rolfe) Rolfe, and their family tree is quite convoluted. There are Rolfes on both sides of the family going back to about 1515, but it's not know whether it was the 1515 Rolfes (one apparently unproven) or whether the connection goes further back. Anyway, it's a lot of Rolfes, and more than one Honor, to keep straight-or not.
Henry and Honor had at least four children. They are believed to have been in Massachusetts Bay Colony by about 1638, although no documentation seems to exist for their trip. John would have been a very young child at the time; Imagine being a three or four year old boy with a ship to explore, and imagine being a young mother, with other children, trying to prevent said boy from going overboard. All were probably glad when they arrived at their destination.
The family settled first in Newbury, where John grew to manhood and married Mary Scullard, daughter of Samuel and Rebecca Kent Scullard, on December 4, 1656. Mary was very young, possibly as young as 14, when they married. They had eleven children together, losing the first one in infancy. Their first three children were born in Newbury, but they moved on to Nantucket about 1663.
This seems to have much to do with the situation described in "Good Wives" by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich. John was a fisherman, and had just left for a trip to Nantucket, leaving his young wife and children adequately protected and supported, as he supposed. But by the time he returned from his trip, Mary and been involved in something of a scandal, involving a gentleman from England, a physician, who decided he wished to bed her, never mind that she was nursing her third child. He was found out, by a neighbor who came in through a window since the door was locked, and rescued Mary, although they agreed to say nothing about it. Mary told all to her mother and had a witness (who, hard as it is for us to imagine) shared the bed with Mary in order to keep her safe, although it wasn't a very effective protection as it turned out.
The man involved was found guilty and Mary was vindicated, but John decided this was a good time to move to Nantucket, where he would be closer to the fishing grounds. They stayed in Nantucket for somewhere around ten years. By this time, John was approaching 40 and may have been looking for an easier way to make a living than fishing. The family moved to Cambridge, where John purchased and apparently operated a mill.
John died at Newbury on October 1, 1681, perhaps while visiting his brother Benjamin. It seems to have been a sudden death and the will may have had an oral codicil, as there is no provision in the will for his wife but the additional testimony of women who were there makes clear that he wanted to have his wife cared for also. Mary was pregnant with their last son when John died. John's inventory was valued at somewhere around 500 pounds (it's not totaled on the two pages, but I added up to about 485 pounds in my head, plus all the shillings and pence; I'm definitely no expert on that!). It seems like a pretty good estate for a fisherman or millwright, either one. He was just 47 when he died and was just in his peak earning years. He had tools and farm animals, copperware, earthenware, and pewter, and five spinning wheels, so this was not a poor family. I didn't see any mention of books or of munitions.
Mary lived about six more years and died in Cambridge. Most of their children moved to the area of Woodbridge, N.J, and changed the spelling of their name to Rolph, except for their son John. I didn't find anything that helped me understand John's religion but some of his children may have become Quakers, or at least lived in harmony with them in Woodbridge. It would be nice to know more about John, but at least we know he was a hard-working man, and one of the few men in the family who fished for any length of time, for a living.
The line of descent is:
John Rolfe-Mary Scullard
Mary Rolph-Benjamin Dunham
Jonathan Dunham-Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Mary Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
The story starts in England, where John was born or baptized May 10, 1634 in Whiteparish, Wiltshire, England. Whiteparish is a small town about seven and a half miles southeast of Salisbury, and at the time of John's birth was a sheep raising area, with textile manufacturing in Salisbury providing an outlet for the wool produced there. His parents were Henry and Honor (Rolfe) Rolfe, and their family tree is quite convoluted. There are Rolfes on both sides of the family going back to about 1515, but it's not know whether it was the 1515 Rolfes (one apparently unproven) or whether the connection goes further back. Anyway, it's a lot of Rolfes, and more than one Honor, to keep straight-or not.
Henry and Honor had at least four children. They are believed to have been in Massachusetts Bay Colony by about 1638, although no documentation seems to exist for their trip. John would have been a very young child at the time; Imagine being a three or four year old boy with a ship to explore, and imagine being a young mother, with other children, trying to prevent said boy from going overboard. All were probably glad when they arrived at their destination.
The family settled first in Newbury, where John grew to manhood and married Mary Scullard, daughter of Samuel and Rebecca Kent Scullard, on December 4, 1656. Mary was very young, possibly as young as 14, when they married. They had eleven children together, losing the first one in infancy. Their first three children were born in Newbury, but they moved on to Nantucket about 1663.
This seems to have much to do with the situation described in "Good Wives" by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich. John was a fisherman, and had just left for a trip to Nantucket, leaving his young wife and children adequately protected and supported, as he supposed. But by the time he returned from his trip, Mary and been involved in something of a scandal, involving a gentleman from England, a physician, who decided he wished to bed her, never mind that she was nursing her third child. He was found out, by a neighbor who came in through a window since the door was locked, and rescued Mary, although they agreed to say nothing about it. Mary told all to her mother and had a witness (who, hard as it is for us to imagine) shared the bed with Mary in order to keep her safe, although it wasn't a very effective protection as it turned out.
The man involved was found guilty and Mary was vindicated, but John decided this was a good time to move to Nantucket, where he would be closer to the fishing grounds. They stayed in Nantucket for somewhere around ten years. By this time, John was approaching 40 and may have been looking for an easier way to make a living than fishing. The family moved to Cambridge, where John purchased and apparently operated a mill.
John died at Newbury on October 1, 1681, perhaps while visiting his brother Benjamin. It seems to have been a sudden death and the will may have had an oral codicil, as there is no provision in the will for his wife but the additional testimony of women who were there makes clear that he wanted to have his wife cared for also. Mary was pregnant with their last son when John died. John's inventory was valued at somewhere around 500 pounds (it's not totaled on the two pages, but I added up to about 485 pounds in my head, plus all the shillings and pence; I'm definitely no expert on that!). It seems like a pretty good estate for a fisherman or millwright, either one. He was just 47 when he died and was just in his peak earning years. He had tools and farm animals, copperware, earthenware, and pewter, and five spinning wheels, so this was not a poor family. I didn't see any mention of books or of munitions.
Mary lived about six more years and died in Cambridge. Most of their children moved to the area of Woodbridge, N.J, and changed the spelling of their name to Rolph, except for their son John. I didn't find anything that helped me understand John's religion but some of his children may have become Quakers, or at least lived in harmony with them in Woodbridge. It would be nice to know more about John, but at least we know he was a hard-working man, and one of the few men in the family who fished for any length of time, for a living.
The line of descent is:
John Rolfe-Mary Scullard
Mary Rolph-Benjamin Dunham
Jonathan Dunham-Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Mary Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Friday, May 31, 2019
Beeks family: Thomas Moon 1756-1828
It's been a long time since I've written about a Beeks ancestor. I've known about Thomas Moon for a long time, as a name and dates, but that much information wouldn't fill a thimble, let alone a blog post, so I've not pursued him. Today his name struck my fancy, mostly because I noticed he lived during French and Indian War as well as the Revolutionary War. I wondered if there was more information available than just names and places, and I've found enough to fill in a couple of parts of his life, anyway.
Thomas Moon was the son of Jacob and Jane Rees Moon. He was born October 11, 1756 near what is now Arden, Berkeley, West Virginia, in the Shenandoah Valley. At that time, it was part of Frederick County, Virginia. The area is in that tiny hook between Maryland and West Virginia, and Arden is 160 miles from Fort Frederick, near Hagerstown, Md. Fort Frederick was built during the French and Indian War. We don't know for sure that the Moon family went here during the attacks that the Indians made during those years, but it's possible, since much of Shenandoah, or at least the women and children, evacuated during that time period. And of course, the Moons were Quakers, so they would likely not have been willing to fight. Regardless of whether the Moons stayed in their home or left for a safer location, they would have lived through interesting times. Thomas was one of at least six children born to his parents, and they would all have worked hard to feed the family.
I've found no mention, yet, of the Moons during the Revolutionary War but this time the danger would have come from the British and the native Americans. This area was hit hard and repeatedly, and again, it is easy to think that the family would have evacuated to safer areas. It would be interesting to know whether their cabins or homes were burned, crops lost, etc. If it didn't happen to the Moons, it happened to many of their neighbors.
We don't know when or where Thomas met his wife, Jean Grey, but they were married June 1, 1780 in what was now Berkeley County, but still Virginia. He was 24 years old and had a right to marry anyone he chose; or did he? Three times his Quaker church family tried to talk to him and three times they got nowhere. He was bound and determined to marry his "hireling teacher", but may have later admitted his error because he is still referred to as a Quaker in a history of Fayette County. Jean was from Scotland and it is not likely she would have converted to the Quaker faith. She was likely Presbyterian in belief. I would love to find more about this "hireling teacher", as this is the first thing I've learned about her other than her vital statistics. We can guess that Jean had a decent education, at least for the time and location, and wonder about Thomas's education, also.
Thomas and Jean had at least nine children together. Jean died in 1804 in Berkeley County, Virginia, and Thomas remarried at the same location to Lydia Job in 1806. He is found in the census records of Berkeley County in 1810 but apparently moved to Fayette County, Ohio, later that year and is in the tax records of Fayette County, Ohio in 1814. Fayette County at this time was quite sparsely settled and he would have contended with wolves, panthers, and probably bear as well as the snakes which gave name to the creek he lived on. In the 1820 census, he is in Green Township, Fayette County, with two of his sons listed separately but as neighbors. Thomas and Lydia settled on Rattlesnake Creek and according to a History of Fayette County written by R.S. Dills, owned 1100 acres of land, some of it in Highland County. He had the first flour mill and saw mill in the county, and also ran a distillery which was apparently a popular "resort". He was a trustee of the township and held other positions of "public trust". Lydia died sometime before he married Amy or Annie Ellis in 1819.
Thomas's will was probated in 1824. He had already given gifts to his three daughters but gave his personal property to them to be divided equally, and left each of his sons tracts of land. I didn't see a mention of Amy in the will, so perhaps she had died earlier.
Who knew that Thomas Moon had such stories to tell us? I'd love to learn more, such as whether his children were Quakers, and whether his childhood home, or his home where he spent the first 30 years of adult life, were destroyed. Was he ever in fear for his life, during either of the wars in Virginia? Did he speak with the Quaker "thee" and "thou"? What would he think was his greatest accomplishment?
The line of descent is:
Thomas Moon-Jean Grey
Margaret Moon-Owen T Reese
Eliza Matilda Reese-Samuel Goodnight Dunham
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Thomas Moon was the son of Jacob and Jane Rees Moon. He was born October 11, 1756 near what is now Arden, Berkeley, West Virginia, in the Shenandoah Valley. At that time, it was part of Frederick County, Virginia. The area is in that tiny hook between Maryland and West Virginia, and Arden is 160 miles from Fort Frederick, near Hagerstown, Md. Fort Frederick was built during the French and Indian War. We don't know for sure that the Moon family went here during the attacks that the Indians made during those years, but it's possible, since much of Shenandoah, or at least the women and children, evacuated during that time period. And of course, the Moons were Quakers, so they would likely not have been willing to fight. Regardless of whether the Moons stayed in their home or left for a safer location, they would have lived through interesting times. Thomas was one of at least six children born to his parents, and they would all have worked hard to feed the family.
I've found no mention, yet, of the Moons during the Revolutionary War but this time the danger would have come from the British and the native Americans. This area was hit hard and repeatedly, and again, it is easy to think that the family would have evacuated to safer areas. It would be interesting to know whether their cabins or homes were burned, crops lost, etc. If it didn't happen to the Moons, it happened to many of their neighbors.
