Back in December I wrote about wanting to find the descendants of “Betsy’s other children”. Betsy, is of course, Elizabeth (Martinleer Eppinger) Trantham, my 6th great grandmother and wife of Martin Trantham, Jr, my 6th great grandfather. The “other children” are the siblings of my 5th great grandfather, Martin Trantham (III). I’ve decided that having these descendants find me is a lot easier. That is what happened this week when a new DNA matched popped up on Ancestry.com!

In his 1884 letter to the editor, Betsy and Martin’s great great grandson Lewis Peach identified Parmelia Trantham as one of their (other) children. Parmelia married a man by the name of Charles Gray according to Lewis. All true. One of my newest DNA matches on Ancestry.com identifies himself simply as “D.C.”. His 4th great grandmother was Barbara Gray, the daughter of said Charles and Parmelia.

How easy was that?

Now, most folks might not understand the significance of the name “Barbara” but I am not most folks. Being the self-proclaimed expert on all things Betsy Trantham, I know that “Barbara” was the name of Betsy’s mother. Barbara Eppinger, nee Blocker, shows up multiple times in deeds from Cumberland County, North Carolina alongside husband John Eppinger and father Michael Blocker.

Kenfolk: Tranthams
Relation: 1st cousin, 6x removed
Common ancestors: Barbara’s grandparents, Betsy and Martin Trantham, Jr. are my 6th great grandparents

Identifying an elusive ancestor’s FAN club is a genealogical research technique I’ve recently discovered. FAN stands for Friends, Associates and Neighbors. It is used to help break through brick walls. The theory behind the technique is that our ancestor’s friends, associates and neighbors were often family members. Okay, that makes a lot of sense but will it work?

My (least) favorite brick wall is Matilda Jane, my 3rd great grandmother, who married Ulysses Goodger in 1849 or 1850. Her maiden name remains a mystery to me. Without a last name, there is no hope of identifying her parents. Considering I know the identities of some of my 8th and 9th great grandparents on other branches, you can imagine how frustrating this is to be stuck on Matilda Jane.

Nevertheless, I’ve begun the systematic process of identifying Matilda Jane’s FAN club. Let’s review my progress.

F is Friends.Seriously? It’s more like F is for Futile. When I find Matilda Jane’s diary which identifies her BFFs, I’ll come back to F.

A is for Associates. No, A is for some Assh*le who needed a filler between the letters F and N. Good grief. It’s not like Matilda Jane worked in an office.

N is for Neighbors. This is a bit more promising.

In the 1850 census, newlyweds Ulysses (age 19) and Matilda Jane (age 20) were listed between the families of John Daniel and J. F. Riley – neighbors! Could Matilda Jane have been related to either one of them? J. F. is 22 so he’s obviously not her father. And he was born in Georgia whereas Matilda was born in Tennessee. It’s much too soon to rule him out so I’ll have to come back to him.

John Daniel, on the other hand, has my full attention. A 41-year-old male in 1850, he was born in North Carolina. His wife, Nancy, and eight children, however, were born in Tennessee. John is not Matilda’s father. Of that, I am certain. Unbelievably, the names and birth dates of all of his children were engraved onto his tombstone. He left no will when he died in 1860 but court documents confirm the identities of his children and Matilda was definitely not one of them.

But, John, I believe, was likely Matilda’s brother, cousin or uncle. FAN should be FANDOM because DNA Obviously Matters.

Turning to my father’s DNA matches on Ancestry.com, I ran a search for the surname “Daniel” excluding those with the surname “Daniels” with an “s”. JACKPOT! Both my father and my aunt have multiple distant cousins who hail from Daniel (not Daniels) ancestors from North Carolina and Tennessee. One of them is a potential 4th cousin! This is very promising. Perhaps Matilda Jane was born Matilda Jane Daniel. One of the matches hails from a “Matilda Ann Daniel”. Also, promising if Matilda is a family name.

Admittedly, this is a bit far-fetched but Ulysses and Matilda Jane did not name their firstborn son Ulysses, Jr. Instead, they opted for Daniel Alexander. Like I said, it’s a bit far-fetched but I have not found a single male named “Daniel” or “Alexander” from Ulysses’ side of the family. But I have found an Alexander Daniel living in Tennessee in the 1840 census. More research is needed.

