RootsChat.Com
Research in Other Countries => United States of America => Topic started by: jettejjane on Saturday 14 March 15 10:54 GMT (UK)
-
Joseph b 1805 England died 1850 Indiana. Married 1830 Elizabeth Ann Davis from Tennessee. Elizabeth later married Hiram Seats.
I think she may also have married Joseph's brother David in 1868.This is what I am looking for. If this is correct, her son Jake(?) killed David 1868. David's son Joel Hume then killed Jake.I have copy of an interview with Joel, he tells of murders, he also names his Step mother as widow Elizabeth Davis. I have just guessed she is Joseph's wife. A Canadian cousin tells me this is correct. However I can't corroborate this.
I also am looking to see if Elizabeth had a son called Jake or anything about her, I believe she died 1882. Her male children with Joseph were, John, Edward, William, George, Andrew Taylor. No Jake. Did she and Hiram have a Jake?
A lot of this is guesswork, can anyone help please.
-
Hi
Have you looked on FS, I can see an 1870 census return in which there is a Hiram SEAT bn Tenessee with wife BETSY aged 68 from Tenesse. Is this the right family ?
claire
-
Hiram Seat and Elizabeth Redman married in 1850 in Indiana, so that may help to give you a timeframe and location for hunting for a possible Jake or Jacob. If he was their son, then he must have been fairly young when he killed David.
-
Hi
To avoid duplication
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=699152.0
claire
-
If a Canadian Cousin tells you this is correct, then the Canadian Cousin must have the proof to back it up - otherwise it is hearsay ???
Sandra
-
Hi
To avoid duplication
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=699152.0
claire
Sorry guys! I didn't realise I had been down this road before. Didn't mean to waste your time.
No my Canadian cousin does not seem to have proof. Or the proof I have. Have access to her tree and just finished going through everything on the American branch. Few things I don't agree with. I will not add anything to my tree unless 100% with docs to back up. I have purchased lots from the States and have many pages from Baptist registers on my Redman s. She has one person dying 1880's and appearing on 1900 census. Then another died 1930 is on 1940 census. Another is on census, Race Black then in Army Race White! I will mail her later about these finds, I did warn her I was going through it.
I am not sharing my doc' think I have given too much, does that sound bad. She questioned a death that she guessed? then asked what proof I had, all I said was it was from Baptist Reg. I am not sure where she gets into from. Every day I get a mail from ancestry to say more people been added, she is a very fast worker :o
This is a challenge ;D Thanks for replies.
I suppose Jake could be a son from another marriage of Hiram. Yes Betsy could be Elizabeth.
-
If she is so fast, then she may just be copying and pasting from other trees without checking anything. Good thing that you are double checking everything before accepting into your tree.
-
This is no great surprise to you Jane, you have known the information from the cousin was "suspect" and tree information always needs checked - so may people just copy information without checking - there have been many threads from frustrated RootsChatters about authenticity of information ancestry trees ::)
Have a vague recollection of looking for a previous marriage for Hiram and or children and never found anything.
Sandra
-
This is no great surprise to you Jane, you have known the information from the cousin was "suspect" and tree information always needs checked - so may people just copy information without checking - there have been many threads from frustrated RootsChatters about authenticity of information ancestry trees ::)
Have a vague recollection of looking for a previous marriage for Hiram and or children and never found anything.
Sandra
Sandra I always print out these threads when they come to an end. No nothing was found on Hiram.
One thing has just struck me, I hope she never comes in here and sees what I have said about her! Oops ;D
I find the American branch very interesting but have to walk away from it every now and then. That's when I lose track of where I got too with my questions.
By the way how do I resurrect an old thread to avoid duplication? I assumed today's question was a new one. I have a lot to learn, hope you will all be patient with me. I need your help ;D
Jane
-
One way of dealing with a new question which may have some overlap with an old topic is:
- Mark the previous topic as completed
- Put a link to and brief explanation of the previous topic in your first post on the new topic
-
Sandra,
just had my daily ancestry mail! More info has been added to our tree!!!!!
