Some looking into the family John (~1750) grew up in and I've learned a few things.
I had originally counted him as tenth out of eleven, but I knew that having two Williams who lived was unlikely, and very soon I found a bogus Hugh.
But it turns out there was a Hugh that qualified, and he could have been one of the four who landed in New York, and he could even be the one they referred to as "ending up in South Carolina," though in fact, he was a Revolutionary War soldier, went down there, had a child, but ended up back in Pennsylvania. More research necessary.
Another interesting finding was a brother Thomas who was in Cecil County Maryland and even died there. This answers the question of why John and family would moove to Cecil County of all places when it seemed he had relatives in Pennsylvania, and even had been in Carlisle if not other places. One would expect him to go where relatives were, and when he disappeared to disappear off into where there are other relatives, either his or Geneva Jane's.
There were four from the Veach-Moore tree, all oddly different from the rest, and I finally concluded they were falsely put into John's family because their father Willliam either had the same birthdate (1711) or was given it in mistake. I don't think Jean Campbell is a second wife so much as a separate wife of a separate William. Interestingly of those four one died in Jamaica and two died in India; the fourth, their Thomas, stayed in Scotland and was known as Thomas Esq. (that Esq. is sometimes given to ours - similar birthdates). The Thomases are getting confused, as are the Johns and Williams. But a family is really likely to have only one of each, unless one died really early, and those don't seem to even appear at all.
So naturally I'm looking for the ones who ended up staying in the USA and dying there, as those are the ones who would have a farm by the early 1800s where John and Geneva Jane could go if and when they got sick of Cecil County. Nathaniel came over, and ended up in Ohio. James died in York, PA but there's some question about him because some of his descendants came over later - perhaps there are two Jameses. Perhaps my parents attributed one James to our family that was not the right one, or, they got death places wrong. More. research necessary.
A William born 1745 ended up in Scotchtown New York and therefore could be the one referred to by the Beaver Co. Historical piece that confidently said one ended up in Goshen New York. Those could be close enough.
So there are still questions to answer here, but we could take that tract by the BCHS to be mostly accurate or at least representing the best it could the knowledge that the New Castle Wallaces were carrying down through the generations.
Eventually I'll get the best of my judgement down on a piece of paper so that it could be published. There is a lot of variation in years born, but more alarmingly, in who was their mother. I have no problem believing that our William had more than one wife, but he probably didn't have two or three at once, or go back and forth, etc. On the contrary what happens is that people attribute certain mothers to people as a reasonable guess and it goes down as fact so that it appears there's a string of different mothers. Or perhaps they just misspell them. It's an important mystery to unfold.
So far this represents by best idea of the kids of our William (1711), disregarding who was alleged by whom to be each one's mother; that's for another day.
Jane Wallace b. 1730
Agnes Wallace b. 1732
Robert Wallace b. 1737
James Wallace b. 1739 d. 1778 York, PA
William Wallace b. 1745 d. 1832 Scotchtown NY
Hugh Wallace b. 1749 d. 1820 Lawrence Co. PA
Nathaniel Wallace b. 1742 d. 1820 Fox, OH
John Wallace b. 1749/1750 d. ?
Thomas Wallace b. 1751 d. 1812 Cecil County MD
Lillias Wallace b. 1763
Notice that after two girls, they had seven boys in a row. John is now eighth out of ten. None of them, yet, ended up in Northern Ireland, though it's clear that some like John were there for a little while.
Thursday, May 29, 2025
Wednesday, May 28, 2025
Most vexing problems
After looking into this family in this era for a while, I've run aground on a few recurring problems. First, the background: Wallaces came to the USA, particulary Pennsylvania, by the hundreds in this era, and in many cases documentation is thin. If we have no documentation of their death, do we assume they went back? Or were buried on the hilltop behind the farm? Or their death was one of the hundreds of others with the same name that died somewhere in PA or nearby in that era? It's hard to say.
One very positive account of those early days comes from the History of Beaver Falls, and was copied here on this blog. At first, when I found out that James also had gone back, and there seemed to be no such Hugh, I figured this entire post was bogus and dismissed it. But now that I know that it's from Beaver Falls, I surmise that it was probably gotten from the family account of young Charles, a brother of one of the great grandfathers, and includes what people knew at the time, exaggerated or not. Some other genealogists in the family (I have now perused more trees) have worked from there and simply found the four brothers that they thought were the right ones. In one tree I found a Hugh that was born just a year or so from John; the Hugh could also be an older brother's son; these guys actually landed and settled before John did.
It makes sense to accept as much of the story as possible. If John married and had a William before returning and marrying Geneva Jane in Scotland, there is no record of that William, or of his grandparents, or of the marriage, or of the wife. Nevertheless it could have happened that way, and there could be people in Carlisle that I simply didn't know about. Of the arrivals in New York, one has it 1770 and one has it 1774, with the second one documented; I may try to track down this alleged documentation, and the earlier date would make more sense if he were to have time to go back and marry Geneva Jane at any of the dates that are often given for that.
By far the most vexing problem is what happened to the family after arriving in Cecil county. There is no documentation of death for either John or Geneva Jane. Both John Jr. and Robert seem to have ended up in PA, John on his way to OH, Robert marrying a New Castle girl and going to Beaver Falls. There were two daughters in the family who could have stuck with them to the end, or followed them if they moved, but there is no record of either of those happening. It would make sense that they became disillusioned with Cecil County and decided to track down one of their relatives up in PA where there were already better established farms. Nathaniel and Hugh maybe? James or William? Maybe I'm missing something, one who latched on in some visible way somewhere, but the only thing I can come up with is Geneva Jane's sister who clearly made it in Wallace Run, and would provide a shelter and a place for someone named Mary Wallace or Jane Wallace to disappear or marry into another family. My only problem with that theory is that if John or Geneva Jane died there, surely we'd know. The identification of Butler as his death location seems to be from another John, one who actually lived there.
The most repeated death date for Geneva Jane is 1844, which would have made her 100, or almost 100. That alone would make her a rock star in that era. But both Geneva and Jane reappear down the genealogy trees, so I surmise that she was a well respected family member, and probably mother of John and Robert, in spite of a tree that implies she wasn't. At least Charles, and probably most of his family, believed she was too. It is not hard to believe step-fathers, step-mothers etc. in this era as people didn't go long unmarried if they could avoid it; life was tough out in the mountains of PA. And half the time, if they married a Wallace, they might not even be related.
One very positive account of those early days comes from the History of Beaver Falls, and was copied here on this blog. At first, when I found out that James also had gone back, and there seemed to be no such Hugh, I figured this entire post was bogus and dismissed it. But now that I know that it's from Beaver Falls, I surmise that it was probably gotten from the family account of young Charles, a brother of one of the great grandfathers, and includes what people knew at the time, exaggerated or not. Some other genealogists in the family (I have now perused more trees) have worked from there and simply found the four brothers that they thought were the right ones. In one tree I found a Hugh that was born just a year or so from John; the Hugh could also be an older brother's son; these guys actually landed and settled before John did.