We don't know when or where Thomas met his wife, Jean Grey, but they were married June 1, 1780 in what was now Berkeley County, but still Virginia. He was 24 years old and had a right to marry anyone he chose; or did he? Three times his Quaker church family tried to talk to him and three times they got nowhere. He was bound and determined to marry his "hireling teacher", but may have later admitted his error because he is still referred to as a Quaker in a history of Fayette County. Jean was from Scotland and it is not likely she would have converted to the Quaker faith. She was likely Presbyterian in belief. I would love to find more about this "hireling teacher", as this is the first thing I've learned about her other than her vital statistics. We can guess that Jean had a decent education, at least for the time and location, and wonder about Thomas's education, also.
Thomas and Jean had at least nine children together. Jean died in 1804 in Berkeley County, Virginia, and Thomas remarried at the same location to Lydia Job in 1806. He is found in the census records of Berkeley County in 1810 but apparently moved to Fayette County, Ohio, later that year and is in the tax records of Fayette County, Ohio in 1814. Fayette County at this time was quite sparsely settled and he would have contended with wolves, panthers, and probably bear as well as the snakes which gave name to the creek he lived on. In the 1820 census, he is in Green Township, Fayette County, with two of his sons listed separately but as neighbors. Thomas and Lydia settled on Rattlesnake Creek and according to a History of Fayette County written by R.S. Dills, owned 1100 acres of land, some of it in Highland County. He had the first flour mill and saw mill in the county, and also ran a distillery which was apparently a popular "resort". He was a trustee of the township and held other positions of "public trust". Lydia died sometime before he married Amy or Annie Ellis in 1819.
Thomas's will was probated in 1824. He had already given gifts to his three daughters but gave his personal property to them to be divided equally, and left each of his sons tracts of land. I didn't see a mention of Amy in the will, so perhaps she had died earlier.
Who knew that Thomas Moon had such stories to tell us? I'd love to learn more, such as whether his children were Quakers, and whether his childhood home, or his home where he spent the first 30 years of adult life, were destroyed. Was he ever in fear for his life, during either of the wars in Virginia? Did he speak with the Quaker "thee" and "thou"? What would he think was his greatest accomplishment?
The line of descent is:
Thomas Moon-Jean Grey
Margaret Moon-Owen T Reese
Eliza Matilda Reese-Samuel Goodnight Dunham
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Monday, December 24, 2018
Beeks and Harshbarger Christmas, 1918
Christmas 100 years ago...What was it like for those family members who were alive then? In many ways, we can only guess whether they had a bountiful Christmas or were lucky to get (or give) an apple or orange. But we do know they had family...Boy, did they have family!
We can only begin to imagine Christmas Day in 1918 for Wilbur Beeks. He was in Russia, and had been since early August, as part of what was supposed to be a second front against Germany but ended up being part of the Russian revolution. By now, he had mostly recovered from his wounds received September 27, and was operating with his unit again. We can only hope they had some pause for a Christmas celebration. Wilbur's wife of a little over four years, Cleo Aldridge Beeks, had a little bundle of joy to enjoy at Christmas. After having buried two babies, one in 1915 and one in 1916, Kenneth Eugene Beeks was having his first Christmas (he would have only one more) and enjoying the day as much as a baby of almost six months can.
Cleo would have had her choice of places to celebrate. I don't know where she was living then. She may have lived in Andrews, as that is where the birth record for Kenneth states,. If so, she could have been living the life of a single Mom while Wilbur was away. Or she could have been living with her parents, Harvey and Margaret Catherine Dunham Aldridge. Harvey was 65 and his wife was 60. In 1920, the Aldridges were living on Berry Street in Andrews, and Harvey was a laborer at the lumberyard. The Aldridges were already raising two grandchildren, but probably would have had room for a daughter and grandson, too, if needed. There were six surviving Aldridge children including Cleo, so the family gathering, wherever it was held, would have included many Aldridge grandchildren, nieces and nephews to Cleo. Maybe she didn't have enough time to really miss her husband that day.
Or she may have been staying with, or at least visiting, the home of her in-laws. John, 51, and Elizabeth Wise Beeks, 48, that day. In 1920, they were living on Main Street in Andrews, and he was a section man on the interurban line. Two of their children, Charity and Chester (Bud) were living with them, as was David Wise, Elizabeth's father, who was 81 years old. And there was another Beeks family member to visit, Mary Wise Beeks, Wilbur's grandmother, the widow of William Beeks. She was 78 years old, but lived in a home she owned on East Washington Street in Lagro. Her son Martin lived with her. Mary and William had several children, some still living, so presumably there was a large Beeks Christmas celebration somewhere.
One other thing about the Beeks Christmas celebration: Cleo herself turned 22 on Christmas of 1918.
The Harshbargers in Whitley County also had lots and lots of family. Grover Harshbarger by now was mostly recovered from the bout with "Spanish influenza" that had knocked him for a loop and out of the military earlier that year. He may have been living with his father then, but by 1920 he was living with his sister Maud, her husband, daughter, son in law, grandchild, and at least two other lodgers, relationship not determined although another of the 'lodgers" had the surname Harshbarger. Grover was a logger at a saw mill. Both his parents, Emanuel and Clara Ellen Harter Harshbarger were still living. listed as in the same household, in Thorn Creek, Whitley County, Indiana. (This was significant because there had been an earlier divorce action and I never found whether or not it was withdrawn, Apparently it was.) Emanuel was 64 and Clara was 61. They had at least three other children still living, so if they hosted a Harshbarger family Christmas the farmhouse they lived in would have been crowded.
Goldie Withers was 17 and single, likely living with her parents, William H and Della Kemery Withers. Her sister Sue, three years older, was married but probably came home for Christmas. By 1920, both girls were gone, but 1918 would have been a family year. Della's parents were still alive and in Whitley County, too, and they have a large family. Adam, 72, and Nancy Fanny Buchtel Kemery, also 72, were farmers in Columbia Township, Whitley County. They had two adult children living with them in 1920, but others were grown and away from home so there were likely grandchildren at the Kemery household that day, too.
All of the families I've visited here had good support systems. In the case of Cleo Aldridge Beeks, that was probably needed and she learned her lessons well, as she cared for many aging relatives during her lifetime. But Christmas 1918 for all would have been a time of hope, with the war (except for Wilbur and the thousands of others still fighting in Russia) over. And one other thing-Christmas Day 1918 brought just a little bit of snow to northern Indiana, .6 of an inch but enough to qualify for a "White Christmas".
We can only begin to imagine Christmas Day in 1918 for Wilbur Beeks. He was in Russia, and had been since early August, as part of what was supposed to be a second front against Germany but ended up being part of the Russian revolution. By now, he had mostly recovered from his wounds received September 27, and was operating with his unit again. We can only hope they had some pause for a Christmas celebration. Wilbur's wife of a little over four years, Cleo Aldridge Beeks, had a little bundle of joy to enjoy at Christmas. After having buried two babies, one in 1915 and one in 1916, Kenneth Eugene Beeks was having his first Christmas (he would have only one more) and enjoying the day as much as a baby of almost six months can.
Cleo would have had her choice of places to celebrate. I don't know where she was living then. She may have lived in Andrews, as that is where the birth record for Kenneth states,. If so, she could have been living the life of a single Mom while Wilbur was away. Or she could have been living with her parents, Harvey and Margaret Catherine Dunham Aldridge. Harvey was 65 and his wife was 60. In 1920, the Aldridges were living on Berry Street in Andrews, and Harvey was a laborer at the lumberyard. The Aldridges were already raising two grandchildren, but probably would have had room for a daughter and grandson, too, if needed. There were six surviving Aldridge children including Cleo, so the family gathering, wherever it was held, would have included many Aldridge grandchildren, nieces and nephews to Cleo. Maybe she didn't have enough time to really miss her husband that day.
Or she may have been staying with, or at least visiting, the home of her in-laws. John, 51, and Elizabeth Wise Beeks, 48, that day. In 1920, they were living on Main Street in Andrews, and he was a section man on the interurban line. Two of their children, Charity and Chester (Bud) were living with them, as was David Wise, Elizabeth's father, who was 81 years old. And there was another Beeks family member to visit, Mary Wise Beeks, Wilbur's grandmother, the widow of William Beeks. She was 78 years old, but lived in a home she owned on East Washington Street in Lagro. Her son Martin lived with her. Mary and William had several children, some still living, so presumably there was a large Beeks Christmas celebration somewhere.
One other thing about the Beeks Christmas celebration: Cleo herself turned 22 on Christmas of 1918.
The Harshbargers in Whitley County also had lots and lots of family. Grover Harshbarger by now was mostly recovered from the bout with "Spanish influenza" that had knocked him for a loop and out of the military earlier that year. He may have been living with his father then, but by 1920 he was living with his sister Maud, her husband, daughter, son in law, grandchild, and at least two other lodgers, relationship not determined although another of the 'lodgers" had the surname Harshbarger. Grover was a logger at a saw mill. Both his parents, Emanuel and Clara Ellen Harter Harshbarger were still living. listed as in the same household, in Thorn Creek, Whitley County, Indiana. (This was significant because there had been an earlier divorce action and I never found whether or not it was withdrawn, Apparently it was.) Emanuel was 64 and Clara was 61. They had at least three other children still living, so if they hosted a Harshbarger family Christmas the farmhouse they lived in would have been crowded.
Goldie Withers was 17 and single, likely living with her parents, William H and Della Kemery Withers. Her sister Sue, three years older, was married but probably came home for Christmas. By 1920, both girls were gone, but 1918 would have been a family year. Della's parents were still alive and in Whitley County, too, and they have a large family. Adam, 72, and Nancy Fanny Buchtel Kemery, also 72, were farmers in Columbia Township, Whitley County. They had two adult children living with them in 1920, but others were grown and away from home so there were likely grandchildren at the Kemery household that day, too.
All of the families I've visited here had good support systems. In the case of Cleo Aldridge Beeks, that was probably needed and she learned her lessons well, as she cared for many aging relatives during her lifetime. But Christmas 1918 for all would have been a time of hope, with the war (except for Wilbur and the thousands of others still fighting in Russia) over. And one other thing-Christmas Day 1918 brought just a little bit of snow to northern Indiana, .6 of an inch but enough to qualify for a "White Christmas".
Tuesday, October 9, 2018
Beeks line: Mary Smith Dunham, one feisty lady
It's been awhile since I've had anything to say about any of the Beeks ancestors. But I came across one sentence about one lady that I think is noteworthy. Actually, finding anything about a woman in the 18th century is noteworthy, as for the most part women are hidden in their husband's identity. Ah, but what is husband dies at a young age? Remarriage was the norm, but sometimes a widow chose a different road.
Mary Smith was the daughter of Shubael and Prudence Fitzrandolph Smith. (The Fitzrandolph family traces back to English and Scottish royalty but that is a story for sometime in the future, if I decide to expand the scope of this blog.) She was born December 27, 1717, probably in Woodbridge, Middlesex County, New Jersey. She was one of eleven children, and that's about what I know of her childhood. I would love to know her religion, but I don't know that at this time.
Mary married Jonathan Dunham (sometimes spelled Donham), the son of Benjamin Dunham and Mary Rolph, probably in 1737 although I haven't pinned that date down yet. Their first son was born at the end of 1738, and they had five additional children. Unfortunately, Jonathan died in 1748, although I've not yet found records that mention a cause of death. This left Mary with 6 children under the age of 15. What's a widow to do?
Well, what she did not do was marry again. We are given a clue as to what she may have done because her name is found (along with some other people by the name of Fitzrandolph and Dunham) on a petition to the New Jersey House stating that the rate for housing soldiers had been 5 shillings, 4 pence but had been reduced to 4 shillings, and the petitioners asked that it be increased to the original level.