Thanks Lynda will try and do that in future.
Jane :D
-
If it helps - these are some of your USA topics on the Redmans - hope it helps having the links in one place. ;)
Edward Redman Emigrated to Indiana
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=649020.0
Redmans - Posey Indiana
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=697216.0
Seeking Father of Edward Redman
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=650793.0
Help Obtaining Newspaper Article
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=685421.0
Indiana
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=699152.0
Sandra
-
If it helps - these are some of your USA topics on the Redmans - hope it helps having the links in one place. ;)
Shall I mark them completed and start again next time?
I work mainly on kindle at weekends not sure if that can cope with adding links. I do research at work on work PC. Even then not sure about adding lots links. Quite a novice with all this. Lack confidence as well.
Jane ???
-
If you enquiry is related to a topic that has already been mentioned - its best to use that link and then people can read about your enquiry all in one place, instead of jumping from thread to thread. For some reason the boards have been full of duplication of late, not sure if that's because there are fewer moderators and so much for them to do, that no one is able tidy things up.
Sandra ;)
-
Sandra,
Next time I have a question about American branch I go back into one of those threads and carry on?
Looking at the links you gave i see a moderator put them together.
Sorry I really am trying to understand, I am only thick when I get in here-honest ;D i don't think I am cut out for this. Perhaps time to throw towel in. That comment born out of pure frustration and not understanding chat rooms.
Jane ???
-
Please don't let this put you off Jane. Don't give up.
You are not the only one who has doubts when they want to ask a new question about a subject they have addressed before. I have tried tacking it on the end of an existing topic and got no interest at all. This is why I suggested that it might make sense to shut down the previous topics and put in a link to them with a brief explanation. There may be no right way or wrong way to do it. If you are unsure about whether your post is ok you could ask a moderator for advice by hitting the report to moderator button and asking them to consider whether to leave it as a separate post or integrate it with an earlier one.
-
Please don't let this put you off Jane. Don't give up.
It has put me off a bit. So think I will back off. I don't understand chatroom etiquette. All this mentioning what you have asked before so it doesn't confuse means to me that everyone will remember what replies they have given me ftom 3 years ago. I don't expect that at all. I can't remember what happened last week. I know what I mean but I may have written that wrong. I still think my new (or not) topics are different questions about same family. Beam me up Scottie!
Confused of Arundel :o
Jane x
-
Well I certainly read it as a different question which was worth researching. I may not have paid much attention to it if you had hung it under an existing title.
Please don't let this stop you from staying as a rootschatter and asking us more questions.
-
Sorry - which question hasn't been answered - I'm confused :-\
Sandra
-
Me too!!!
-
Hello Confused of Arundel ;D
It's a difficult problem - as Sandra says there have been a lot of duplicated threads lately, but these are mostly people asking a question and posting it on two or three boards at the same time, not people just seeking new information about the same people.
If I were you, if you need new information, I would first check back to see if and where I have asked a question about these people. You can find posts by looking at your profile or by using the seach facility. Once I'd done that, and was sure that my question hadn't already been answered, I would then start a new thread. However, you must mention that there is already a thread about them and put a link back to that thread so that people can see what has already been found. You could just continue the old thread, but, if others are like me, I tend not to look at threads that are already several pages long.
As Craclyn says, don't give up, one day it will all fall into place.
-
Hello Confused of Arundel ;D
It's a difficult problem - as Sandra says there have been a lot of duplicated threads lately, but these are mostly people asking a question and posting it on two or three boards at the same time
Jan,
Thanks. Giving up now ??? No not research just asking here for a while.
Jane
-
To make it easier, if you're asking about the same person as in an existing thread, just add a new post to that thread. You can easily find all your old posts about a particular surname by clicking on Search, adding the surname in the box that says "Search for" and your username where it says "By user".
-
Hello Confused of Arundel ;D
It's a difficult problem - as Sandra says there have been a lot of duplicated threads lately, but these are mostly people asking a question and posting it on two or three boards at the same time
Jan,
Thanks. Giving up now ??? No not research just asking here for a while.