It makes sense to accept as much of the story as possible. If John married and had a William before returning and marrying Geneva Jane in Scotland, there is no record of that William, or of his grandparents, or of the marriage, or of the wife. Nevertheless it could have happened that way, and there could be people in Carlisle that I simply didn't know about. Of the arrivals in New York, one has it 1770 and one has it 1774, with the second one documented; I may try to track down this alleged documentation, and the earlier date would make more sense if he were to have time to go back and marry Geneva Jane at any of the dates that are often given for that.
By far the most vexing problem is what happened to the family after arriving in Cecil county. There is no documentation of death for either John or Geneva Jane. Both John Jr. and Robert seem to have ended up in PA, John on his way to OH, Robert marrying a New Castle girl and going to Beaver Falls. There were two daughters in the family who could have stuck with them to the end, or followed them if they moved, but there is no record of either of those happening. It would make sense that they became disillusioned with Cecil County and decided to track down one of their relatives up in PA where there were already better established farms. Nathaniel and Hugh maybe? James or William? Maybe I'm missing something, one who latched on in some visible way somewhere, but the only thing I can come up with is Geneva Jane's sister who clearly made it in Wallace Run, and would provide a shelter and a place for someone named Mary Wallace or Jane Wallace to disappear or marry into another family. My only problem with that theory is that if John or Geneva Jane died there, surely we'd know. The identification of Butler as his death location seems to be from another John, one who actually lived there.
The most repeated death date for Geneva Jane is 1844, which would have made her 100, or almost 100. That alone would make her a rock star in that era. But both Geneva and Jane reappear down the genealogy trees, so I surmise that she was a well respected family member, and probably mother of John and Robert, in spite of a tree that implies she wasn't. At least Charles, and probably most of his family, believed she was too. It is not hard to believe step-fathers, step-mothers etc. in this era as people didn't go long unmarried if they could avoid it; life was tough out in the mountains of PA. And half the time, if they married a Wallace, they might not even be related.
Tuesday, May 27, 2025
A much wider picture than I'd imagined has come as a result of the Veach/Moore tree, which made several claims documented in the previous post. It is possible that William Wallace married twice, and had as many as the seventeen or so children that come from adding up what this tree and the others have provided John Sr. also could have married twice, and Geneva Jane could be the first, and not the mother of some of our key players. And finally John Jr. could also have married twice, and done some things before ending up in Ohio farming.
Some things lead me to believe that John Jr., our own great=great-great uncle, was not the father of all those Wallace children in Washington County. In fact I found a John Wallace whose ancestors were from Antrim (in Northern Ireland, but nowhere near Londonderry), and he had a birthdate of 1750, and a death date of 1808 in Butler PA; these were borrowed by followers of our John until many people had assumed, and written in, a birthdate of 1750 and a death date of 1808 Butler PA.
But on reflection I concluded that we know way too little about our John, who doesn't even have a middle name; for his birthdate the best we could come up with is ~1750, and I for one would not take away a ~ squiggly if it implied I knew something which I don't. The John we know did seem to occupy a house with a wife and six children in 1800; many have said he had an older child (1773/4) William who would not be in that house probably, but who nevertheless has disappeared much like John and Geneva Jane did. I've found death dates for all of them that are widely various; one claimed that Geneva Jane lived to be 100. But there is no clear trail, in Cecil County or anywhere else, that would lead me to believe she lived out fifty or sixty more years there. If anything, they more likely both went back, or went up into Pennsylvania somewhere, where they both seemed to have relatives.
The place was crawling with Wallaces and many of them were entirely unrelated. Two Wallaces married in Pennsylvania and one, being the Antrim John Joseph, was probably totally unrelated to the other, and this seemed to be somewhat common. Marrying cousins was not out of the question either. But the general pattern was, once married, they would have a child every year or almost every year, almost indefinitely. That's why all the people filled in by the Veach/Moore tree had possibility. If you could see how they had a kid every year instead of having six or seven-year gaps, you'd believe they were like everyone else, and doing what pioneers do when it's cold out and there's no more deer to hunt. They were filling up the state with Wallaces.
A huge number of them were simply unaccounted for, and that's probably going to be the bottom line for John and Geneva Jane. I won't be the first one to say I have no idea what happened to them after they bailed on Cecil County. In fact I'm not even sure it was them down there in Cecil County. Who said they had their children in Northern Ireland, then moved to Cecil County in 1797? I'm not sure who said it first or whether it came from our family, but it was repeated often enough that I'd come to internalize it and believe it. I was shocked by a Veach/Moore tree that put it entirely a different way. But I also realized that I didn't have the facts to argue. I could see how people were probably adding wrong things to their tree left and right, but I also couldn't back up what I felt was more likely, and realized that almost everything we know has just been said and repeated often enough that we're lulled into believing it's probably true.
Back to the drawing board, as they say.
Some things lead me to believe that John Jr., our own great=great-great uncle, was not the father of all those Wallace children in Washington County. In fact I found a John Wallace whose ancestors were from Antrim (in Northern Ireland, but nowhere near Londonderry), and he had a birthdate of 1750, and a death date of 1808 in Butler PA; these were borrowed by followers of our John until many people had assumed, and written in, a birthdate of 1750 and a death date of 1808 Butler PA.
But on reflection I concluded that we know way too little about our John, who doesn't even have a middle name; for his birthdate the best we could come up with is ~1750, and I for one would not take away a ~ squiggly if it implied I knew something which I don't. The John we know did seem to occupy a house with a wife and six children in 1800; many have said he had an older child (1773/4) William who would not be in that house probably, but who nevertheless has disappeared much like John and Geneva Jane did. I've found death dates for all of them that are widely various; one claimed that Geneva Jane lived to be 100. But there is no clear trail, in Cecil County or anywhere else, that would lead me to believe she lived out fifty or sixty more years there. If anything, they more likely both went back, or went up into Pennsylvania somewhere, where they both seemed to have relatives.
The place was crawling with Wallaces and many of them were entirely unrelated. Two Wallaces married in Pennsylvania and one, being the Antrim John Joseph, was probably totally unrelated to the other, and this seemed to be somewhat common. Marrying cousins was not out of the question either. But the general pattern was, once married, they would have a child every year or almost every year, almost indefinitely. That's why all the people filled in by the Veach/Moore tree had possibility. If you could see how they had a kid every year instead of having six or seven-year gaps, you'd believe they were like everyone else, and doing what pioneers do when it's cold out and there's no more deer to hunt. They were filling up the state with Wallaces.