Happy Mother’s Day, Matilda Jane Something!

And Happy Mother’s Day as well to my own mother, whose memory inspires me to keep chasing wild geese.

Kenfolk: Tranthams
Relation: 3rd great grandmother
Common ancestors: Work in progress

In my quest to find my long lost cousins, I read a lot of obituaries. And by “a lot”, I mean beaucoup. Every once in a while I’ll come across one with an interesting tidbit that makes it a tad bit more memorable.

Such is the case of the obituary of Harriette Hillyer, my 4th cousin, 1x removed, who died in 2005. Born in Hiawatha, Kansas in 1919, she hails from my father’s Winter branch of the family tree. A mother of four, she and her husband, Henry Theodore Hastings, owned and operated the Perma-Blitz Pest Control Company. That’s an appropriate name for sure but not why I’ll remember Harriette.

In 1951, David Hicks Overmeyer, an artist and Kansas native, was commissioned to paint eight murals for the rotunda of the Kansas State Capitol in Topeka. He selected Harriette to be one of his models. Her likeness was immortalized as the “woman in the covered wagon” per her obituary. When I read this, I expected I would find the face of a pioneer woman who was determined, yet weary. Or, at least hot and thirsty given my own experience with Kansas. I was not expecting sultry. The mural, entitled Westward Ho, hangs in the northwest corner of the first floor.

Click here to see the mural.

In any event, should I ever have the occasion to visit Topeka again, I’ll be sure to pay homage to my Winter cousin whose pioneer lady-likeness graces the Capitol.

Kenfolk: Tranthams
Relation: 4th cousin, 1x removed
Common ancestors: Harriette’s grandmother was Eliza (Winter) Femmer, 2nd cousin to my great grandmother, Minnie (Biesemeyer) Dusenberg. Both Eliza and Minnie are descendants of Anton and Catharina (Bracht) Winter, my 4th great grandparents

References:
https://www.kshs.org/p/kansas-state-capitol-online-tour-westward-ho/16590
http://www.washburn.edu/about/community/mulvane-art-museum/exhibitions/archived/david-hicks-overmyer.html
http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/cjonline/obituary.aspx?n=harriette-hastings&pid=14931656

Bad news awaited Martin Trantham, my 5th great grandfather, when he returned home after his brief sojourn into the Spanish-controlled Natchez District: he had missed the deadline to be compensated for serving in the Revolutionary War. Ouch. Compensation at the time came in the form of land grants since the fledgling former colonies had very few pesos in the coffers. Fight for your country and if we win we’ll give you land (we don’t own). If we lose, you should have fought harder. That was the arrangement.

So, poor Martin, who had missed the deadline, filed a petition with the land-granting authorities in South Carolina in hopes that an exception could be made. Nope. They turned him down on November 17, 1795 on the grounds that his request was “not delivered within the time limited by law.” That must have sucked like a black hole trapped within a bigger and blacker black hole.

Martin’s disappointment was not a singular event. The newly-formed government must have realized that many soldiers had missed the same deadline. So the laws were changed and the former colonies began compensating the former soldiers again – some grants happened as late as 1841. That would explain the land survey order that was (finally) ordered on behalf of Martin Trantham in 1824 – almost thirty years after his petition was turned down. Since Martin had been a private, 640 acres was his bounty. North Carolina – where the survey was ordered – had run out of land by this time so it was granting land in its former western region – Tennessee. That would explain why the original survey order is housed in the Tennessee State Library and Archives in Nashville.

Now, should other Trantham researchers happen upon this blog, how can I be so certain that this Martin Trantham fought in the Revolutionary War and not his father, Martin Trantham, Jr. or some other Martin Trantham? First, his great grandson, Lewis Peach, told us so in his 1884 letter concerning Betsy Trantham’s “real” age. Second, our dear Betsy was the head of her household in 1820 so it wasn’t Martin Trantham, Jr. her husband – he was DEAD in 1824. And it wasn’t his father Martin Trantham, Sr. of the 1783 will (also DEAD) or his half-brother also named Martin Trantham who was a minor in the 1783 will – unless he fought in diapers, it wasn’t him either. Touché.