Jane
Jane - that is a really disappointing response - no one on here has done anything but try to help you and be understanding towards you. Yet your still throwing your toys out of the pram - such a shame. :o :o
Regards
Sandra
-
Hello Confused of Arundel ;D
It's a difficult problem - as Sandra says there have been a lot of duplicated threads lately, but these are mostly people asking a question and posting it on two or three boards at the same time
Jan,
Thanks. Giving up now ??? No not research just asking here for a while.
Jane
Jane - that is a really disappointing response - no one on here has done anything but try to help you and be understanding towards you. Yet your still throwing your toys out of the pram - such a shame. :o :o
Regards
Sandra
Sandra, let me put record straight. I am not disputing the help and kindness of you and others. It has be fantastic and I am always quick to acknowledge all help with my appreciation and thanks.
-
So no need to add hurtful comments like that for no reason.
Sandra
-
So no need to add hurtful comments like that for no reason.
Sandra
Sandra, it was not my intention to be hurtful and I apologise to everyone if that is what you thought. I just thought I needed to understand things in here a bit more before posting anything else. I have nothing but praise for this site and help I get.
I don't think anything will be gained by continuing this. Your comment also hurt me. Throwing toys out of pram was not what I was doing. Taking a break through sheer frustration of not getting it right is all I meant.
Please accept my apologies, can we move on?
Jane
-
Thank you Jane. Yes, lets move on please, life's to short. Always willing to help but you know that already ;D
Not a wine drinker but hubby has a bottle of McGuigan open so I might just have a splash - have one yourself.
Have a great night and remainder of the weekend. ;)
Best Regards
Sandra ;D
-
Thank you Jane. Yes, lets move on please, life's to short. Always willing to help but you know that already ;D
Not a wine drinker but hubby has a bottle of McGuigan open so I might just have a splash - have one yourself.
Have a great night and remainder of the weekend. ;)
Best Regards
Sandra ;D
Yes I know you will help you have done a lot for me. You are great on the American stuff.
I have a glass of red by my side, I am a wine drinker!
See you around.
Jane
-
All the best
Hugs
Sandra ;D
-
I sat down this morning and sorted out all the info I have from this and other threads. No closer to finding Jake! But with help of ancestry subs have many docs to print. Think things are coming together. I need some more input so if it's ok i will add to this thread?
Have put research to bed for while but in the words of Arnie "I'll be back"
Thanks for all your replies
Jane
-
Definitely. When your ready Jane, always willing to help if we can.
All the best
Sandra ;D
-
Have had a revelation. Joseph and Elizabeth had a son John. So in US John is called Jack, Jack could be Jake. Have found 2 Johns that fit the bill. But only one in the running . So I am seeking John to rule him out or put him in the frame.
-
That's the John Redman born 1838 ???
Sandra
-
Do you see the anc tree with a Edward "Edwin" "Elijiah" John Redman born 20 Nov 1837 in Posey, Indiana, passed away 25 January 1913 in Posey, Indiana.
Married to Margaret Greathouse born 23 March 1843 in Indiana, passed away 17 March 1874 in Posey, Indiana.
They have Edwin as the son of Joseph Redman and Elizabeth Davis.
Interestingly use the middle name Taylor for one of the children - George Taylor Redman born 1868
https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/2:2:93KD-8ZN
http://david.bottomley.us/gen/eer.html
Sandra
-
Sandra,
Yes John 1838 just a thought.
Missed the Edward marriage had his death as 1913. There is an Andrew Taylor as well!
I love the way they keep all the marriages within a few families. Although I suppose with Posey being a new township there were not that many . The Redmans even married within the Redman family!
I have a huge list of look ups tomorrow. Edward or whatever his name is on it. Hope I am not busy at work!
Thanks for your interest as usual it is much appreciated.
Jane
-
So Edward or Edwin could be John ??? Hmmm - no they are both together on that 1850 census ::)
Sandra
-
Andrew Taylor b 1847 Edwards brother.