A huge number of them were simply unaccounted for, and that's probably going to be the bottom line for John and Geneva Jane. I won't be the first one to say I have no idea what happened to them after they bailed on Cecil County. In fact I'm not even sure it was them down there in Cecil County. Who said they had their children in Northern Ireland, then moved to Cecil County in 1797? I'm not sure who said it first or whether it came from our family, but it was repeated often enough that I'd come to internalize it and believe it. I was shocked by a Veach/Moore tree that put it entirely a different way. But I also realized that I didn't have the facts to argue. I could see how people were probably adding wrong things to their tree left and right, but I also couldn't back up what I felt was more likely, and realized that almost everything we know has just been said and repeated often enough that we're lulled into believing it's probably true.
Back to the drawing board, as they say.
Monday, May 26, 2025
The general overview I've been working on, in John the senior's family, has been totally altered by new information I came up with in the course of investigating his son, John Junior. In short, some people had a tree on Ancestry that contradicts most of what I believed, and has a few other curve balls in it, for both people.
Starting with John Sr.; he was part of a very large family in Ayrshire, and was born in Ayrshire himself. The new tree, which can be called the Veach/Moore tree, claims that his father had a second wife, and that he and five other people were born of that second wife, Joan Campbell. In the list I had before he was tenth out of eleven, with a good thirteen years between him and number eleven. Now there are five more in there, though I have already eliminated one or two.
The biggest difference is its general orientation toward Geneva Jane. In the Veach/Moore tree, he marries Geneva Jane, but then comes to New York (1774), and then presumably she dies because he remarries Mary Alexander, and has seven children with her, including a Robert (1782) and John Junior (1788), who for some reason is listed as being born in Donegal even while the others are all being born in Washington County PA. Now I should say, a second wife in Wash County would answer a lot of my questions, which I may have stated earlier: why did he appear to fall off the face of the earth? What happened to Geneva Jane? And, is it possible that he died in Butler, PA when he was living out his life in Maryland? Apparently he was up in Pennsylvania by then. And he did die in 1808, although the Veach/Moore tree says he died in Cecil County but was buried in Finleyville, Wash County.
The son John Jr. has the most stunning changes. Before I encountered the Veach/Moore, I knew about his first daughter Jane, Crawford, and Elizabeth. I knew that he found his way out to Ohio. This tree has him marrying Margaret Wallace in 1808 - same year his dad dies. He is therefore in PA at that time, and according to them they have twelve kids, among them Jane, Crawford and Elizabeth. Elizabeth and Crawford appear at the back of this list, actually, while most of the twelve including Jane come before them and are born in Pennsylvania. And we seem to be talking about Somerset, just east of Pittsburgh, but sometimes Johnstown.
There was also something bizarre. The page I looked at first said that his wife was Margaret Wallace - she was a Wallace before they married. That is, he went up there to visit cousins, and married one of them, perhaps. I'll have to look into this. She was already Margaret Wallace because her father was a Robert Wallace....What happened to Margaret Ellison, who seemed to be hard to find, perhaps not real? Did he also have two wives? That was actually quite common in the era, a guy whose wife died could barely wake up oin the morning without remarrying, quick, especially if they had kids around. You help me watch my kids, and I'll bring in the food. It was a prectical deal. There were lots of half brothers that way.
SO, not all the people make sense, and a few have been thrown in there no doubt. In some cases they have two with the same name who both lived and thrived - one was obviously placed in their tree for lack of their own. People were coming from Ireland left and right, so to speak. But it makes sense to know that, as long as they were alive, they seem to be cranking out lots of kids, who in turn are our relatives today.
Starting with John Sr.; he was part of a very large family in Ayrshire, and was born in Ayrshire himself. The new tree, which can be called the Veach/Moore tree, claims that his father had a second wife, and that he and five other people were born of that second wife, Joan Campbell. In the list I had before he was tenth out of eleven, with a good thirteen years between him and number eleven. Now there are five more in there, though I have already eliminated one or two.
The biggest difference is its general orientation toward Geneva Jane. In the Veach/Moore tree, he marries Geneva Jane, but then comes to New York (1774), and then presumably she dies because he remarries Mary Alexander, and has seven children with her, including a Robert (1782) and John Junior (1788), who for some reason is listed as being born in Donegal even while the others are all being born in Washington County PA. Now I should say, a second wife in Wash County would answer a lot of my questions, which I may have stated earlier: why did he appear to fall off the face of the earth? What happened to Geneva Jane? And, is it possible that he died in Butler, PA when he was living out his life in Maryland? Apparently he was up in Pennsylvania by then. And he did die in 1808, although the Veach/Moore tree says he died in Cecil County but was buried in Finleyville, Wash County.
The son John Jr. has the most stunning changes. Before I encountered the Veach/Moore, I knew about his first daughter Jane, Crawford, and Elizabeth. I knew that he found his way out to Ohio. This tree has him marrying Margaret Wallace in 1808 - same year his dad dies. He is therefore in PA at that time, and according to them they have twelve kids, among them Jane, Crawford and Elizabeth. Elizabeth and Crawford appear at the back of this list, actually, while most of the twelve including Jane come before them and are born in Pennsylvania. And we seem to be talking about Somerset, just east of Pittsburgh, but sometimes Johnstown.
There was also something bizarre. The page I looked at first said that his wife was Margaret Wallace - she was a Wallace before they married. That is, he went up there to visit cousins, and married one of them, perhaps. I'll have to look into this. She was already Margaret Wallace because her father was a Robert Wallace....What happened to Margaret Ellison, who seemed to be hard to find, perhaps not real? Did he also have two wives? That was actually quite common in the era, a guy whose wife died could barely wake up oin the morning without remarrying, quick, especially if they had kids around. You help me watch my kids, and I'll bring in the food. It was a prectical deal. There were lots of half brothers that way.
SO, not all the people make sense, and a few have been thrown in there no doubt. In some cases they have two with the same name who both lived and thrived - one was obviously placed in their tree for lack of their own. People were coming from Ireland left and right, so to speak. But it makes sense to know that, as long as they were alive, they seem to be cranking out lots of kids, who in turn are our relatives today.
General report on John and Robert's family
I've spent a couple of days fishing around on people who are associated with John and Geneva Jane moving to Maryland, from Ireland, in 1797. Robert would have been one at the time. He had an older brother John Jr. who would have been nine; those two have the clearest trails, while nobody else does. I am struck by how the whole family, which seemed to be clearly a family of eight, in 1800, in Cecil, Maryland, drifted into total obscurity.
The death dates given for John and Geneva Jane seem to come right out of the air. There are no legitimate death dates, and no other record of their participating in civil society around Cecil, Maryland. This leads me to believe that possibly 1) they went back, or 2) they moved up to Wallace Run to be with her sister, and died in obscurity up there.
