Caleb
Ebenezer Russell is my great*4 grandfather. He was born in 1775 and died in
1830. But there are few records available for this illiterate farmer who was
born and died in Dutchess County, NY. For his grandfather, Robert, and his
father, John, we are fortunate to have their wills available in order to get
the names of their children.
Robert
in his 1811 will named his children as Abijah, Jane [Utter], Margaret, James,
Elizabeth [Barrett], and John (Jane and Elizabeth were already married).
John
in his 1833 will named his children as David, Levi, Lee, Abijah, Robert W,
Isaac, William, John, Phebe [Wixson], Abigail, Sophiah [Robinson], and Naomi
[Ganong]. Caleb Ebenezer is not named as he had already died in 1830,
predeceasing his father. However, because he lived next door to John in the
1800 census we can be pretty sure that John was his father.
By
1810, Caleb and his family had moved from Fishkill to Dover where he can be
found in the 1810 and 1820 census. He died in 1830.
In
looking at the 1800, 1810, and 1820 census records we can see that he had
several children. In 1800 he had one daughter age <10. In the 1810 census
Caleb has 5 children, two boys <10, two girls <10 and one girl 10-15. In
the 1820 census he has one boy <10, two girls <10, one girl 10-15, and
one 16-25. So, how do we fill in the missing names?
One
of the boys is my ancestor Silas. I also have a confirmed DNA connection for
Sarah/Sally through whom I have a DNA match to Robin Mason farther down her
tree. Through other research, I believe that the first girl was Eliza who died
in 1810, and the other boy may be Edward who was born in 1810. But that still
leaves several unknowns. But where do we look?
The
key turns out to be following Caleb’s wife, Parmea, as she lived a long life –
and longer past the 1850 census where the names of everyone in the house were
listed. She evidently spent most of her later years living with her children,
still in Dutchess County. We can find her in the 1850, 1860, and 1870 census.
In
1850 she is living with Jane Harrington, who appears to be widowed and has her
7yo son Henry living with her.
In
1860 she is still living with Jane and Henry, but Jane's last name is now
Miller. The three of them are with an apparent blended family which includes
Nathan Sprague and his wife Dimmie F (translation software in ancestry has it
as "Dennis", but this person is a female). Nathan and Dimmie have 3
children - Jane, Mary, and Susan. There are other family trees which confirm
this. The oldest, Jane, has apparently recently married George Townsend who is
also living with them (she is 18 and he is 24). The youngest two have been
incorrectly been given the last name of Townsend but it is actually still
Sprague. Dimmie (short for Dimeous) is, according to other sources, also a
daughter of Parmea (and Caleb).
In
1870 she is living with Martin and Sally Etts in CT. As noted above,
Sarah/Sally is one of her known children through whom I have a DNA match.
Parmea
died in 1872 and "wife of Caleb Russell" is listed on her gravestone.
That
leaves only one daughter to be accounted for. I was recently contacted by someone
whose great*3 grandmother was Thankful Russell, born in Fishkill, NY in 1804.
Does she also fit?
If
she was born in 1804, she would have been one of the two females <10 in 1810
and the female 16-25 in 1820. We don't
know exactly when Caleb moved from Fishkill to Dover, only that it's between
1800 and 1810, so he certainly could have still been in Fishkill in 1804.
Having
parsed through all of this, we end up with the family of Caleb and Parmea as
follows:
-
Eliza, b. 1793, d. 1810 (we have a death record for her in late 1810 with
father’s name as Caleb)
-
Sarah, b. 1800
-
Silas, b. 1803
-
Thankful, b. 1804
-
Edward, b. 1810
-
Jane, b. 1814
-
Dimeous, b. 1817
This
matches all the census records as follows:
-
1800 - F<10 (Eliza)
-
1810 - M<10 (Silas, Edward), F<10 (Sarah, Thankful), F10-15 (Eliza - who
dies later that year)
-
1820 - M<10 (Edward), F<10 (Jane, Dimeous), F10-15 (Thankful),
F16-25(Sarah)
[Silas
is no longer at home in 1820, probably boarding with someone for whom he is
working as is typically the case back then, Edward is <10 in both 1810 and
1820 as he is a newborn in 1810, but is not yet 10 when 1820 census taken -
dates that the census was taken are not listed on the form, but I've seen this
kind of thing before]
It
took a few hours to pull this all together, including tracing the next few
generations of each of the new children to look for any inconsistencies.
No comments:
Post a Comment