Sorry hadn't looked at second link. That is fantastic what a distinctive looking guy ::)
No John is another brother I think.
-
Just to say thanks to all who replied to this thread. Wow I have found out so much. My American line is coming on so well. It is turning out a lot easier than I anticipated.Especially now I have ancestry subs. I am up to present day on so many lines. Now what? Do I try and find the living? Would they be interested?
Happy I did it on my own. But a big thank you to Sandra who helped me at the start when I was a novice. And obviously to all you who showed an interest in my many posts.
I have enjoyed getting to know you all and the help and friendship has been great.
Jane
-
I am adding to this post. Hope I am doing right thing.
Have done well on original question. Have returned to Joseph's father Edward and a massive brick wall. He emigrated 1820 to Indiana from UK with family. I found his 3 sons Joseph, Edward and David, however cannot find mention of his 4 daughters anywhere. It is driving me mad. They were Mary1808
, Jesse 1811, Martha 1815 and Elisha 1816. I have tried ancestry to no avail. Also there is still no sign of Edwards wife Jane in U.S..
I toyed with idea that Jane (and daughters)died on the voyage, or she died shortly after she reached America, or h.e left her or did away with her. I have contacted various sources in America but they cannot find her anywhere. Maybe Jane and daughters didn't go to Indiana when they arrived! Changed names and settled elsewhere.
I don't know where to look now for all these elusive females.
-
Sometimes there are no records to be found. Females in particular are very difficult to follow, especially when they marry and there are no marriage records to consult. Many records have been destroyed one way or another, for example fires and the civil war destroyed many.
Examples of records lost in Indiana.
http://www.raogk.org/county-facts/indiana/#courthouse
Sandra
-
Thanks for link Sandra very interesting and such a shame. Have read and 're read and think maybe mine were in a court house that survived. Would census records be stored there? I have 1930
ensus records for Edward snr/jnr? and Joseph. Unfortunately only the males are named, the rest of residents are under catorgories of age and sex. The sisters could be living with them as some of age ranges fit. But that is massive straw clutching.
I will keep at it ;D
-
Thanks for link Sandra very interesting and such a shame. Have read and 're read and think maybe mine were in a court house that survived. Would census records be stored there? I have 1930
ensus records for Edward snr/jnr? and Joseph. Unfortunately only the males are named, the rest of residents are under catorgories of age and sex. The sisters could be living with them as some of age ranges fit. But that is massive straw clutching.
I will keep at it ;D
Wishful thinking Jane. Many records were destroyed during the Civil War. Indiana played an important roll in the American Civil War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_in_the_American_Civil_War
Presume you mean 1830 Census ???
Enumerators of the 1830 and 1840 census were asked to include the following categories in the census: Name of head of household - number of free white males and females in age categories 0 to 5, 5 to 10, 10 to 15, 15 to 20, 20 to 30, 30 to 40, 40 to 50, 50 to 60, 60 to 70, 70 to 80, 80 to 90, 90 to 100, over 100 - the name of a slave owner and the number of slaves owned by that person - the number of male and female slaves and free "coloured" persons by age categories - the number of foreigners (not naturalized) in a household; the number of deaf, dumb, and blind persons within a household - and town or district, and county of residence.
Have you checked what is available for the girls on Indiana Marriages
https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1674830
-
Wishful thinking Jane. Many records were destroyed during the Civil War. Indiana played an important roll in the American Civil War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_in_the_American_Civil_War
Presume you mean 1830 Census ???
Enumerators of the 1830 and 1840 census were asked to include the following categories in the census: Name of head of household - number of free white males and females in age categories 0 to 5, 5 to 10, 10 to 15, 15 to 20, 20 to 30, 30 to 40, 40 to 50, 50 to 60, 60 to 70, 70 to 80, 80 to 90, 90 to 100, over 100 - the name of a slave owner and the number of slaves owned by that person - the number of male and female slaves and free "coloured" persons by age categories - the number of foreigners (not naturalized) in a household; the number of deaf, dumb, and blind persons within a household - and town or district, and county of residence.