The collective Ancestry people name the seven kids of the family: William (1774-1839), Adeline? (1784-), Francis (1784-1865), John (1788-1856), Jane (1790-1879), Mary (1794), and Robert (1796-1883). My parents' genealogy, which I think was influenced by Mormon collecting, had William (1773/4), unk. d (1776), unk. s (1777), Jane (>1784), John (1778), unk. d. (>1790), and Robert (1796). Perhaps its dates were influenced by the census, but its early three were interesting to me because that's more like how families go; they start out with kids avery year or so until they get worn out and space the last ones out a little. In the ancestry listing I found right away that Francis belonged in another family. A different William (d. 1839) had been attributed to this family and that someone found his correct family, which is not to say that ours wasn't born in 1773 or 4 also.
While looking for ours I found the story of Michael, whose house burned down in Sinking Valley, PA, and his brother died trying to save his things. The brother sounded a lot like William while Michael could have been the unk. s of 1777. Michael Wallace was identified as "from Maryland," and I'm not sure what tipped me off that the dead brother was William or was born in 1773/4. That William seemed to be visiting his brother when he died (the fire was in 1807; both would be in their thirties), but we don't know where he was visiting from, and I found no burial information. Michael went on to have kids and a life in running manufacturing things (and at one point I thought I found another brother Thomas), but I could not attach him to our family definitively except that people said he was from Maryland yet seemed to be born in Ireland. In fact there were a lot of Wallaces like that. All the others, Mary, Jane, Adeline, joined a legion of Wallaces around Maryland and Pennsylvania, some black, either registering their deaths and marriages or not. What I liked about the fire story was that it at least accounted for the disappearance of William, who, if he was not the one who died in 1839, seems to have just disappeared into thin air.
But William was at least 23 at the time they sailed, and very easily could have not come over, or come over and settled somewhere else entirely. The same could be said for the unk. s of 1777, who would have been 23 at the census, and boys didn't tend to be hanging around home at 23 in those days. Somebody 16-25, male, was, which is why I looked into Michael and Thomas. But Pennsylvania was full of Wallaces who came from Maryland, or Ireland, or somewhere, and they were just kicking around doing business and surviving in places like Sinking Valley. Both searches, for Michaels and Thomases, got lost in a sea of Wallaces.
On the theory that John and Geneva Jane picked up and moved to Wallace Run soon after arrival in Maryland: this would explain a lot. First, Robert, after fighting in the War of 1812, married a New Castle girl and settled in Wallace Run himself. Second, John married a PA girl and had his first child in PA, before leaving for Ohio for good. In this era who they marry is directly correlated to where they grew up since they tended to grow right into adulthood unawares almost. So I guess the next step is to investigate Wallace Run, and the women that Robert and John married, in hopes there is some sign of an Adeline, Jane, or Mary, or even Michael or Thomas, that we could claim.
The death dates given for John and Geneva Jane seem to come right out of the air. There are no legitimate death dates, and no other record of their participating in civil society around Cecil, Maryland. This leads me to believe that possibly 1) they went back, or 2) they moved up to Wallace Run to be with her sister, and died in obscurity up there.
The collective Ancestry people name the seven kids of the family: William (1774-1839), Adeline? (1784-), Francis (1784-1865), John (1788-1856), Jane (1790-1879), Mary (1794), and Robert (1796-1883). My parents' genealogy, which I think was influenced by Mormon collecting, had William (1773/4), unk. d (1776), unk. s (1777), Jane (>1784), John (1778), unk. d. (>1790), and Robert (1796). Perhaps its dates were influenced by the census, but its early three were interesting to me because that's more like how families go; they start out with kids avery year or so until they get worn out and space the last ones out a little. In the ancestry listing I found right away that Francis belonged in another family. A different William (d. 1839) had been attributed to this family and that someone found his correct family, which is not to say that ours wasn't born in 1773 or 4 also.
While looking for ours I found the story of Michael, whose house burned down in Sinking Valley, PA, and his brother died trying to save his things. The brother sounded a lot like William while Michael could have been the unk. s of 1777. Michael Wallace was identified as "from Maryland," and I'm not sure what tipped me off that the dead brother was William or was born in 1773/4. That William seemed to be visiting his brother when he died (the fire was in 1807; both would be in their thirties), but we don't know where he was visiting from, and I found no burial information. Michael went on to have kids and a life in running manufacturing things (and at one point I thought I found another brother Thomas), but I could not attach him to our family definitively except that people said he was from Maryland yet seemed to be born in Ireland. In fact there were a lot of Wallaces like that. All the others, Mary, Jane, Adeline, joined a legion of Wallaces around Maryland and Pennsylvania, some black, either registering their deaths and marriages or not. What I liked about the fire story was that it at least accounted for the disappearance of William, who, if he was not the one who died in 1839, seems to have just disappeared into thin air.
But William was at least 23 at the time they sailed, and very easily could have not come over, or come over and settled somewhere else entirely. The same could be said for the unk. s of 1777, who would have been 23 at the census, and boys didn't tend to be hanging around home at 23 in those days. Somebody 16-25, male, was, which is why I looked into Michael and Thomas. But Pennsylvania was full of Wallaces who came from Maryland, or Ireland, or somewhere, and they were just kicking around doing business and surviving in places like Sinking Valley. Both searches, for Michaels and Thomases, got lost in a sea of Wallaces.
On the theory that John and Geneva Jane picked up and moved to Wallace Run soon after arrival in Maryland: this would explain a lot. First, Robert, after fighting in the War of 1812, married a New Castle girl and settled in Wallace Run himself. Second, John married a PA girl and had his first child in PA, before leaving for Ohio for good. In this era who they marry is directly correlated to where they grew up since they tended to grow right into adulthood unawares almost. So I guess the next step is to investigate Wallace Run, and the women that Robert and John married, in hopes there is some sign of an Adeline, Jane, or Mary, or even Michael or Thomas, that we could claim.
Saturday, May 24, 2025
Robert's older brothers
Robert (1796) had one older brother that we know of, John (1788), besides William (1774), the oldest, who I was looking into. At the time of the 1800 census there were three boys in the house in Cecil, Maryland: Robert (1 under <10 10-15="" and="" john="" one="" other="">15). Some on ancestry identified that one as Francis, but I decided that was not right; Francis was born in Ulster, and had a different mother. All John's kids were born in Londonderry/Donegal, as far as I know, and he was still with Geneva Jane at his death.
So I was looking around at the different Williams who were born in 1774, and what happened to them, and then it seemed that I could follow my parents' lead (they spent time at the Mormon libraries) and look for an unknown male born 1777 (they also had an unknown female born 1776). I actually liked this assumption because John and Geneva Jane, upon marrying in 1774, are more likely in my view to have three in quick succession than wait with years between them and have kids later. So if there was a Wallace out there born in 1777 in Ireland, living in Cecil County (would have been 23) in 1800, I'm interested.
Along came this story about Michael. Born in 1777 (from Maryland, as far as anyone knew), he was living in Sinking Valley, near Huntingdon. A fire ravaged his house. In the process of saving his possessions, some burning timbers fell on his brother William. This was in November of 1807. William died in December 1807 as a result of the burns.