This was during the French and Indian War. Woodbridge may have been close enough to the frontier that the citizens felt threatened, and apparently at least a few soldiers were stationed there or near there to protect civilians. My strong suspicion is that Mary ran a boarding house or inn to support her family. That would explain why some of her late husband's relatives would have signed the same petition. They wanted her to be able to support herself, so they would not be obliged to do so.
I've not learned whether the petition was successful or not. I don't know what Mary looked like, whether she was short or tall, plain or attractive, but I can imagine the determination in her mind and body that showed her a way to support her family without re-marrying. Signing a petition to the state was not a common thing for a woman to do. I think she was a feisty lady.
Mary died in 1791. Her will, written in 1784, disposed of mostly personal property, but she made cash bequests to two sons. Samuel, the Beeks ancestor (and also Barack Obama's ancestor) was absent from home and if he did not return within ten years, his son Jacob was to receive 10 pounds with the remainder of Samuel's share to be divided among her three children. It's possible that Samuel was already in what became West Virginia at that time, making a life for himself and his several children.
One other detail. One of her sons, Asher, was a Tory and fought on the British side in the Revolutionary war. Daniel Dunham followed the same path. He may or may not be Mary's son. Her birth date is given as 1717 and Daniel's as 1730. I suspect Daniel belongs to another Dunham, or might just possibly be Jonathan's from an earlier relationship. He would have been family of some kind, however. Asher seems to have returned to New Jersey by the time Mary wrote her will. Samuel may have stayed away because his were not Tory views.
That's what is known about Mary, plus I've thrown in some speculation that may or may not be accurate (that she ran an inn or boarding house of some sort). I like Mary. I admire her spunk and her grit that allowed her to raise five children without the benefit of a husband. I like that she was willing to sign a petition. I like that she wanted Samuel to return home, as most parents would. I just like Mary, and I hope you do, too.
The line of descent is:
Jonathan Dunham-Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham-Hannah probably Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G. Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Gretta Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Mary Smith was the daughter of Shubael and Prudence Fitzrandolph Smith. (The Fitzrandolph family traces back to English and Scottish royalty but that is a story for sometime in the future, if I decide to expand the scope of this blog.) She was born December 27, 1717, probably in Woodbridge, Middlesex County, New Jersey. She was one of eleven children, and that's about what I know of her childhood. I would love to know her religion, but I don't know that at this time.
Mary married Jonathan Dunham (sometimes spelled Donham), the son of Benjamin Dunham and Mary Rolph, probably in 1737 although I haven't pinned that date down yet. Their first son was born at the end of 1738, and they had five additional children. Unfortunately, Jonathan died in 1748, although I've not yet found records that mention a cause of death. This left Mary with 6 children under the age of 15. What's a widow to do?
Well, what she did not do was marry again. We are given a clue as to what she may have done because her name is found (along with some other people by the name of Fitzrandolph and Dunham) on a petition to the New Jersey House stating that the rate for housing soldiers had been 5 shillings, 4 pence but had been reduced to 4 shillings, and the petitioners asked that it be increased to the original level.
This was during the French and Indian War. Woodbridge may have been close enough to the frontier that the citizens felt threatened, and apparently at least a few soldiers were stationed there or near there to protect civilians. My strong suspicion is that Mary ran a boarding house or inn to support her family. That would explain why some of her late husband's relatives would have signed the same petition. They wanted her to be able to support herself, so they would not be obliged to do so.
I've not learned whether the petition was successful or not. I don't know what Mary looked like, whether she was short or tall, plain or attractive, but I can imagine the determination in her mind and body that showed her a way to support her family without re-marrying. Signing a petition to the state was not a common thing for a woman to do. I think she was a feisty lady.
Mary died in 1791. Her will, written in 1784, disposed of mostly personal property, but she made cash bequests to two sons. Samuel, the Beeks ancestor (and also Barack Obama's ancestor) was absent from home and if he did not return within ten years, his son Jacob was to receive 10 pounds with the remainder of Samuel's share to be divided among her three children. It's possible that Samuel was already in what became West Virginia at that time, making a life for himself and his several children.
One other detail. One of her sons, Asher, was a Tory and fought on the British side in the Revolutionary war. Daniel Dunham followed the same path. He may or may not be Mary's son. Her birth date is given as 1717 and Daniel's as 1730. I suspect Daniel belongs to another Dunham, or might just possibly be Jonathan's from an earlier relationship. He would have been family of some kind, however. Asher seems to have returned to New Jersey by the time Mary wrote her will. Samuel may have stayed away because his were not Tory views.
That's what is known about Mary, plus I've thrown in some speculation that may or may not be accurate (that she ran an inn or boarding house of some sort). I like Mary. I admire her spunk and her grit that allowed her to raise five children without the benefit of a husband. I like that she was willing to sign a petition. I like that she wanted Samuel to return home, as most parents would. I just like Mary, and I hope you do, too.
The line of descent is:
Jonathan Dunham-Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham-Hannah probably Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G. Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Gretta Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, September 5, 2017
Beeks line: Samuel Dunham 1742-1824
I thought I'd break my self imposed rule of writing only about immigrants and proven war veterans in this blog. Since I'm running out of Beeks names, I'm looking now for people who left enough of a record that we can at least catch a glimpse of them, through the family forest and the mists of time. Samuel Dunham is such a man.
We don't know as much about Samuel as we'd like to know, of course. He seems to have been a moderately successful, salt of the earth kind of man, the kind who pays his taxes and raises his family. There are hints of parts of his life in records, so we'll have to be happy with that until more information is known.
Samuel was born in Woodbridge, N.J. on May 11, 1742. His parents were Jonathan and Mary Smith Dunham. He had five siblings, all born between 1738 and 1742, so he wouldn't have lacked for chores to do nor for playmates, if there was time for such a thing. He don't know whether he could read or write, but it's reasonable to believe he had at least a rudimentary education, and perhaps more than that. His family was well known in the Woodbridge community.
We have difficulty following Samuel's move to the west, but we know it happened. He is believed to have married Hannah Ruble, daughter of David and Sarah Malin Ruble, about 1772. This family lived in Washington County, Pennsylvania and it is likely that Samuel was living or at least working in the vicinity then. He would have been about 30 years old, give or take, since we don't have an exact marriage date yet.
The Revolutionary War was about to break out, and we don't know how this impacted Samuel. He is not found on the Tax List for Berkeley County, now West Virginia, in 1777. He may have been there at least to scout out a future home, but this was a hot area for battles with the native Americans, who were armed and encouraged by the British. Perhaps they patiently waited in Pennsylvania, or even Maryland, for a chance to move on. If Samuel did live in the area during this time period, we can wonder what his role was in the War. I've not been able to find him listed as a soldier either on Fold 3 or the DAR, but that doesn't mean he didn't serve. He may well have been in a state militia unit, protecting his family and others in a guardhouse or "fort", for there were many such structures and someone his age on the frontier would have been expected to serve.
Between 1778 and 1783 Samuel and his family moved to Back Creek Valley, in what was then Virginia. Looking at images found on Google, it was and still is a beautiful area, although home and land prices there are higher than in Indiana. Most of what I've read of this area says that the Scots-Irish and the Germans settled this area, so it would be interesting to find out how and why this part of the country beckoned to Samuel.
I'm showing a total of 11 children for Samuel and Hannah, although other sources list "only" nine. At any rate, even the oldest children were young when they moved, and several were born in what was then Virginia. David Dunham has done research, showing that the couple had at least 80 grandchildren, and some of their descendants are still living in the immediate area, to the ninth generation.
Samuel Dunham was a Baptist, and presumably Sarah was, too, or at least that's what she became after her marriage. I've not found the particular congregation he attended, but there are some churches in the Back Creek area that might have been active during Samuel's life. Samuel died February 18, 1824 on his 611 acre farm, and Hannah died about two years later, possibly in Butler County, Ohio.
If Samuel left a will, I haven't found it yet. It isn't known where he was buried. Many records from this time period were burned during the Civil War, or otherwise destroyed, so we may never be able to answer some of these questions. Or, the answers may pop up tomorrow, because we never know...
The line of descent is:
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel Goodnight Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
We don't know as much about Samuel as we'd like to know, of course. He seems to have been a moderately successful, salt of the earth kind of man, the kind who pays his taxes and raises his family. There are hints of parts of his life in records, so we'll have to be happy with that until more information is known.
Samuel was born in Woodbridge, N.J. on May 11, 1742. His parents were Jonathan and Mary Smith Dunham. He had five siblings, all born between 1738 and 1742, so he wouldn't have lacked for chores to do nor for playmates, if there was time for such a thing. He don't know whether he could read or write, but it's reasonable to believe he had at least a rudimentary education, and perhaps more than that. His family was well known in the Woodbridge community.
We have difficulty following Samuel's move to the west, but we know it happened. He is believed to have married Hannah Ruble, daughter of David and Sarah Malin Ruble, about 1772. This family lived in Washington County, Pennsylvania and it is likely that Samuel was living or at least working in the vicinity then. He would have been about 30 years old, give or take, since we don't have an exact marriage date yet.
The Revolutionary War was about to break out, and we don't know how this impacted Samuel. He is not found on the Tax List for Berkeley County, now West Virginia, in 1777. He may have been there at least to scout out a future home, but this was a hot area for battles with the native Americans, who were armed and encouraged by the British. Perhaps they patiently waited in Pennsylvania, or even Maryland, for a chance to move on. If Samuel did live in the area during this time period, we can wonder what his role was in the War. I've not been able to find him listed as a soldier either on Fold 3 or the DAR, but that doesn't mean he didn't serve. He may well have been in a state militia unit, protecting his family and others in a guardhouse or "fort", for there were many such structures and someone his age on the frontier would have been expected to serve.
Between 1778 and 1783 Samuel and his family moved to Back Creek Valley, in what was then Virginia. Looking at images found on Google, it was and still is a beautiful area, although home and land prices there are higher than in Indiana. Most of what I've read of this area says that the Scots-Irish and the Germans settled this area, so it would be interesting to find out how and why this part of the country beckoned to Samuel.
I'm showing a total of 11 children for Samuel and Hannah, although other sources list "only" nine. At any rate, even the oldest children were young when they moved, and several were born in what was then Virginia. David Dunham has done research, showing that the couple had at least 80 grandchildren, and some of their descendants are still living in the immediate area, to the ninth generation.
Samuel Dunham was a Baptist, and presumably Sarah was, too, or at least that's what she became after her marriage. I've not found the particular congregation he attended, but there are some churches in the Back Creek area that might have been active during Samuel's life. Samuel died February 18, 1824 on his 611 acre farm, and Hannah died about two years later, possibly in Butler County, Ohio.
If Samuel left a will, I haven't found it yet. It isn't known where he was buried. Many records from this time period were burned during the Civil War, or otherwise destroyed, so we may never be able to answer some of these questions. Or, the answers may pop up tomorrow, because we never know...
The line of descent is:
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel Goodnight Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, July 11, 2017
Beeks line: John Gurney 1603-1663 Immigrant
It's fun to take a name that's on the family tree and try to place him in time and space, to think for a few minutes about his life and to realize that once again there are more questions than answers. John Gurney is such a person. Not much is known about him but I do want to give credit to the RootsWeb World Connect Project called "Genealogies of Families of Brantree, Quincy, Weymouth, Randolph, Holbrook, Mass. & Others". I'd located maybe 20% of this information on my own, so it would have been slim pickings indeed for a post if I hadn't found this source.
As nearly as is known, John Gurney was born about 1603, since he gave a court deposition in 1652/53 saying he was 50 years old or thereabouts. There is a John Gurney who was baptized at Stewkley, Buckinghamshire, England on February 21, 1603 and it is likely that this is our John. If so, his father's name was also John, but that is as much family background as I have at present. If this John Gurney is ours, then he came from an area identified as "Non-conformist" and he may have been a Puritan. The church there is very old, dating to the twelfth century, so it is possible that generations on Gurneys worshipped there. At present, we can't state that with any certainty.