Have you checked what is available for the girls on Indiana Marriages
https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1674830
Sorry yes 1830 ::) tried everything I can think of with girls but will keep 're-checking.
I am getting really into this American branch, it is a challenge. There are lots of trees on ancestry with info that fits some of my Rellies but no proof I can see.
Thanks for replies.
Jane ;D
-
Just being repetitive, as it has been discussed loads on this site over the years but all information on ancestry tree's is not correct and the burden of proof is with the researcher.
Sandra
-
Hi Jane
I agree with Sandra, it doesn't matter how many online trees show the same thing, it still doesn't mean that they are correct. They could all be copied from the one tree that is incorrect. The only way to be 100% sure is to get birth, marriage and death certificates.
That is interesting, Sandra, about so many records being destroyed, and certainly explains why it is hard to track people.
-
Just being repetitive, as it has been discussed loads on this site over the years but all information on ancestry tree's is not correct and the burden of proof is with the researcher.
Sandra
Yes Sandra, I realise that! You know why. I have researched info from trees further and found it incorrect. Jane had fingers burnt-ouch!!! I don't take anything at face value. Learning all the time.
Jan, it is sad about the records. It does indeed explain a lot.
-
Quote - I am getting really into this American branch, it is a challenge. There are lots of trees on ancestry with info that fits some of my Rellies but no proof I can see.
I would have said there were a lot less tree's on the Redman's than when you first enquired back in 2013. Can't say I've ever seen anything on the Redman girls though.
Sandra
-
I would have said there were a lot less tree's on the Redman's than when you first enquired back in 2013. Can't say I've ever seen anything on the Redman girls though.
Sandra
There are a few on Redman men and women. Maybe not as many now ;)
I looked on the family search link. First name looks possible for Mary. Do I have to be member or is it part of ancestry?
-
When I mentioned the Redman "girls" - I was referring to Mary 1808 Jesse 1811 Martha 1815 and Elisha 1816. Are you saying you have come across info on these 4 ???
FamilySearch is a genealogy organization operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Family search and Ancestry are separate. You can register for free at Family Search to create yourself a free account. Very often they have a record but no transcription available.
You can read about Family Search on this link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FamilySearch
Sandra
-
When I mentioned the Redman "Łgirls" - I was referring to Mary 1808 Jesse 1811 Martha 1815 and Elisha 1816. Are you saying you have come across info on these 4 ???
Sandra
Sorry Sandra I don't explain very well. No I meant the next generation ladies. I can be hard work at times can t I ;D As dad used to say "like pulling hens teeth".
I will register with family search.
Thanks for your patience. I appreciate you and Jan replying and staying with me.
Jane
-
You don't even have to register to use FamilySearch. It is a great resource and often one that is the first port of call for a lot of people on here. I think it is better than it used to be as it shows records from Parish registers, but at one time it showed submitted records as well, so needed to be treated carefully. It links up with Find My Past and often to see the connected images you have to either have a subscription or by credits for that site.
-
You don't even have to register to use FamilySearch. It is a great resource and often one that is the first port of call for a lot of people on here. I think it is better than it used to be as it shows records from Parish registers, but at one time it showed submitted records as well, so needed to be treated carefully. It links up with Find My Past and often to see the connected images you have to either have a subscription or by credits for that site.
Don't mind buying credits , no more subs at moment. Will have a good look tomorrow. Think the Mary I saw could be one of my ladies, fingers crossed.
Thanks :D
-
Well that is intriguing - do you want to share at all ?
Sandra
-
Well that is intriguing - do you want to share at all ?
Sandra
Of course, the link you sent to family search. Had Mary married 1826 Simmons Mills. Though I mentioned it, sorry.
-
May not be my Mary obviously will look into it.
I seem to spend my life in here apologising, I am doing many things at once, cooking roast, but want to reply and acknowledge help and miss things.