What a sad story! If that was our William, he lived until the age of 33 and who knows if he was married or not; he was visiting Michael at the time.
Michael went on to move and move again, until he ended up back in Morris, which is all near Huntingdon. A Michael had a son who went on to have many descendants but here we have a Michael who apparently had a brother Thomas which doesn't quite fit into our picture. Although all these people have unknown origins, Wallaces kicking around the mountains of Pennsylvania, a Thomas of that year would have to live with the family if he in fact existed.
A recurring problem is that there were lots of Wallaces, lots of Johns, Williams, even Michaels, and they are often placed onto our tree as if they were just sprung from John and Geneva Jane in their little house in Cecil Maryland. That was the story of Francis, who was placed there wrongly, and apparently also William Andrew (1774), who was fairly well documented, placed with John and Geneva Jane, died in Huntingdon in like 1837, definitely did not die in a fire.
I can buy that John might name his oldest son William Andrew, for a variety of reasons; also, that any "Michael" who is known to be from Maryland, and has a birthdate of 1777, could be from the John & Geneva Jane line. I could buy that our Michael saw his brother die in a fire in 1807, before he had a chance to go on and have his family (actually he would be 30 at that point), give up merchandising in that location because of the memories, but come back and do ok before it was all over. I think it's likely that we're confusing a lot of different Williams and a few different Michaels.
Sinking Valley, by the way, is not far from State College, in the center of the state. Not far from Huntingdon, a more substantial town. Nowhere near Wallace Run, but kind of in its own territory. Would it be possible that two, or possibly three, of John's sons ended up up there? Possible. I'll keep digging.
So I was looking around at the different Williams who were born in 1774, and what happened to them, and then it seemed that I could follow my parents' lead (they spent time at the Mormon libraries) and look for an unknown male born 1777 (they also had an unknown female born 1776). I actually liked this assumption because John and Geneva Jane, upon marrying in 1774, are more likely in my view to have three in quick succession than wait with years between them and have kids later. So if there was a Wallace out there born in 1777 in Ireland, living in Cecil County (would have been 23) in 1800, I'm interested.
Along came this story about Michael. Born in 1777 (from Maryland, as far as anyone knew), he was living in Sinking Valley, near Huntingdon. A fire ravaged his house. In the process of saving his possessions, some burning timbers fell on his brother William. This was in November of 1807. William died in December 1807 as a result of the burns.
What a sad story! If that was our William, he lived until the age of 33 and who knows if he was married or not; he was visiting Michael at the time.
Michael went on to move and move again, until he ended up back in Morris, which is all near Huntingdon. A Michael had a son who went on to have many descendants but here we have a Michael who apparently had a brother Thomas which doesn't quite fit into our picture. Although all these people have unknown origins, Wallaces kicking around the mountains of Pennsylvania, a Thomas of that year would have to live with the family if he in fact existed.
A recurring problem is that there were lots of Wallaces, lots of Johns, Williams, even Michaels, and they are often placed onto our tree as if they were just sprung from John and Geneva Jane in their little house in Cecil Maryland. That was the story of Francis, who was placed there wrongly, and apparently also William Andrew (1774), who was fairly well documented, placed with John and Geneva Jane, died in Huntingdon in like 1837, definitely did not die in a fire.
I can buy that John might name his oldest son William Andrew, for a variety of reasons; also, that any "Michael" who is known to be from Maryland, and has a birthdate of 1777, could be from the John & Geneva Jane line. I could buy that our Michael saw his brother die in a fire in 1807, before he had a chance to go on and have his family (actually he would be 30 at that point), give up merchandising in that location because of the memories, but come back and do ok before it was all over. I think it's likely that we're confusing a lot of different Williams and a few different Michaels.
Sinking Valley, by the way, is not far from State College, in the center of the state. Not far from Huntingdon, a more substantial town. Nowhere near Wallace Run, but kind of in its own territory. Would it be possible that two, or possibly three, of John's sons ended up up there? Possible. I'll keep digging.
Friday, May 23, 2025
Nathaniel Wallace 1747?
This guy pops up occasionally as the father of some of John's kids. I have found a census report from Cecil County Maryland (near Delaware) that gives John and Geneva Jane six kids living with them, and we know that probably William, the oldest, is no longer living with them, whether he was born in the US or born back in Ireland as the rest of them were. We know that John Jr. (1788). and Robert (1796) are pretty much in that household: born in Ireland, came over with John and Geneva Jane in 1797 or 1799. Who are the other four?
Some people in Ancestry found a Francis (1784), a Mary (1794), a a Jane (1790), and an Adeline (different dates); it was in digging into these that I found Nathaniel. One guy claimed that even Robert was Nathaniel's, but also Mary and Adeline.
I found a census report for Nathaniel that had him living with a wife Mary and a daughter Mary - could be a Mary that is attributed to John. He was living in Allegany, Maryland, way west. The thing is, he's probably John's brother, an older brother. He is not one of the four that originally were supposed to come together in 1770 (a doubtful story) - James, William, Hugh, and John - but he was of that family and supposedly born in Glasgow.
One guy has him married to Geneva Jane and while some of his kids are all his, some have half brothers. More likely he just married this Mary woman and Geneva Jane lived and died with the family of John. Unertain family, but her own.
Some people in Ancestry found a Francis (1784), a Mary (1794), a a Jane (1790), and an Adeline (different dates); it was in digging into these that I found Nathaniel. One guy claimed that even Robert was Nathaniel's, but also Mary and Adeline.
I found a census report for Nathaniel that had him living with a wife Mary and a daughter Mary - could be a Mary that is attributed to John. He was living in Allegany, Maryland, way west. The thing is, he's probably John's brother, an older brother. He is not one of the four that originally were supposed to come together in 1770 (a doubtful story) - James, William, Hugh, and John - but he was of that family and supposedly born in Glasgow.
One guy has him married to Geneva Jane and while some of his kids are all his, some have half brothers. More likely he just married this Mary woman and Geneva Jane lived and died with the family of John. Unertain family, but her own.
Thursday, May 22, 2025
William Wallace 1773/1774
I want to talk about this guy although my search is not quite complete. I use this blog partly to lay out the questions I still have to explore and imagine ways to resolve the dilemma. The new use of ancestry.com has added a lot of different theories as to what happened to people.
William Wallace (1773/1774) was the oldest son of our ancestor John (~1750). It was said that John came over in 1770 and landed in Carlisle PA; one has said that he had three brothers with him. One person said clearly that he married and had William, but his wife died, so he went back to northern Ireland and remarried. This theory is plausible for some reasons and implausible for others. In this theory William was born in PA.
Another theory has John remarrying in Port Glasgow in 1774, already back, and having William in Ireland along with his other six children, all born in Ireland, before he and his wife returned to the states in about 1799. In this theory William was born in Ireland. Obviously he cannot be both, but he is listed as both, and it's widely circulated; in other words, once somebody says where he was born, lots of other people repeat it. Yet there seems to be no proof of where he was born. None of the kids born in Ireland have solid proof. No records appear.