Kenfolk: Tranthams
Relation: 5th great grandfather
Common ancestors: Martin Trantham was the son of Martin Trantham, Jr. and Elizabeth (Martinleer Eppinger) Trantham, my 6th great grandparents

References:
Ancestry.com. North Carolina and Tennessee, Revolutionary War Land Warrants, 1783-1843 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2013.
Ancestry.com. Revolutionary War Bounty Land Grants [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2006.

Lewis Peach’s letter was reprinted in:
Knight, J. K. (1980). Obituaries from Tennessee Newspapers 1851-1899. Easley, South Carolina: Southern Historical Press, Inc.

One of the Martin Tranthams who made an appearance in Mississippi was a horse thief!

In a report presented to the Senate in 1813 there appeared an entry concerning some disputed land in Natchez, Mississippi. A few Native American tribes were arguing over who had rights to the land. A witness, Nicholas Chatelin, came forth and testified to events that happened about twenty years earlier. This would be about five years after Martin Trantham and his family arrived. The case is a bit convoluted but apparently, the Choctaw allowed James Kirkland and Martin Trantham to farm a “small portion” of the disputed land on the condition that James and Martin maintained the Choctaw’s GUNS. This arrangement lasted about a year and ended abruptly when, according to the witness, Martin Trantham stole a horse from the Choctaws and made his escape. Frankly, I have no idea what this has to do with the land in dispute but I am grateful to Nicholas for mentioning it.

If it actually happened as Nicholas described, it might explain why the Martin Tranthams didn’t stay very long. They made enemies of the Choctaw.

Thus, I have a new theory about the appearance of the Tranthams in Mississippi and their identities. In my previous post, I put forth that this Martin Trantham was the husband of Jane, Massey and Rachel. I think I was partially correct as I’ve discovered new information. It happened that quickly. I now believe both Martin Trantham and his father Martin Trantham, Jr. were likely both in Mississippi, not just the former.

In 1812, the “widow of Martin Trantham” attempted to lay claim to 640 acres of land in Eastern Louisiana (in the Natchez District). Her claim appeared in a report prepared for the House of Representatives. Whoever prepared the report recommended that her claim be denied on the grounds that Martin and his widow never actually lived there. I suspect the Federal Government was attempting to lure settlers further west on the promise of cheap land – but they were required to live on it and farm the land. That probably didn’t happen because a horse was stolen and they had to leave town quickly.

Although the widow’s name appeared as “Elenor” in the report, I believe wholeheartedly that this was likely our dearest Elizabeth Martinleer Eppinger Trantham who was living in Maury County, Tennessee by 1820. Why “Elenor” and not “Elizabeth”? For starters, the entry says that SHE filed affidavits. Not likely. Most women folk couldn’t read or write during this time period so someone filed them on her behalf. And “Elizabeth” became ‘”Elenor” in the process. Let’s face it. How many Martin Tranthams from North Carolina do we think attempted to settle in Mississippi and then returned to South Carolina? It’s probably the same people.

If I am correct, then the horse thief was probably the younger Martin Trantham who was farming the smaller portion of land owned by the Choctaw Indians and not Elenor’s 640 acres. They all arrived in Natchez in 1788 with high hopes of tobacco bumper crops, stayed long enough to stake their claims or steal horses and then returned to “civilization” in South Carolina before moving on into Tennessee.

Let me see if I can summarize what you just read: on two occasions the name “Trantham” came before the honorable and duly-elected members of the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States of America: first, the widow of Martin Trantham attempted to commit fraud claiming rights to land in Mississippi they never actually lived on; and, second, a man named Martin Trantham stole a horse.

The pride is swelling in me.

Kenfolk: Tranthams
Relation: Less puzzling
Common ancestors: Martin Trantham and Martin Trantham, Jr.

References:
Land claims in the eastern district of the Orleans Territory. Communicated to the House of Representatives, January 9, 1812. American State Papers 029, Public Lands Vol. 2, p. 386.
Land claims in Louisiana. Communicated to the Senate, June 22, 1813.  Land claims in Louisiana. Communicated to the Senate, June 22, 1813. American State Papers 029, Public Lands Vol. 2, p. 793.

Herbert R. Trantham, Jr., a distant cousin, wrote a comprehensive history of the Tranthams focusing primarily on the descendants of his ancestor, James Trantham. Herbert puts forth that James was the son of Martin Trantham and his wife “Jane”. And, he wrote that Martin, Jane and James along with brothers Robert and John lived in Kershaw County, South Carolina sometime around 1800. Since James named one of his sons George Martin Trantham, I am inclined to believe that he may be correct.