I can't find documentation, but John was supposedly married to a woman named Mary, most likely in England. He may have been an indentured servant but the dates don't match for the most commonly quoted master. At any rate, either at home or in Massachusetts he learned the tailor trade. He is reported as being in Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1636, but it's possible he arrived earlier. His children have birth dates of from about 1628 to about 1640, which is puzzling to have so many "abouts" unless the family was moving frequently.
We know that he was a tenant of rented land owned by Captain William Tyng in Brantree in 1653, which was 45 acres of upland and marsh. As mentioned ealier, he was a tailer and lived within Braintree, with a house and five acres of land, until he sold it in 1661 to Richard Thayer.
John's wife Mary died September 20, 1661 and just a few weeks later he married Grizell Fletcher Jewell Griggs Kibbee. It was his second marriage and her fourth. It's only speculation but perhaps he was already in poor health. To put a good face on it, Grizell seems to have bettered herself with each marriage, and she would have one final marriage soon after John died. (I wonder if people then talked, or whispered, about a woman with five marriages. Two marriages were common, three were somewhat frequent, four were occasional, but five? Really?)
I've found no record of John being admitted as a freeman, and no record of church or civic involvement. John may have been a man determined to keep his head down and just to concentrate on raising his family. When he died, he left an inventory valued at 55 pounds, 14 shillings, and 6 pence. He also had a long list of debts, so it is likely that there wasn't much left for the widow or his children to inherit. Son John did get lands in Mendon, which is where our John had intended to move before his last illness.
This is a summary of the information I've been able to locate about John Gurney. It's the unrecognized people who helped build America, and for that reason, I'm happy to introduce you briefly to John Gurney, immigrant and nation builder.
The line of descent is:
John Gurney-Mary
Mary Gurney-Daniel Shedd
Elizabeth Shedd-Daniel Pierce
Elizabeth Pierce-Samuel Smith
Shubael Smith-Prudence Fitzrandolph
Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham
Samuel Dunnah-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
As nearly as is known, John Gurney was born about 1603, since he gave a court deposition in 1652/53 saying he was 50 years old or thereabouts. There is a John Gurney who was baptized at Stewkley, Buckinghamshire, England on February 21, 1603 and it is likely that this is our John. If so, his father's name was also John, but that is as much family background as I have at present. If this John Gurney is ours, then he came from an area identified as "Non-conformist" and he may have been a Puritan. The church there is very old, dating to the twelfth century, so it is possible that generations on Gurneys worshipped there. At present, we can't state that with any certainty.
I can't find documentation, but John was supposedly married to a woman named Mary, most likely in England. He may have been an indentured servant but the dates don't match for the most commonly quoted master. At any rate, either at home or in Massachusetts he learned the tailor trade. He is reported as being in Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1636, but it's possible he arrived earlier. His children have birth dates of from about 1628 to about 1640, which is puzzling to have so many "abouts" unless the family was moving frequently.
We know that he was a tenant of rented land owned by Captain William Tyng in Brantree in 1653, which was 45 acres of upland and marsh. As mentioned ealier, he was a tailer and lived within Braintree, with a house and five acres of land, until he sold it in 1661 to Richard Thayer.
John's wife Mary died September 20, 1661 and just a few weeks later he married Grizell Fletcher Jewell Griggs Kibbee. It was his second marriage and her fourth. It's only speculation but perhaps he was already in poor health. To put a good face on it, Grizell seems to have bettered herself with each marriage, and she would have one final marriage soon after John died. (I wonder if people then talked, or whispered, about a woman with five marriages. Two marriages were common, three were somewhat frequent, four were occasional, but five? Really?)
I've found no record of John being admitted as a freeman, and no record of church or civic involvement. John may have been a man determined to keep his head down and just to concentrate on raising his family. When he died, he left an inventory valued at 55 pounds, 14 shillings, and 6 pence. He also had a long list of debts, so it is likely that there wasn't much left for the widow or his children to inherit. Son John did get lands in Mendon, which is where our John had intended to move before his last illness.
This is a summary of the information I've been able to locate about John Gurney. It's the unrecognized people who helped build America, and for that reason, I'm happy to introduce you briefly to John Gurney, immigrant and nation builder.
The line of descent is:
John Gurney-Mary
Mary Gurney-Daniel Shedd
Elizabeth Shedd-Daniel Pierce
Elizabeth Pierce-Samuel Smith
Shubael Smith-Prudence Fitzrandolph
Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham
Samuel Dunnah-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, June 27, 2017
Beeks line: Gilles de Mandeville 1626-1701 Immigrant
You may not be able to guess from the name that this is another ancestor from what is now The Netherlands. That's because it seems that there is no one "correct" way to write his name. Some list him as Aegidius, some as Giles Jensen, some as Yellis, and I'm not sure that the Mandeville surname really "sticks", although he has parents and grandparents all the way back to 1525 who also have been given that surname. I'm going to call him Gilles because that's easier for me, but yet reminds me this is not an Englishman.
Gilles was born in 166 in Veluwe, Gelderland, the Netherlands in 1626, the son of Rev.Jan Michealse and Trintgen Wilma Van Harderwijk Mandeville. Oh, he may have been born in France and baptized in Doesburk, Geldeland, the Netherlands. I think he was likely born in the Netherlands, unless the information about his parent's birthplace is incorrect. The first think we really know about Gilles is that he, his wife Elsje Pieterse Hendricks, and four children sailed on the "de Trouw", to New Amsterdam, supposedly traveling with Peter Stuyvesant. That makes a nice story, the Stuyvesant connection, but I'm not sure that Stuyvesant had gone anywhere so that he would have been returning in 1659. (I could be wrong about that, of course, and it is likely that the families knew each other. I just don't find anything that says Stuyvesant had gone to the Netherlands in 1658-59. He seems to have been in New Amsterdam the whole time.)
He paid the way of himself and his family so he was not a poor man. He is associated with several pieces of land at Long Island, atNew Amersfoort and New Amsterdam, and when the English took over the Dutch colony, he was on a tax list for New York in 1676.He also had a farm at Flatbush and 30 acres at Greenwich. The main estate, the farm o Manhattan Island, was in what is now Greenwich Village. Gilles and Elsje were members of the Dutch Reformed Church in New York.
In his will, written in September of 1696 and proven May 22, 1701, he left all of his estate during Elsje's widowhood. His farm in Queens county, near Hempstead, with houses, barns,etc he left to his oldest son Hendrick,. The farm at Greenwich was to be sold to the highest bidder and the proceeds divided among his six adult children. The final execution probably didn't take long, as Elsje herself made her will the same date that Gilles' will was proven.
Gilles appears to have been a hard-working man with a good business sense, and enough money to get started in his new life in the New Netherlands. If he actually lived in all the places that he had land, he could almost be considered a real estate developer. I wonder what he would think of his most lasting "development", Greenwich Village, and its property values now!
The line of descent is:
Gilles de Mandeville-Elsje Hendricks
Gerritje Mandeville-Jan Pieterse Meet
Maretje Meete-Peter Demarest
Lea Demarest-Samuel David Demarest
Sarah Demarest-Benjamin Slot
William (Slot) Lock-Elizabeth Teague
Sally Lock-Jeremiah Folsom
Leah Folsom-Darlington Aldridge
Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Gilles was born in 166 in Veluwe, Gelderland, the Netherlands in 1626, the son of Rev.Jan Michealse and Trintgen Wilma Van Harderwijk Mandeville. Oh, he may have been born in France and baptized in Doesburk, Geldeland, the Netherlands. I think he was likely born in the Netherlands, unless the information about his parent's birthplace is incorrect. The first think we really know about Gilles is that he, his wife Elsje Pieterse Hendricks, and four children sailed on the "de Trouw", to New Amsterdam, supposedly traveling with Peter Stuyvesant. That makes a nice story, the Stuyvesant connection, but I'm not sure that Stuyvesant had gone anywhere so that he would have been returning in 1659. (I could be wrong about that, of course, and it is likely that the families knew each other. I just don't find anything that says Stuyvesant had gone to the Netherlands in 1658-59. He seems to have been in New Amsterdam the whole time.)
He paid the way of himself and his family so he was not a poor man. He is associated with several pieces of land at Long Island, atNew Amersfoort and New Amsterdam, and when the English took over the Dutch colony, he was on a tax list for New York in 1676.He also had a farm at Flatbush and 30 acres at Greenwich. The main estate, the farm o Manhattan Island, was in what is now Greenwich Village. Gilles and Elsje were members of the Dutch Reformed Church in New York.
In his will, written in September of 1696 and proven May 22, 1701, he left all of his estate during Elsje's widowhood. His farm in Queens county, near Hempstead, with houses, barns,etc he left to his oldest son Hendrick,. The farm at Greenwich was to be sold to the highest bidder and the proceeds divided among his six adult children. The final execution probably didn't take long, as Elsje herself made her will the same date that Gilles' will was proven.
Gilles appears to have been a hard-working man with a good business sense, and enough money to get started in his new life in the New Netherlands. If he actually lived in all the places that he had land, he could almost be considered a real estate developer. I wonder what he would think of his most lasting "development", Greenwich Village, and its property values now!
The line of descent is:
Gilles de Mandeville-Elsje Hendricks
Gerritje Mandeville-Jan Pieterse Meet
Maretje Meete-Peter Demarest
Lea Demarest-Samuel David Demarest
Sarah Demarest-Benjamin Slot
William (Slot) Lock-Elizabeth Teague
Sally Lock-Jeremiah Folsom
Leah Folsom-Darlington Aldridge
Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Beeks line: A cousin discovered and mourned
Well, maybe he's not discovered, because I sure hope someone still remembers him, but this story was new to me and I found it only accidentally, while reading local newspapers for my "next book" project. But Donald C Murdock deserves to be remembered and honored, not just by the few who may still remember him, but by all his extended family. He gave the ultimate sacrifice for his country and his family.
Donald Murdock was born June 5, 1918, the son of William and Hazel Aldridge Murdock. (It's possible that Hazel had an earlier marriage, but I'm unable to verify that now) Donald was the only child of this couple. They lived in Frankfort, Clinton County, Indiana from the early years of the marriage, because Donald was listed with his parents there in the 1920 U.S. census. William is listed as 44 years old, so it's possible that he had been married before also, and Hazel was 26. Donald's paternal grandparents, the Murdocks, were born in Ireland. His maternal grandfather, Jeremiah Aldridge, was born in Tipton County, Indiana. (Jeremiah had three wives and I've not yet found Hazel's birth record, so I'm not sure who her mother was).
As far as we know, life was going OK for Donald in 1930. He spent summers in Huntington County, living on a farm, probably with family members. His father was now a landscaper for an electric light plant, and owned his own home. Sometime between 1930 and 1940 William died, and Hazel remarried to Chelsea (?) Holtz. In 1940, Chelsea was a fireman's helper at the electric plant, Hazel was a seamstress, and Donald was a truck driver. They were living in a rented home, so it appears that perhaps the stress of the Depression and of William's death had reached this home.
The only story I know about Donald during his teenage years is one worthy of a hero. While staying with his uncle, W.A. Bickel for the summer, Donald went to Silver Lake for an outing. While there, he saved the life of a young girl who had swum too far out and was exhausted. (This was a big enough deal that it reached the Huntington Herald Press, even though it didn't occur in Huntington County). Donald graduated from high school, probably in 1936, and was inducted into the U.S. Army on November 22, 1941, just about two weeks before Pearl Harbor. His last job before joining the Army was as a guard at the Kingsbury ordnance plant.