In the first theory (born in PA), we are looking for Carlisle birth records, 1773 or 1774, of John and somebody having this baby William. We don't know who he married. We don't know when she died. They say the boy was raised by his grandparents, but we don't know who they would be. Sounds spurious eh? Well a lot of people are like that, especially in this era, but you have to watch out; if you just make something up, or assume it, people will repeat it as if it's fact.
Let's look at the birthdates of the other six. In ancestry one would think that they were 1784 (Adeline?), 1784 (Francis), 1788 (John Jr.), 1790 (Jane), 1794 (Mary), and 1796 (Robert, our ancestor). An earlier account, my parents', has 1776 (unk. d), 1777 (unk. s), >1784 (Jane), 1788 (John Jr.), >1790 (unk. d), 1796 (Robert). With the latter four, the two versions don't contradict each other at all. There's a question of when they started having them; if William (1774) was their first (born in Ireland theory), then there was a ten year gap before they had the other six. I consider that unlikely based on what I know. If they got married in Scotland/Ireland in 1774 I would expect kids every year or two until they were done or worn out.
If on the other hand he had William in PA (1773/1774), then his wife died, then he flailed around, then he went back to Ireland and had six, those six could very easily start at 1784 with no contradiction. He had to make arrangements. He had to sail back. He had to settle once he did sail back. Starting in 1776 (second set of dates) makes more sense but far less is known in that set of dates. Starting in 1776 makes more sense whether he had William in PA or in Ireland. But if you buy the first set of dates (starting in 1784, after William), born in PA is the only way to go.
There is one possible way out of this mess. In Cecil County Maryland in 1800, they recorded John and Geneva Jane as living in a house with six children, though they don't name them. They do gibe their relative ages which we have some information on. It is a census but is not in any way transparent. I was overjoyed to find it partly because I have solid proof now that they did move to Cecil County and at least someone was there with them. One of their kids may have died by then, but apparently they brought everyone. What became of these kids, coming over from Ireland in 1799? Not sure, stay in touch.
William Wallace (1773/1774) was the oldest son of our ancestor John (~1750). It was said that John came over in 1770 and landed in Carlisle PA; one has said that he had three brothers with him. One person said clearly that he married and had William, but his wife died, so he went back to northern Ireland and remarried. This theory is plausible for some reasons and implausible for others. In this theory William was born in PA.
Another theory has John remarrying in Port Glasgow in 1774, already back, and having William in Ireland along with his other six children, all born in Ireland, before he and his wife returned to the states in about 1799. In this theory William was born in Ireland. Obviously he cannot be both, but he is listed as both, and it's widely circulated; in other words, once somebody says where he was born, lots of other people repeat it. Yet there seems to be no proof of where he was born. None of the kids born in Ireland have solid proof. No records appear.
In the first theory (born in PA), we are looking for Carlisle birth records, 1773 or 1774, of John and somebody having this baby William. We don't know who he married. We don't know when she died. They say the boy was raised by his grandparents, but we don't know who they would be. Sounds spurious eh? Well a lot of people are like that, especially in this era, but you have to watch out; if you just make something up, or assume it, people will repeat it as if it's fact.
Let's look at the birthdates of the other six. In ancestry one would think that they were 1784 (Adeline?), 1784 (Francis), 1788 (John Jr.), 1790 (Jane), 1794 (Mary), and 1796 (Robert, our ancestor). An earlier account, my parents', has 1776 (unk. d), 1777 (unk. s), >1784 (Jane), 1788 (John Jr.), >1790 (unk. d), 1796 (Robert). With the latter four, the two versions don't contradict each other at all. There's a question of when they started having them; if William (1774) was their first (born in Ireland theory), then there was a ten year gap before they had the other six. I consider that unlikely based on what I know. If they got married in Scotland/Ireland in 1774 I would expect kids every year or two until they were done or worn out.
If on the other hand he had William in PA (1773/1774), then his wife died, then he flailed around, then he went back to Ireland and had six, those six could very easily start at 1784 with no contradiction. He had to make arrangements. He had to sail back. He had to settle once he did sail back. Starting in 1776 (second set of dates) makes more sense but far less is known in that set of dates. Starting in 1776 makes more sense whether he had William in PA or in Ireland. But if you buy the first set of dates (starting in 1784, after William), born in PA is the only way to go.
There is one possible way out of this mess. In Cecil County Maryland in 1800, they recorded John and Geneva Jane as living in a house with six children, though they don't name them. They do gibe their relative ages which we have some information on. It is a census but is not in any way transparent. I was overjoyed to find it partly because I have solid proof now that they did move to Cecil County and at least someone was there with them. One of their kids may have died by then, but apparently they brought everyone. What became of these kids, coming over from Ireland in 1799? Not sure, stay in touch.
Wednesday, May 21, 2025
Wallaces of Cairnhill
Back at the very beginning, or at least as far as we know, Sir Thomas Wallace of Cairnhill was born in 1687 and grew to have thirteen children, give or take a few, of whom ours, a William was among the first, if not the first, and was named after his grandfather, also a William. All Wallaces of course must remember Braveheart, and they do this by naming one of theirs William, though John, Robert and even James have pretty fair representation. In this family the most famous is Hugh, which back then might have been spelled Hew. One of the Hughs ended up in Jamaica.
So the Wallaces of Scotland are known by their geographical area; for example, there are Wallaces of Craigie, etc. Cairnhill is just east of Glasgow. I can't ascertain for sure whether it is part of Ayrshire or not. It's the historic east side of Glasgow.
The Book of Wallaces (1917) has all the Wallaces by geographical area, and has lots of genealogical information though at this point it is like an ocean to me. It's online though; anyone can find it. Charles Rogers was the author. Imagine setting out to find all the Wallaces, and actually getting most of them.
The way you ensure that people still care about you three hundred years later is to have thirteen. Hugh was the famous one, but at least William went and had eleven more, of whom John was our man that married Geneva Jane. That William lived and died in Scotland, so I know there are some left in the old country once I figure out where the heck they could have ended up. Slowly I'll familiarize myself with Scottish geography.
Now my goals are much clearer. I found my way back to Scotland; now I can learn about it.
So the Wallaces of Scotland are known by their geographical area; for example, there are Wallaces of Craigie, etc. Cairnhill is just east of Glasgow. I can't ascertain for sure whether it is part of Ayrshire or not. It's the historic east side of Glasgow.
The Book of Wallaces (1917) has all the Wallaces by geographical area, and has lots of genealogical information though at this point it is like an ocean to me. It's online though; anyone can find it. Charles Rogers was the author. Imagine setting out to find all the Wallaces, and actually getting most of them.