Herbert also introduced evidence that this particular Martin and his family lived for a brief time in the Natchez District of Mississippi. Huh? This intrigued me so I decided to retrace Herbert’s research footsteps. So, back to the Library of Congress I went in search of the same material Herbert cited in his work.

Sure enough, Martin “Frentham” arrived in Natchez, Mississippi on July 5, 1788 along with his wife and three children. What I did not understand was that the Natchez District was actually controlled by Spain at this time. So, we have the local commandant, Carlos de Grand Pre, to thank for the meticulous records that have survived. He kept a close watch on his former British subjects and their comings and goings. A year after Martin arrived, Carlos kept track of how much tobacco each of his “foreign” planters grew. That is after all, why, I suspect so many farmers flocked to this fertile Spanish-controlled corner of the world – tobacco money! BUT, Martin Trantham was not listed among them.

I agree with Herbert’s conclusion that Martin and his family returned to South Carolina. This, however, begs the question: just who IS this Mississippi Martin Trantham whose wife’s name was “Jane”? And why did they return to South Carolina??? More research is needed.

That said, a theory is emerging. This is NOT a new Martin Trantham as I first believed. Instead, this Martin Trantham is likely the SAME Martin Trantham who ended up in Williamson County, Tennessee and is the son of Martin Trantham, Jr. and Elizabeth Martinleer Eppinger. “Jane” may have been his first wife, followed by “Massey” his second, and, last but not least, Rachel Holladay his third. Men outlived their child-bearing wives quite often those days so it’s not outside the realm of possibility that he had three wives.

Perhaps there were not as many Martins as I first believed. Or at least one fewer. More to come….

 

Kenfolk: Tranthams
Relation: Puzzling for sure
Common ancestors: Martin Trantham – that’s such a cop out!

Reference:
Mississippi Genealogical Exchange, 5 (2), p. 41.

Yes, I believe they must have. I had no idea just how challenging genealogy could be until I started working on the Withers family A YEAR AGO. They schooled me. Maria Trantham, my 3rd great grand aunt, married Elihu Withers in Henry County, Tennessee in 1838. Twelve years later, Elihu and Maria Weathers are still living there according to the 1850 census. They have five children at this point: John, Jesse, James, William and Wiley. Thinking I was off to a great start, I began looking for them in the 1860 census. Finding them should have been relatively easy given Elihu’s unusual first name. So, I looked and looked and looked and looked. And looked again. Hmm. Missing in 1860. Okay, let’s try the 1870 census. Same arduous process and in the end no such luck. 1880? Nope. I have no idea how many weeks I spent trying to find Elihu and Maria in the census records. The challenge is that “Withers” has many spelling variations.

I decided to shelve the Withers family for a few months and come back to them. After all, how could an entire family disappear?

A couple of months ago I finally came back to them. I concluded sadly that Elihu and Maria likely died after the 1850 census was taken and that I needed to stop focusing on them and start focusing on the children. Perhaps they were still living together in the 1860 census.

Sometimes I hate it when I am right. Twenty-one-year-old John Withers is the head of a household in the 1860 census. He and his wife, Angelina, are living in Massac County, Illinois along with John’s siblings Jesse, James and Wiley. Three new siblings who were born after 1850 are living there as well: Martha, Reuben and Joshua. The latter three children were born in Illinois unlike their older siblings who were born in Tennessee. As I suspected Elihu and Maria are absent and likely passed, leaving John to raise his younger siblings. His brother William is also missing.

Although I was both elated and saddened by the discovery, my progress was short-lived. In the 1870 census, not one of them is still living in Massac County. Or the surrounding counties. Or the surrounding states. The only sliver of information I was able to find after the 1860 census record was a marriage record for John Wethers and “Anjaline” Gates in 1858. Good night nurse!

Finding the Withers children in the 1870 census records will be like trying to find needleS in a haystack. A lot can happen in 10 years, thus leaving me to wonder whether these weathered Withers or Wethers or Weathers wandered again.

Kenfolk: Tranthams
Relation: 3rd great grand aunt
Common ancestors: Maria Trantham’s (presumed) parents, Jesse and Sally (Holliday) Trantham, are my 4th great grandparents