I don't know anything about Donald's training or what his job in the Army was. Sometime, after he was deemed trained, he was shipped to the South Pacific theater. I don't know if he was in New Guinea the whole time, or if he had arrived there from another location (he very well could have been in Australia for additional training, as many soldiers in that campaign were stationed and trained there for a time.) We know that he sent a Christmas greeting to his cousin, Allen Bickel, on December 26, 1942 and said that all was well. However, in what was probably the battle to retake Buna from the Japanese, on the island of New Guinea, Donald was killed in action on December 29, 1942. Word didn't read Huntington county until January 21, 1943 of this death in the family.
I have thought about what the Aldridge and Beeks families must have felt when they heard the news. Donald was a second cousin to the Beeks "children", who were younger than Donald. Cleo Aldridge Beeks and Hazel Aldridge Murdock Holtz were first cousins and likely grew up spending time together. It would have been a sad day for the family, and for the other Aldridge family members. For Hazel, it must have been devastating.
At some point, Donald's body was returned to the States and he was buried at the IOOF cemetery in Frankfort. There is a military marker on his headstone indicating that he was a private. Perhaps his mother received a letter from his commander, giving more details of the death, but this is as much as I know now. If anyone reading this has any more knowledge about Donald Murdock, I'd love it if you'd share that with me. We should know the story of family heroes!
Donald's line of descent would be: To show the connection:
Darlington Aldridge-Leah Folsom Darlington Aldridge-Leah Folsom
Jeremiah Aldridge- Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Hazel Aldridge-William Murdock Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Donald Murdock Mary Margaret Beeks and siblings
Donald Murdock was born June 5, 1918, the son of William and Hazel Aldridge Murdock. (It's possible that Hazel had an earlier marriage, but I'm unable to verify that now) Donald was the only child of this couple. They lived in Frankfort, Clinton County, Indiana from the early years of the marriage, because Donald was listed with his parents there in the 1920 U.S. census. William is listed as 44 years old, so it's possible that he had been married before also, and Hazel was 26. Donald's paternal grandparents, the Murdocks, were born in Ireland. His maternal grandfather, Jeremiah Aldridge, was born in Tipton County, Indiana. (Jeremiah had three wives and I've not yet found Hazel's birth record, so I'm not sure who her mother was).
As far as we know, life was going OK for Donald in 1930. He spent summers in Huntington County, living on a farm, probably with family members. His father was now a landscaper for an electric light plant, and owned his own home. Sometime between 1930 and 1940 William died, and Hazel remarried to Chelsea (?) Holtz. In 1940, Chelsea was a fireman's helper at the electric plant, Hazel was a seamstress, and Donald was a truck driver. They were living in a rented home, so it appears that perhaps the stress of the Depression and of William's death had reached this home.
The only story I know about Donald during his teenage years is one worthy of a hero. While staying with his uncle, W.A. Bickel for the summer, Donald went to Silver Lake for an outing. While there, he saved the life of a young girl who had swum too far out and was exhausted. (This was a big enough deal that it reached the Huntington Herald Press, even though it didn't occur in Huntington County). Donald graduated from high school, probably in 1936, and was inducted into the U.S. Army on November 22, 1941, just about two weeks before Pearl Harbor. His last job before joining the Army was as a guard at the Kingsbury ordnance plant.
I don't know anything about Donald's training or what his job in the Army was. Sometime, after he was deemed trained, he was shipped to the South Pacific theater. I don't know if he was in New Guinea the whole time, or if he had arrived there from another location (he very well could have been in Australia for additional training, as many soldiers in that campaign were stationed and trained there for a time.) We know that he sent a Christmas greeting to his cousin, Allen Bickel, on December 26, 1942 and said that all was well. However, in what was probably the battle to retake Buna from the Japanese, on the island of New Guinea, Donald was killed in action on December 29, 1942. Word didn't read Huntington county until January 21, 1943 of this death in the family.
I have thought about what the Aldridge and Beeks families must have felt when they heard the news. Donald was a second cousin to the Beeks "children", who were younger than Donald. Cleo Aldridge Beeks and Hazel Aldridge Murdock Holtz were first cousins and likely grew up spending time together. It would have been a sad day for the family, and for the other Aldridge family members. For Hazel, it must have been devastating.
At some point, Donald's body was returned to the States and he was buried at the IOOF cemetery in Frankfort. There is a military marker on his headstone indicating that he was a private. Perhaps his mother received a letter from his commander, giving more details of the death, but this is as much as I know now. If anyone reading this has any more knowledge about Donald Murdock, I'd love it if you'd share that with me. We should know the story of family heroes!
Donald's line of descent would be: To show the connection:
Darlington Aldridge-Leah Folsom Darlington Aldridge-Leah Folsom
Jeremiah Aldridge- Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Hazel Aldridge-William Murdock Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Donald Murdock Mary Margaret Beeks and siblings
Tuesday, May 30, 2017
Beeks line: Margaret Catherine Dunham Aldridge 1858-1942
I'm going to type two newspaper articles from the Huntington Herald Press. They are full of errors and misspellings, but perhaps someone in the family hasn't seen these before. They relate to the death of Margaret Catherine Dunham Aldridge, wife of Harvey Homer Aldridge and daughter of Samuel and Eliza Matilda Reese Dunham.
Here's the first article, printed on May 8,1942:
"ILLNESS FATAL TO ANDREWS RESIDENT"
Margaret K. Aldrich dies at Home of Daughter
Mrs. Margaret Katherine Aldrich, 88, died at 5 p.m. Wednesday at the home of her daughter, Mrs. Cleo Beeks, in Andrews after a serious illness.
She was born in Tipton county May 18,1858 to Samuel and Matilda Dunham and was married April 1, 1880 to Harvey Aldrich at Kempton, where the family lived until 1910 when they came to Andrews. Mr. Aldrich died in August, 1930.
Surviving are two sons, Frank Aldrich, Wabash county, and Samuel Aldrich, Midland, Mich.; two daughters, Mrs. Della Harrell, Lagro, and Mrs. Beeks; 35 grandchildren and 25 great grandchildren. One son and three daughters are deceased.
The body was taken to the Zimmerman funeral home in Andrews where brief services will e held at 10 a.m. Saturday. The body will then be taken to Kempton where services will be held in the Methodist church at 2p.m. The Rev. John W. Borders, pastor of the Methodist church at Wabash will officiate. Burial will be in the Morris cemetery near Kempton."
The second is from the Andrews news column, which explains the delay, and is dated May 21, 1942.
"FUNERAL SERVICES
Short funeral services for Mrs. Margaret Aldridge were held at the Zimmerman funeral home and the body was taken to Kempton for final services and burials. Rev. John Borders of the Wabash Methodist Church officiated. Singers were Mrs. Lloyd Slagal and Lester Stephan accompanied at the pino by Elizabeth Warschko. Flowerbearers were granddaughters Anna Mae Beeks, Mary Margaret Beeks, Bernetta Huston, Lois Huston, Mary Enyard, Bernice Krider, Lurene Urschel, Doris Reynolds, Norma Jean Beeks, Carol Ann Enyeart and Lurene Kennedy. Pallbearers were grandsons James Beks, Paul Aldridge, Herbert Harrell, Herman Harrell, George Enyard and Roy Huston."
There is a lot of information in these paragraphs that may be new to some of the family. Remember that a couple of weeks ago I commented on the potential size of an Aldridge family reunion? These articles prompted that comment. There were many more great grandchildren born after Margaret's death, and those great grandchildren now have children, grand children, great grandchildren and perhaps even great great grandchildren of their own!
The line of descent is:
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Here's the first article, printed on May 8,1942:
"ILLNESS FATAL TO ANDREWS RESIDENT"
Margaret K. Aldrich dies at Home of Daughter
Mrs. Margaret Katherine Aldrich, 88, died at 5 p.m. Wednesday at the home of her daughter, Mrs. Cleo Beeks, in Andrews after a serious illness.
She was born in Tipton county May 18,1858 to Samuel and Matilda Dunham and was married April 1, 1880 to Harvey Aldrich at Kempton, where the family lived until 1910 when they came to Andrews. Mr. Aldrich died in August, 1930.
Surviving are two sons, Frank Aldrich, Wabash county, and Samuel Aldrich, Midland, Mich.; two daughters, Mrs. Della Harrell, Lagro, and Mrs. Beeks; 35 grandchildren and 25 great grandchildren. One son and three daughters are deceased.
The body was taken to the Zimmerman funeral home in Andrews where brief services will e held at 10 a.m. Saturday. The body will then be taken to Kempton where services will be held in the Methodist church at 2p.m. The Rev. John W. Borders, pastor of the Methodist church at Wabash will officiate. Burial will be in the Morris cemetery near Kempton."
The second is from the Andrews news column, which explains the delay, and is dated May 21, 1942.
"FUNERAL SERVICES
Short funeral services for Mrs. Margaret Aldridge were held at the Zimmerman funeral home and the body was taken to Kempton for final services and burials. Rev. John Borders of the Wabash Methodist Church officiated. Singers were Mrs. Lloyd Slagal and Lester Stephan accompanied at the pino by Elizabeth Warschko. Flowerbearers were granddaughters Anna Mae Beeks, Mary Margaret Beeks, Bernetta Huston, Lois Huston, Mary Enyard, Bernice Krider, Lurene Urschel, Doris Reynolds, Norma Jean Beeks, Carol Ann Enyeart and Lurene Kennedy. Pallbearers were grandsons James Beks, Paul Aldridge, Herbert Harrell, Herman Harrell, George Enyard and Roy Huston."
There is a lot of information in these paragraphs that may be new to some of the family. Remember that a couple of weeks ago I commented on the potential size of an Aldridge family reunion? These articles prompted that comment. There were many more great grandchildren born after Margaret's death, and those great grandchildren now have children, grand children, great grandchildren and perhaps even great great grandchildren of their own!
The line of descent is:
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, May 2, 2017
Beeks line: Jason Wheeler 1765-1843, some thoughts
Jason Wheeler is one of the brick walls that is driving me crazy. Most trees out there give a definite date of birth for him, of October 4, 1765, and an approximate death date of 1843, supposedly in Marion County, Indiana. I have no reason to dispute those dates except that I can't find documentation for them. My hope is that the birth date came from a family Bible somewhere, and that someone seeing this will contact me with more information.
So the only real thing I have to go on is his birthdate, and the fact that the 1850 census shows his widow, Patience, or Palina possibly, as having been born in Vermont. So the 1791 census (called the 1790 census on Ancestry, but it was taken a year later than the rest of the country) shows a Jason Wheeler in Lunenburgh, Orange County, Vermont. This is the only Jason Wheeler in the entire 1790 census, so I'm going to assume this is our guy. I have bits and pieces through land records and census records of the rest of his life. He and Timothy Wheeler (a possible brother, possibly named for Timothy Nash) went to Chenango County, New York and then Jason moved on to Clermont County, Ohio, before the final move to Marion County, Indiana. The dates and time frame aren't really part of this discussion, because I want to focus on the early years of Jason Wheeler's life-in fact, his earliest years.
Specifically, I would like to know who his parents were. Every tree that ventures a guess seems to think his father is Joseph Wheeler, from Smyrna, Cobb County, Georgia. If someone has proof of this I sure would be pleased to see it, but on the face of it this doesn't seem likely. Going from Georgia to New York (where Joseph supposedly died) is not a usual migration path, and none of Jason's known children are named Joseph.
Let's leave that name alone for a while and apply some of the thought processes that family historians rely on. We know that family tended to stay together, so let's look at the other Wheelers in Orange County, Vermont in 1791. There are quite a few, but the one closest geographically is George, who is in Guildhall, which is basically right over the line from Lunenburgh. In fact, the two men probably thought they were living in the same town, until a 1786 survey showed that the border was not where the towns thought they were. George Wheeler's name is on some petitions in 1786 and 1788, and Jason's name joins his in 1788. George's 1791 census shows that he still has quite a large family, with a total of 10 people in the household. As a further note, Lunenburgh and Guildhall were each very small communities, with only 16 heads of households listed in each town in that year. George and Jason are the only two Wheelers here.