The way you ensure that people still care about you three hundred years later is to have thirteen. Hugh was the famous one, but at least William went and had eleven more, of whom John was our man that married Geneva Jane. That William lived and died in Scotland, so I know there are some left in the old country once I figure out where the heck they could have ended up. Slowly I'll familiarize myself with Scottish geography.
Now my goals are much clearer. I found my way back to Scotland; now I can learn about it.
Finally, to Scotland
What happened was, after I got ancestry dot com from a stepdaughter, I got a Wallace tree from a cousin. It didn't have much in the present fifty years or so, but if you combine the efforts of everyone on the web, and apply them to the ones going back, a lot of information comes out and onto the table.
And so, where my trail had stopped in Londonderry, I now have real people who were born and died in Scotland, and I have a clearer picture of the era when they came over. The parents of the four boys, William and Mary - I have their dates and the assertion that they died in Scotland, not forced to move over to Ireland. William was one of thirteen kids of Sir Thomas Wallace of Cairnhill, and that makes for some good travel around Ayrshire as I figure out who exactly he was, and whether all of those thirteen were real. On. this site it appears some stray people may have been dropped into the trees here and there; for example, William and Mary seem to have had two Williams who lived a while, one 1742-1778, another 1749-1832; you can guess that only one of them belongs there. Far from knowing which, at this point.
And so, where my trail had stopped in Londonderry, I now have real people who were born and died in Scotland, and I have a clearer picture of the era when they came over. The parents of the four boys, William and Mary - I have their dates and the assertion that they died in Scotland, not forced to move over to Ireland. William was one of thirteen kids of Sir Thomas Wallace of Cairnhill, and that makes for some good travel around Ayrshire as I figure out who exactly he was, and whether all of those thirteen were real. On. this site it appears some stray people may have been dropped into the trees here and there; for example, William and Mary seem to have had two Williams who lived a while, one 1742-1778, another 1749-1832; you can guess that only one of them belongs there. Far from knowing which, at this point.
Tuesday, May 20, 2025
early Wallaces
I have some observations about the post below, in which the Find-a-grave site for John Wallace made some strong claims. In short, it claimed he came over (to Carlisle, Pennsylvania, from Northern Ireland) with three brothers, William, James, and Hugh, in 1770; William ended up in Goshen NY; James ended up in eastern Pennsylvania; and Hugh ended up in South Carolina, all with large families and important connections; and that John himself had a son William in Carlisle only to abandon him (upon his wife's death) to being raised by grandparents, as he went back to Ireland to marry Geneva Jane and have six more children, among them our Robert.
That last part is verifiable, although several Williams claim to be that William, who would have been born after 1770 but not long after. Everything is sketchy in that era, and I blame the revolution, but also the fact that such names as William Wallace were extremely common among all kinds of people. I believe I will be able to find the son William among Carlisle Wallaces and figure out which of the claimants is really him, and even find the mother, if I look hard enough.
But I am having trouble with the other three 1770 brothers, who supposedly had clear trails off into Goshen, NY, eastern PA, and South Carolina. I'm beginning to suspect that that poster is talking of the top of his/her hat. Of course there are lots of Hugh Wallaces in South Carolina. Why is none of them marked as coming from William Wallace of Ayrshire/Ireland? Perhaps because we have no real handle on that William, where he lived, who he married (someone named Mary?), or when he was born. In fact we have no birthdates for any of the boys, which in Wallace genealogy means we're doomed.
A cursory look at the facts we do have allows some observations. John himself supposedly has a birthdate of ~1750. This makes him 20 at the passage and my guess would be he was among the youngest if not the youngest. William would be the first, maybe, as if a father is going to name kids after himself they'll do it right away.
The other thing I would say is that if the "two boys stole a pig" story (or its variants) is true, that the boys stopping over in Northern Ireland would be looking for their brother(s), since having no money, they needed some respite from the cruel world. One or more brother was already in Northern Ireland at least surviving, possibly with means for the passage ticket to Pennsylvania. How long did it take to procure four passages? Not sure, not even sure that post is real. But if we have four boys coming over at once, then scattering to the winds, it's a whole new ballgame.
John, when he gave up Pennsylvania, and left his son to be raised by grandparents, went back to Londonderry, not Scotland. There was nothing for him in Scotland, but Londonderry had Geneva Jane, who he may have known. She may even have invited him to come back. Did letters cross the ocean, from Donegal to Carlisle? Just speculating here.
When he comes back to the states, he settles in Cecil County, Maryland. Again, trail very murky. He and Geneva Jane now have six kids, among them John Jr. and Robert, ours, but those two are the only ones with a clear trail. No gravesite for John or Geneva Jane, no information about the other four. One is named Jane, uncertain birthdate; another has 1776 as a birthdate, but no name. Oh well. Back to the drawing board, as they say.
PS one more riddle to solve according to the above information. Knowing that uncle James had a whole clan in Wallace Run, I went looking for him and his people, and found some. Some accounts have him born in the early 1740s (makes sense), marrying a Mary Fulton around 1762, having William Wallace (~1764) and then Mary Wallace (~1769). In this account his son William marries Mary McClelland and they come over in 1789, settling in Dauphin County Pennsylvania. William and Mary married in County Down (Londonderry) and she was from there. Their daughter Jane is the one who finds her way up to Beaver County which means she's not there until 1815 or so which still could have made it possible for Robert to find her; she would be a cousin? But the discrepancy is whether that James was in Pennsylvania or went back for any significant period of time, as John did. He coulen't be in both places at once. And naming his kids William and Mary and then Jane sounds very much like this family - the information was compiled and put in the genealogy on this very blog.
That last part is verifiable, although several Williams claim to be that William, who would have been born after 1770 but not long after. Everything is sketchy in that era, and I blame the revolution, but also the fact that such names as William Wallace were extremely common among all kinds of people. I believe I will be able to find the son William among Carlisle Wallaces and figure out which of the claimants is really him, and even find the mother, if I look hard enough.
But I am having trouble with the other three 1770 brothers, who supposedly had clear trails off into Goshen, NY, eastern PA, and South Carolina. I'm beginning to suspect that that poster is talking of the top of his/her hat. Of course there are lots of Hugh Wallaces in South Carolina. Why is none of them marked as coming from William Wallace of Ayrshire/Ireland? Perhaps because we have no real handle on that William, where he lived, who he married (someone named Mary?), or when he was born. In fact we have no birthdates for any of the boys, which in Wallace genealogy means we're doomed.
A cursory look at the facts we do have allows some observations. John himself supposedly has a birthdate of ~1750. This makes him 20 at the passage and my guess would be he was among the youngest if not the youngest. William would be the first, maybe, as if a father is going to name kids after himself they'll do it right away.
The other thing I would say is that if the "two boys stole a pig" story (or its variants) is true, that the boys stopping over in Northern Ireland would be looking for their brother(s), since having no money, they needed some respite from the cruel world. One or more brother was already in Northern Ireland at least surviving, possibly with means for the passage ticket to Pennsylvania. How long did it take to procure four passages? Not sure, not even sure that post is real. But if we have four boys coming over at once, then scattering to the winds, it's a whole new ballgame.