The only record I've found for a child for George is George Junior, who was born in 1773. That doesn't mean that this was the only child the family had, though. I've found that George first went to the area that became Guildhall in 1764, as one of a small group of people that also included Timothy Nash and David Page. These men settled in the area, with George pitching a tent on the south side of Fiske's pond (which I've not yet located on a map; it could be drained by now). There is a reference to the Wheeler family being there in the early years but it's possible that at least for the first year or two that the family joined George only for the warmer months.
So who was George Wheeler? Well, the record for George Junior's birth shows his parents as George and Experience Wheeler. George Wheeler and Experience Nash (she seems to be the daughter of the Timothy Nash mentioned above, and Experience Kellogg) were married in Shutesbury, Massachusetts on March 17, 1764. Jason was born about 19 months later. If we count back nine months from October 4, 1765 we arrive at early January, 1765, a time when it would make sense for the couple to have been together, if George went back to Shutesbury that first winter. It's an "if", but it may be a reasonable "if". And if Jason was born in Vermont in early fall, it makes sense that his birth records would either be non-existent due to the pioneer experience, have been lost, or are somewhere in the archives of either New York or New Hampshire, each of which was claiming this land at the time. There are no further records for George Wheeler in Shutesbury, so he must have gone someplace.
George served in the Revolutionary War under a New Hampshire group, in Captain Bedell's company, and again in 1782 in a group credited to Vermont. I haven't done a lot of digging on the war story because I'm still trying to piece together a timeline and figure out how much sense this idea makes.
George is in Lunenburgh, now Essex County, in the 1800 census. He is about the age of 45, so born earlier than 1755, and still has 5 people living with him, plus a woman over 45 who is presumably his wife, Experience. After that, I can no longer locate a likely suspect to be George. He may have died between 1800 and 1810, or he may be living in a child's home, but since we don't know the children to check that is hard to determine at this point. Jason, meanwhile has moved on to Frankfort, Herkimer, New York in 1800 (again, he's the only Jason I can find in the 1800 census). He is apparently married (best guess for marriage date is 1788 or so) and has six children living in the household. One of these children is a son named George, born in 1799.
I have no smoking gun here. I haven't found a will for George, or estate papers, land records or pension records. I don't know what happened to him. I have geographic location, opportunity, and names (some of Jason's children used the name George, also, which may be for George Wheeler, or could be for George Washington) This is more than I can find for the supposed Joseph.
What do my genealogy friends think? Are George and Experience strong possibilities for Jason's parents? Where else can I look? I'd sure love to add these names to the Beeks family tree, and start researching George and Experience! Please email me: happygenealogydancingATgmailDOTcom, or leave a comment!
Here's Jason's line of descent:
Jason Wheeler-Patience
Lucinda Wheeler-John Simpson Aldridge Jr.
Darlington Aldridge-Leah Folsom
Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
So the only real thing I have to go on is his birthdate, and the fact that the 1850 census shows his widow, Patience, or Palina possibly, as having been born in Vermont. So the 1791 census (called the 1790 census on Ancestry, but it was taken a year later than the rest of the country) shows a Jason Wheeler in Lunenburgh, Orange County, Vermont. This is the only Jason Wheeler in the entire 1790 census, so I'm going to assume this is our guy. I have bits and pieces through land records and census records of the rest of his life. He and Timothy Wheeler (a possible brother, possibly named for Timothy Nash) went to Chenango County, New York and then Jason moved on to Clermont County, Ohio, before the final move to Marion County, Indiana. The dates and time frame aren't really part of this discussion, because I want to focus on the early years of Jason Wheeler's life-in fact, his earliest years.
Specifically, I would like to know who his parents were. Every tree that ventures a guess seems to think his father is Joseph Wheeler, from Smyrna, Cobb County, Georgia. If someone has proof of this I sure would be pleased to see it, but on the face of it this doesn't seem likely. Going from Georgia to New York (where Joseph supposedly died) is not a usual migration path, and none of Jason's known children are named Joseph.
Let's leave that name alone for a while and apply some of the thought processes that family historians rely on. We know that family tended to stay together, so let's look at the other Wheelers in Orange County, Vermont in 1791. There are quite a few, but the one closest geographically is George, who is in Guildhall, which is basically right over the line from Lunenburgh. In fact, the two men probably thought they were living in the same town, until a 1786 survey showed that the border was not where the towns thought they were. George Wheeler's name is on some petitions in 1786 and 1788, and Jason's name joins his in 1788. George's 1791 census shows that he still has quite a large family, with a total of 10 people in the household. As a further note, Lunenburgh and Guildhall were each very small communities, with only 16 heads of households listed in each town in that year. George and Jason are the only two Wheelers here.
The only record I've found for a child for George is George Junior, who was born in 1773. That doesn't mean that this was the only child the family had, though. I've found that George first went to the area that became Guildhall in 1764, as one of a small group of people that also included Timothy Nash and David Page. These men settled in the area, with George pitching a tent on the south side of Fiske's pond (which I've not yet located on a map; it could be drained by now). There is a reference to the Wheeler family being there in the early years but it's possible that at least for the first year or two that the family joined George only for the warmer months.
So who was George Wheeler? Well, the record for George Junior's birth shows his parents as George and Experience Wheeler. George Wheeler and Experience Nash (she seems to be the daughter of the Timothy Nash mentioned above, and Experience Kellogg) were married in Shutesbury, Massachusetts on March 17, 1764. Jason was born about 19 months later. If we count back nine months from October 4, 1765 we arrive at early January, 1765, a time when it would make sense for the couple to have been together, if George went back to Shutesbury that first winter. It's an "if", but it may be a reasonable "if". And if Jason was born in Vermont in early fall, it makes sense that his birth records would either be non-existent due to the pioneer experience, have been lost, or are somewhere in the archives of either New York or New Hampshire, each of which was claiming this land at the time. There are no further records for George Wheeler in Shutesbury, so he must have gone someplace.
George served in the Revolutionary War under a New Hampshire group, in Captain Bedell's company, and again in 1782 in a group credited to Vermont. I haven't done a lot of digging on the war story because I'm still trying to piece together a timeline and figure out how much sense this idea makes.
George is in Lunenburgh, now Essex County, in the 1800 census. He is about the age of 45, so born earlier than 1755, and still has 5 people living with him, plus a woman over 45 who is presumably his wife, Experience. After that, I can no longer locate a likely suspect to be George. He may have died between 1800 and 1810, or he may be living in a child's home, but since we don't know the children to check that is hard to determine at this point. Jason, meanwhile has moved on to Frankfort, Herkimer, New York in 1800 (again, he's the only Jason I can find in the 1800 census). He is apparently married (best guess for marriage date is 1788 or so) and has six children living in the household. One of these children is a son named George, born in 1799.
I have no smoking gun here. I haven't found a will for George, or estate papers, land records or pension records. I don't know what happened to him. I have geographic location, opportunity, and names (some of Jason's children used the name George, also, which may be for George Wheeler, or could be for George Washington) This is more than I can find for the supposed Joseph.
What do my genealogy friends think? Are George and Experience strong possibilities for Jason's parents? Where else can I look? I'd sure love to add these names to the Beeks family tree, and start researching George and Experience! Please email me: happygenealogydancingATgmailDOTcom, or leave a comment!
Here's Jason's line of descent:
Jason Wheeler-Patience
Lucinda Wheeler-John Simpson Aldridge Jr.
Darlington Aldridge-Leah Folsom
Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, March 21, 2017
Beeks line: David Jones 1653-1707, Immigrant
It's possible that I should be writing about Samuel Jones, who may or may not be David's father, and who may or may not have emigrated from Wales to Pennsylvania. However, I can find a bit of documentation for David and I find nothing for Samuel, so at this point we'll write what we can about David.
David was born in 1653 in either Pembrokeshire or Carmarthenshire, Wales. We know nothing at all of his early life until he shows up in 1682 in Langamin, Carmarthen(shire) Wales, marrying Susanna Howell at the Monthly Meeting of Pembroke. This gives us our first clue-he was a Quaker, and so that may explain some of why he can't be found earlier. Quakers left few footprints, unless they were jailed for their faith. So far, records haven't been found that would indicate this. So he probably lived a very quiet life, and either paid his taxes when due, as some Quakers did, or possibly owed no taxes. He married Susanna Howell, whose parents are believed to be Morgan Howell and Elizabeth Adams, on April 6, 1682. There are 22 names signed as witnesses on the marriage record, including Saara Jones, who may be a relative, and three people with the last name of Howell.
Soon after their marriage, David and Susanna came to America, arriving in Pennsylvania in 1682, so probably part of the William Penn group. Here they found frontier territory to settle, and it appears that they settled in what became Chester County, in what was later termed the "Welsh Tracts". He and Susanna had at least three children-Susanna, Elizabeth, and Alice. That is all we know of him until his death 04 Eleventh, 1707 (Quaker usage), or January 4, 1707, as we would know it. This is noted in the Chester Monthly meeting, and his religion is indicated as "Orthodox" which doesn't seem to have much meaning as applied to this time period in history.
It appears that his wife Susanna died within just a couple of months of David's death. Was there an epidemic, or were these two fifty somethings just worn out? I've seen no hints that there were problems with the native Americans, as the early Quakers did all in their power to treat them peacefully.
Of course there is so much more we'd like to know. David undoubtedly did some farming, but was this his principal occupation? Was he a fur trader, or a merchant of some kind? With no known sons, it would have been hard to expand his landholdings, if he even owned land. Did his daughters work for others in order to help support the family, or was David doing well enough by the time they were born that they didn't need to do that? I'd like to know what land he held, if any, and of course I'd love to know about his life in Wales, and his family further back.
The line of descent is:
David Jones-Susanna Howell
Elizabeth Jones-Isaac Malin
Isaac Malin-Lydia Booth
Sarah Malin-David Ruble
Hannah Ruble-Samuel Dunham
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
David was born in 1653 in either Pembrokeshire or Carmarthenshire, Wales. We know nothing at all of his early life until he shows up in 1682 in Langamin, Carmarthen(shire) Wales, marrying Susanna Howell at the Monthly Meeting of Pembroke. This gives us our first clue-he was a Quaker, and so that may explain some of why he can't be found earlier. Quakers left few footprints, unless they were jailed for their faith. So far, records haven't been found that would indicate this. So he probably lived a very quiet life, and either paid his taxes when due, as some Quakers did, or possibly owed no taxes. He married Susanna Howell, whose parents are believed to be Morgan Howell and Elizabeth Adams, on April 6, 1682. There are 22 names signed as witnesses on the marriage record, including Saara Jones, who may be a relative, and three people with the last name of Howell.
Soon after their marriage, David and Susanna came to America, arriving in Pennsylvania in 1682, so probably part of the William Penn group. Here they found frontier territory to settle, and it appears that they settled in what became Chester County, in what was later termed the "Welsh Tracts". He and Susanna had at least three children-Susanna, Elizabeth, and Alice. That is all we know of him until his death 04 Eleventh, 1707 (Quaker usage), or January 4, 1707, as we would know it. This is noted in the Chester Monthly meeting, and his religion is indicated as "Orthodox" which doesn't seem to have much meaning as applied to this time period in history.
It appears that his wife Susanna died within just a couple of months of David's death. Was there an epidemic, or were these two fifty somethings just worn out? I've seen no hints that there were problems with the native Americans, as the early Quakers did all in their power to treat them peacefully.
Of course there is so much more we'd like to know. David undoubtedly did some farming, but was this his principal occupation? Was he a fur trader, or a merchant of some kind? With no known sons, it would have been hard to expand his landholdings, if he even owned land. Did his daughters work for others in order to help support the family, or was David doing well enough by the time they were born that they didn't need to do that? I'd like to know what land he held, if any, and of course I'd love to know about his life in Wales, and his family further back.
The line of descent is:
David Jones-Susanna Howell
Elizabeth Jones-Isaac Malin
Isaac Malin-Lydia Booth
Sarah Malin-David Ruble
Hannah Ruble-Samuel Dunham
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
Beeks line: Daniel Shed 1620-1708, Immigrant
Daniel Shedd is another in a line of New Englanders of whom little is known. I often wonder about them. For instance, was Daniel the kind of man who would have been the life of the party? Was he a Puritan? If he was, then he probably wasn't the life of the party, but he may have been a very religious man, or he may have been someone who went through the motions for business reasons. He may have been a farmer or a tradesman of some sort, but so far I've found nothing to help indicate his occupation, trade, or even education. That's the bad news.
The good news is that there is a little bit of information about him, anyway. He was born on or before June 25, 1620 in Finchingfield, Braintree, Essex, England, and was baptized on that date as the son of Daniel Shedd and Sarah. Daniel and Sarah had three girls, and Daniel, that we know of. Do you think Daniel might possibly have been just a little bit spoiled? We don't even know for sure when he came to America. He was here by 1643, when he was an early settler of "Brantrey", but he wasn't given land in the first set of grants so either he was young or he wasn't there when the village was started. He did receive land in 1645. He's not found on any immigration lists that I've found, which means that he may (or may not) have come over as an indentured servant and had just gained his freedom in 1643, at the same time that he went to Braintree. (This is just my conjecture, but it makes sense to me.)
He was married by 1646, to Mary Gurney, who seems to have been a daughter of John Gurney, and they had seven children together. Mary died about the time their youngest daughter Sarah was born, in 1658, and Daniel married Elizabeth, maiden name not known, soon after, because the first of four children was born to Daniel and Elizabeth on August 13, 1660. Daniel had the sad situation of seeing at least three of his children die before he did, as young marrieds in the prime of life. One son, his namesake, died of small pox and I've not seen the cause of death of his two daughters.
In 1658, the year his youngest daughter in the first set of children was born and possibly the year his first wife died, he moved from Braintree to Billerica, where he stayed for the remaining 50 years of his life. His family was assigned to live in the main garrison there, during King Philip's War. Billerica was on the frontier and considered a possible target of the native Americans. I'm finding various "alternate facts" about the war, indicating that Billerica did or did not suffer attack, and indicating that the town of about 48 families evacuated to safer locations. Maybe all of the above are true, at different times during the conflict.
Daniel lived a long life and died in Billerica July 27, 1708. Elizabeth survived him. Although we know little of his life, he surely lived a long life in interesting times. He came across the Atlantic as a young boy or young man, made a home out of the wilderness not once but twice, raised two families, likely served in the militia and possibly saw duty during King Philip's War. Even though his name does not survive in very many records, we know that he was a pioneer when that word meant something, and he is a man the family can be proud to honor.
The line of descent is:
Daniel Shedd-Mary Gurney
Eliabeth Shedd-Daniel Pierce
Elizabeth Pierce-Samuel Smith
Shubael Smith-Prudence Fitzrandolph
Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
The good news is that there is a little bit of information about him, anyway. He was born on or before June 25, 1620 in Finchingfield, Braintree, Essex, England, and was baptized on that date as the son of Daniel Shedd and Sarah. Daniel and Sarah had three girls, and Daniel, that we know of. Do you think Daniel might possibly have been just a little bit spoiled? We don't even know for sure when he came to America. He was here by 1643, when he was an early settler of "Brantrey", but he wasn't given land in the first set of grants so either he was young or he wasn't there when the village was started. He did receive land in 1645. He's not found on any immigration lists that I've found, which means that he may (or may not) have come over as an indentured servant and had just gained his freedom in 1643, at the same time that he went to Braintree. (This is just my conjecture, but it makes sense to me.)
He was married by 1646, to Mary Gurney, who seems to have been a daughter of John Gurney, and they had seven children together. Mary died about the time their youngest daughter Sarah was born, in 1658, and Daniel married Elizabeth, maiden name not known, soon after, because the first of four children was born to Daniel and Elizabeth on August 13, 1660. Daniel had the sad situation of seeing at least three of his children die before he did, as young marrieds in the prime of life. One son, his namesake, died of small pox and I've not seen the cause of death of his two daughters.
In 1658, the year his youngest daughter in the first set of children was born and possibly the year his first wife died, he moved from Braintree to Billerica, where he stayed for the remaining 50 years of his life. His family was assigned to live in the main garrison there, during King Philip's War. Billerica was on the frontier and considered a possible target of the native Americans. I'm finding various "alternate facts" about the war, indicating that Billerica did or did not suffer attack, and indicating that the town of about 48 families evacuated to safer locations. Maybe all of the above are true, at different times during the conflict.
Daniel lived a long life and died in Billerica July 27, 1708. Elizabeth survived him. Although we know little of his life, he surely lived a long life in interesting times. He came across the Atlantic as a young boy or young man, made a home out of the wilderness not once but twice, raised two families, likely served in the militia and possibly saw duty during King Philip's War. Even though his name does not survive in very many records, we know that he was a pioneer when that word meant something, and he is a man the family can be proud to honor.
The line of descent is:
Daniel Shedd-Mary Gurney
Eliabeth Shedd-Daniel Pierce
Elizabeth Pierce-Samuel Smith
Shubael Smith-Prudence Fitzrandolph
Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Beeks line: George Jacob, Immigrant 1675-1731
George Jacob is another mystery, although his story begins later in time than some of the other immigrants in the Beeks line. He was born in the Palatinate, which is the southwestern part of Germany, but an exact location still eludes researchers. However, knowing that he came from that region tells us that he probably came to the New world with others from his village and of his religious belief.
He settled with his wife and children in Roxborough (Roxborrow) township, which is now part of Philadelphia but at that time would have been outside of the city. There he died, in 1731.
Most of what we know of George comes from his will, actually. He had married Gerdrew, maiden name unknown, in about 1699. The will tells us he was a weaver by trade, but we don't know if that's what he did in the Old World, too. It's believed that the children were born in the Palatinate but once again we refer to the will for information. It names his wife, Gerdrew, and lists his children as Henry, Jacob, Peter, Catherine, Sarah, Jane, and Matthias. His sons in law were Samuel Kastner, Hans Jerk )Jorg, maybe) Trout, and Uleriah (Ulrich) Rubel. This is from an abstract only; I don't yet have a copy of the actual will. It was written November 28, 1731 and proved January 20, 1732, so the actual date of death is somewhere in that time period.
That is what we know of George Jacob. We don't know when he came to the New World, how he fared after he arrived here, what religion he was, or any of the other dozens of things we'd like to know. I don't think it likely that he was one of those who came through England, because most of those people ended up north of Philadelphia, in Berks County. So he likely made the trip from Rotterdam to Philadelphia, but I'd sure like to find his name on a passenger list!
George is important to the Beeks family because he is one of the relatively few German ancestors this family has.
The line of descent is:
George Jacob-Gerdrew
Jane Jacob-Ulrich Ruble
David Ruble-Sarah Malin
Hannah Ruble-Samuel Dunham
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Actually, when you look at this list, several German lines show up. So maybe George isn't such an anomaly and maybe more can be learned about him!
He settled with his wife and children in Roxborough (Roxborrow) township, which is now part of Philadelphia but at that time would have been outside of the city. There he died, in 1731.
Most of what we know of George comes from his will, actually. He had married Gerdrew, maiden name unknown, in about 1699. The will tells us he was a weaver by trade, but we don't know if that's what he did in the Old World, too. It's believed that the children were born in the Palatinate but once again we refer to the will for information. It names his wife, Gerdrew, and lists his children as Henry, Jacob, Peter, Catherine, Sarah, Jane, and Matthias. His sons in law were Samuel Kastner, Hans Jerk )Jorg, maybe) Trout, and Uleriah (Ulrich) Rubel. This is from an abstract only; I don't yet have a copy of the actual will. It was written November 28, 1731 and proved January 20, 1732, so the actual date of death is somewhere in that time period.
That is what we know of George Jacob. We don't know when he came to the New World, how he fared after he arrived here, what religion he was, or any of the other dozens of things we'd like to know. I don't think it likely that he was one of those who came through England, because most of those people ended up north of Philadelphia, in Berks County. So he likely made the trip from Rotterdam to Philadelphia, but I'd sure like to find his name on a passenger list!
George is important to the Beeks family because he is one of the relatively few German ancestors this family has.
The line of descent is:
George Jacob-Gerdrew
Jane Jacob-Ulrich Ruble
David Ruble-Sarah Malin
Hannah Ruble-Samuel Dunham
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Actually, when you look at this list, several German lines show up. So maybe George isn't such an anomaly and maybe more can be learned about him!
Tuesday, January 24, 2017
Beeks line: Samuel Burgess Immigrant or not?
I'm not sure whether this man is an immigrant, or not, but he's a Beeks ancestor and as such deserves at least a few lines. There is much confusion in on line sources about this man, from his hometown to his parents to whether or not he came to the New World. I am starting to suspect he never arrived here. If he did, he died shortly after his supposed arrival. Much of the confusion comes because he had a son Samuel Burgess, of whom there is an abundance, relatively speaking, of information. I am quite sure that Samuel 1, as I am labeling him, is not the Samuel who was a representative in 1712 and who died in 1714. That Samuel is likely the son of Samuel 1.
But was our Samuel here, or did he intend to come here? I found one reference to a Samuel who owned land already, in 1683, in what became Bucks County. Was that our Samuel 1, or was it Samuel the son? I'm not sure about that. Most of the references in the 1690s I can somewhat confidently say were Samuel the son, not the Beeks ancestor.
Samuel was born in 1623, the son of Daniel and Catherine Burges. His birthplace is generally given as Bristol, England, which is quite possible. Sometimes it is given as Wales, which seems a little less likely but still possible. I haven't found records yet that proved it either way for me. He married, about 1638, Eleanor or Elin Peeres (could be Pierce or Pers or some other variation), and they appear to have had at least three children, Joan, Samuel, and Sarah. Other children are also listed but these must be the children of Samuel the son, as their birth dates are in the 1690's. And of course, one of those grandchildren is named Samuel, also.
It's possible that the land owned in 1683 belonged to Samuel1, and it's possible that he didn't survive to come to Pennsylvania. It's also possible that it belonged to Samuel the son, who apparently arrived late in 1683, with an interesting cargo. Or Samuel 1 could have purchased it in England for Samuel the son. I've not found enough information to make a guess about this yet.
Some trees say that Samuel died as early as 1665, and that Elin or Eleanor died in 1701. Samuel would have died in England is the 1665 date was correct, but Elin is supposed to have died in 1701 in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Is this again a case of mistaken identity, or did she perhaps come to the New World with her son, and she is the true immigrant?
There is nothing about this man that is clear at the present time, or I haven't yet found the proper records and documentation. However, if he didn't come to Pennsylvania he at least instilled in his family and perhaps even his widow the desire to do so. For that, I honor him.
I'd love to hear from someone who is working on this family and perhaps has sorted them out better than I have!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Burgess-Elin Peeres
Joan or Jane Burgess-James Moone
James Moon-Mary Wilsford
Simon Moon-Louretha Humphrey
Jacob Moon-Jane Rees
Thomas Moon-Jean Gray
Margaret Ellen Moon-Owen Traveler Reese
Eliza Matilda Reese-Samuel G Dunham
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Elia Matilda Reese-Samuel G Dunham
But was our Samuel here, or did he intend to come here? I found one reference to a Samuel who owned land already, in 1683, in what became Bucks County. Was that our Samuel 1, or was it Samuel the son? I'm not sure about that. Most of the references in the 1690s I can somewhat confidently say were Samuel the son, not the Beeks ancestor.
Samuel was born in 1623, the son of Daniel and Catherine Burges. His birthplace is generally given as Bristol, England, which is quite possible. Sometimes it is given as Wales, which seems a little less likely but still possible. I haven't found records yet that proved it either way for me. He married, about 1638, Eleanor or Elin Peeres (could be Pierce or Pers or some other variation), and they appear to have had at least three children, Joan, Samuel, and Sarah. Other children are also listed but these must be the children of Samuel the son, as their birth dates are in the 1690's. And of course, one of those grandchildren is named Samuel, also.
It's possible that the land owned in 1683 belonged to Samuel1, and it's possible that he didn't survive to come to Pennsylvania. It's also possible that it belonged to Samuel the son, who apparently arrived late in 1683, with an interesting cargo. Or Samuel 1 could have purchased it in England for Samuel the son. I've not found enough information to make a guess about this yet.
Some trees say that Samuel died as early as 1665, and that Elin or Eleanor died in 1701. Samuel would have died in England is the 1665 date was correct, but Elin is supposed to have died in 1701 in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Is this again a case of mistaken identity, or did she perhaps come to the New World with her son, and she is the true immigrant?
There is nothing about this man that is clear at the present time, or I haven't yet found the proper records and documentation. However, if he didn't come to Pennsylvania he at least instilled in his family and perhaps even his widow the desire to do so. For that, I honor him.
I'd love to hear from someone who is working on this family and perhaps has sorted them out better than I have!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Burgess-Elin Peeres
Joan or Jane Burgess-James Moone
James Moon-Mary Wilsford
Simon Moon-Louretha Humphrey
Jacob Moon-Jane Rees
Thomas Moon-Jean Gray
Margaret Ellen Moon-Owen Traveler Reese
Eliza Matilda Reese-Samuel G Dunham
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Elia Matilda Reese-Samuel G Dunham
Tuesday, January 10, 2017
Beeks line: Jans Pieterse Meet 1660- , Immigrant
Technically this post should be about the father of Jans Pieterse Meet, Pieter Jansen Meet. However, what little I know of Pieter Jansen Meet can be written in two or three sentences. He married Styntje Jacobs in Amersfoort, Utrecht, The Netherlands in 1654 and came to New Netherlands in 1663 with their four children, ranging in age from 19 to 3, and died in 1695 in Hackensack, New Jersey. So far that is what I know of the immigrant father, although I'll be looking for more information about him.
Jans Pieterse Meet (somehow some of the family became Meads) was just three years old when the family came to New Amsterdam on the ship "Rose Tree" in 1663. It may or may not have been a surprise to the family that about a year later, they were no longer living in a Dutch colony, as England took it over in 1664. Still, although the government was now English, the colony and all the settlements around it were composed of Dutch immigrants, and the family would have found friends and possibly relatives already here. There were people to "show them the ropes" of how to live in the New World.
We don't know what trade or occupation Pieter Jansen practiced, but his son Jans Pieterse was a weaver. He may have learned this from his father, or he may have been apprenticed in some fashion to another tradesman. Of course, he also acquired land as he matured. On May 11,1687, he was married to Grietje Mandeville, the daughter of Gilles Jansen de Mandeville and Elsie Hendricks on Manhattan Island. He was listed as a "poll" at Bushwick but by 1692 the new family was living at Flatbush, which appears to be a different location, although both are part of what is now the Brooklyn borough of New York City.
The record of where he lived and when is a bit confusing. He purchased property in 1695, 500 acres in what is now Mountain View, New Jersey. He joined the Dutch Reformed church in Hackensack in 1699. Yet in 1703 he was reported as living in New York City There were at least 6 children born to this couple-Maretje, Jan Janse, Jacob Janse, Christina, Elsje, and Gilles, but it's not clear where each was born. On October 7, 1710 he and three other men purchased 1000 acres in Morris County, N.J. He's believed to have died in New Jersey.
He wrote his will on November 1, 1709 and is thought to have died about 1714. I haven't yet located a copy of the will, but reports are that it wasn't probated until April 27, 1745, if that last date isn't a typographical error. I'd love to find the will, and an inventory, and if the 1745 date is correct, try to figure out why it took almost 30 years for this to go to probate. But for now, that part of the story is a mystery.
The Beeks family has so many interesting lines in it, from German to Dutch to English to French, but for some reason the Dutch lines particularly intrigue me. I'm glad to know this much about this family, even though I wish I knew more! Most of the information in this post came from the information on Geni, a Rootsweb post, and the Mills-Burkholder genealogy. I'd like to find more!
The line of descent is
Jans Pieterse Meet-Grietje Mandeville
Maretje Meet-Peter Demarest
Lea Demarest-Samuel David Demarest
Sarah Demarest-Benjamin Slot
William Lock-Elizabeth Teague
Sally Lock-Jeremiah Folsom
Leah Folsom-Darlington Aldridge
Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Jans Pieterse Meet (somehow some of the family became Meads) was just three years old when the family came to New Amsterdam on the ship "Rose Tree" in 1663. It may or may not have been a surprise to the family that about a year later, they were no longer living in a Dutch colony, as England took it over in 1664. Still, although the government was now English, the colony and all the settlements around it were composed of Dutch immigrants, and the family would have found friends and possibly relatives already here. There were people to "show them the ropes" of how to live in the New World.
We don't know what trade or occupation Pieter Jansen practiced, but his son Jans Pieterse was a weaver. He may have learned this from his father, or he may have been apprenticed in some fashion to another tradesman. Of course, he also acquired land as he matured. On May 11,1687, he was married to Grietje Mandeville, the daughter of Gilles Jansen de Mandeville and Elsie Hendricks on Manhattan Island. He was listed as a "poll" at Bushwick but by 1692 the new family was living at Flatbush, which appears to be a different location, although both are part of what is now the Brooklyn borough of New York City.
The record of where he lived and when is a bit confusing. He purchased property in 1695, 500 acres in what is now Mountain View, New Jersey. He joined the Dutch Reformed church in Hackensack in 1699. Yet in 1703 he was reported as living in New York City There were at least 6 children born to this couple-Maretje, Jan Janse, Jacob Janse, Christina, Elsje, and Gilles, but it's not clear where each was born. On October 7, 1710 he and three other men purchased 1000 acres in Morris County, N.J. He's believed to have died in New Jersey.
He wrote his will on November 1, 1709 and is thought to have died about 1714. I haven't yet located a copy of the will, but reports are that it wasn't probated until April 27, 1745, if that last date isn't a typographical error. I'd love to find the will, and an inventory, and if the 1745 date is correct, try to figure out why it took almost 30 years for this to go to probate. But for now, that part of the story is a mystery.
The Beeks family has so many interesting lines in it, from German to Dutch to English to French, but for some reason the Dutch lines particularly intrigue me. I'm glad to know this much about this family, even though I wish I knew more! Most of the information in this post came from the information on Geni, a Rootsweb post, and the Mills-Burkholder genealogy. I'd like to find more!
The line of descent is
Jans Pieterse Meet-Grietje Mandeville
Maretje Meet-Peter Demarest
Lea Demarest-Samuel David Demarest
Sarah Demarest-Benjamin Slot
William Lock-Elizabeth Teague
Sally Lock-Jeremiah Folsom
Leah Folsom-Darlington Aldridge
Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
Beeks line: Samuel Scullard abt 1616-1647 Immigrant
Samuel Scullard is likely from Abbots Ann, Hamphire, England although as yet it seems that no one has pinpointed his birth or christening record. He is believed to be the son of Richard Scullard, joiner, and his wife, Alice. Richard died in 1617 when Samuel, his second child, was just a baby, which could possibly explain the lack of baptismal records for Samuel. Perhaps his wife was just too overwhelmed or ill to arrange for it.
It appears that Samuel was in New England by 1638, and likely came with Rev. Stephen Bachwiler. He was in Newbury, Massachusetts by February 24,1637/38, because he was fined for not attending a town meeting at eight o'clock in the morning, after having been warned, so he must have been there at least a few weeks by that time. He was referred to as yeoman, meaning a farmer who owned his own land, as opposed to a tenant farmer, or a planter, who may not have actually worked the land he owned. He also was a partner in a water (grist) mill in Newbury, and upon his death his widow's second husband purchased that interest. Newbury is situated at the northeast end of Massachusetts, on the coast, and was also an early site for shipbuilding and tanning, so there was an opportunity to sell to more than just the local farmers.
Samuel married Rebecca Kent, daughter of Richard and Emme Dorothy Shorte in 1641. Some sites say they married in England but this does not appear to be correct. The Kents were already in Newbury and doubtless the couple met and married there. They probably had four children, Mary, Rebecca, Sarah and Samuel although only Mary and Sarah are named in his will. Unfortunately, his will was dated March 27, 1647 and proved July 28, 1647, so Samuel died when he was only about 30 years old. It was a nuncupative will, indicating that likely his death was sudden. He may have been injured, or he may have died of one of the fevers that went the rounds so quickly and so often in colonial times.
His estate was valued at 196 pounds, 4 shillings. Half went to his wife, who remarried soon after Samuel's death, and the other half went to his two daughters but not until 1670, when the daughters were married and of age. Rebecca married John Bishop and died sometime before John's death in 1684.
There is still more research to be done about Samuel. I don't have a good grasp of the land he owned, or of his church life, or whether he held any church or civic positions. However, we do know this much and that's more than we knew when we began this post!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Scullard-Rebecca Kent
Mary Scullard-John Rolfe
Mary Rolfe-Benjamin Dunham
Jonathan Dunham-Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
It appears that Samuel was in New England by 1638, and likely came with Rev. Stephen Bachwiler. He was in Newbury, Massachusetts by February 24,1637/38, because he was fined for not attending a town meeting at eight o'clock in the morning, after having been warned, so he must have been there at least a few weeks by that time. He was referred to as yeoman, meaning a farmer who owned his own land, as opposed to a tenant farmer, or a planter, who may not have actually worked the land he owned. He also was a partner in a water (grist) mill in Newbury, and upon his death his widow's second husband purchased that interest. Newbury is situated at the northeast end of Massachusetts, on the coast, and was also an early site for shipbuilding and tanning, so there was an opportunity to sell to more than just the local farmers.
Samuel married Rebecca Kent, daughter of Richard and Emme Dorothy Shorte in 1641. Some sites say they married in England but this does not appear to be correct. The Kents were already in Newbury and doubtless the couple met and married there. They probably had four children, Mary, Rebecca, Sarah and Samuel although only Mary and Sarah are named in his will. Unfortunately, his will was dated March 27, 1647 and proved July 28, 1647, so Samuel died when he was only about 30 years old. It was a nuncupative will, indicating that likely his death was sudden. He may have been injured, or he may have died of one of the fevers that went the rounds so quickly and so often in colonial times.
His estate was valued at 196 pounds, 4 shillings. Half went to his wife, who remarried soon after Samuel's death, and the other half went to his two daughters but not until 1670, when the daughters were married and of age. Rebecca married John Bishop and died sometime before John's death in 1684.
There is still more research to be done about Samuel. I don't have a good grasp of the land he owned, or of his church life, or whether he held any church or civic positions. However, we do know this much and that's more than we knew when we began this post!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Scullard-Rebecca Kent
Mary Scullard-John Rolfe
Mary Rolfe-Benjamin Dunham
Jonathan Dunham-Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)