John, when he gave up Pennsylvania, and left his son to be raised by grandparents, went back to Londonderry, not Scotland. There was nothing for him in Scotland, but Londonderry had Geneva Jane, who he may have known. She may even have invited him to come back. Did letters cross the ocean, from Donegal to Carlisle? Just speculating here.
When he comes back to the states, he settles in Cecil County, Maryland. Again, trail very murky. He and Geneva Jane now have six kids, among them John Jr. and Robert, ours, but those two are the only ones with a clear trail. No gravesite for John or Geneva Jane, no information about the other four. One is named Jane, uncertain birthdate; another has 1776 as a birthdate, but no name. Oh well. Back to the drawing board, as they say.
PS one more riddle to solve according to the above information. Knowing that uncle James had a whole clan in Wallace Run, I went looking for him and his people, and found some. Some accounts have him born in the early 1740s (makes sense), marrying a Mary Fulton around 1762, having William Wallace (~1764) and then Mary Wallace (~1769). In this account his son William marries Mary McClelland and they come over in 1789, settling in Dauphin County Pennsylvania. William and Mary married in County Down (Londonderry) and she was from there. Their daughter Jane is the one who finds her way up to Beaver County which means she's not there until 1815 or so which still could have made it possible for Robert to find her; she would be a cousin? But the discrepancy is whether that James was in Pennsylvania or went back for any significant period of time, as John did. He coulen't be in both places at once. And naming his kids William and Mary and then Jane sounds very much like this family - the information was compiled and put in the genealogy on this very blog.
Monday, May 19, 2025
The following was on the Find-a-Grave site for John Wallace (https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/43363939/john-wallace)
John Wallace, who in 1770, with three brothers (see below) emigrated from Londonderry, Ireland, and settled in Carlisle, Pa., he married and had one son, William, who was reared by his grandparents. John Wallace, after the death of his wife, returned to Ireland and married a Miss Crawford, a sister of Mrs. John Scott , well known in the pioneer days of Beaver county. He remained near Londonderry until his children, six in number, were born, and in 1797 returned to America and settled in Cecil county, Md.
Oldest Son:
1. William Wallace married a Philadelphian and reared a large family, from whom came what are known as the Carlisle Wallaces. Ex- Governor Wallace , of Washington Territory, is one of that family. Gen. Lew Wallace , who distinguished himself in the War of the Rebellion, and late Minister to Constantinople, is another. Dr. Wallace, of Springfield, Ill.; and Ex-U.S. Senator William A. Wallace , of Clearfield, Pa. are also of this family.
Brothers:
1. William, located in Goshen, N.Y., and many of his descendants, a number of whom occupy prominent positions, still reside in that city and New York.
2. James, settled in Philadelphia, and from him spring many of the Wallace families in the eastern part of the state.
3. Hugh, went to South Carolina, where there is today a large connection.
Number of boys
The Find-a-Grave site for John Wallace (~1750) makes some interesting claims. Remember that he is a key figure in the genealogy I am working on, and undoubtedly my great-great-great-great grandfather.
This site claims that there were four brothers and that they emigrated in 1770; furthermore they landed in Carlisle Pennsylvania. John had a son there but went back to Northern Ireland, leaving the son to be raised by grandparents (this part has been backed up by other sites). Of the three brothers, Hugh went to South Carolina, James stuck around Philadelphia and eastern PA, and William went to Goshen, NY. The son, William, after growing up in Carlisle (not sure about this), became father to many of what is known as the Carlisle Wallaces.
Let's back up a little. If four emigrated from Northern Ireland, is it possible that the pig-stealing boys met up with them in Northern Ireland before leaving? If so, the original legend (2 boys stole a pig in Scotland, made it to No. Ireland, stopped over, emigrated to PA) could be true that way. It could be that the number 3 appeared as a compromise between the two truths - there were two at one end, four at the other.
At the moment John (~1750) has the only even approximate birth date. But if we know they emigrated in 1770, or we assume that it's true (there is no source on this information), we can make a lot of inferences. Perhaps we can start from there. Where and how can we find these elusive characters? Fortunately I have ancestry.com again. Start there, perhaps.
This site claims that there were four brothers and that they emigrated in 1770; furthermore they landed in Carlisle Pennsylvania. John had a son there but went back to Northern Ireland, leaving the son to be raised by grandparents (this part has been backed up by other sites). Of the three brothers, Hugh went to South Carolina, James stuck around Philadelphia and eastern PA, and William went to Goshen, NY. The son, William, after growing up in Carlisle (not sure about this), became father to many of what is known as the Carlisle Wallaces.
Let's back up a little. If four emigrated from Northern Ireland, is it possible that the pig-stealing boys met up with them in Northern Ireland before leaving? If so, the original legend (2 boys stole a pig in Scotland, made it to No. Ireland, stopped over, emigrated to PA) could be true that way. It could be that the number 3 appeared as a compromise between the two truths - there were two at one end, four at the other.
At the moment John (~1750) has the only even approximate birth date. But if we know they emigrated in 1770, or we assume that it's true (there is no source on this information), we can make a lot of inferences. Perhaps we can start from there. Where and how can we find these elusive characters? Fortunately I have ancestry.com again. Start there, perhaps.
Sunday, May 18, 2025
trail through Londonderry
I've been thinking a lot about what I've come up with so far, and the major thing I've learned is that if our ancestors stopped in Northern Ireland on the way over to Pennsylvania, it could have been for several generations or longer. The family legend says that two boys stole a pig in Scotland (Ayrshire they believe) and stopped in Northern Ireland on their way across. I'd like to believe it, and find a pig, but it's more likely that Londonderry and Donegal were their new home; that's where they seem to be sailing from.
This may have been true for many of the Scot-Irish settlers in Pennsylvania and the new world. The king had put Scots (Protestants) in Northern Ireland for years, and the Catholic Irish weren't fond of the practice. One of the promises of the new world was that it wouldn't matter so much if they were Protestant or Catholic; they wouldn't be unwelcome in their own home. Scotland was crowded and they couldn't go back; there was no work and no land; Northern Ireland was liveable but not prosperous, and they were in an ethnic and political minority, forced to defend themselves against Catholic leaders who never wanted them in the first place. The woods of Pennsylvania were looking better all the time.
All the Scot-Irish traced their families back to Scotland and were still proud of it. Within a few generations they stopped talking about it, though they kept some of their customs and beliefs. I have yet to run into any references to where in Scotland they were from or who they still knew back there. I suspect the people they knew were already in Londonderry/Donegal.
Geneva Jane was the daughter of a fisherman near Londonderry/Donegal. John Wallace (~1750), having lived in the colonies, married, had a son, saw his wife die, and left his son behind to be raised by grandparents. But rather than returning to Scotland, he returned to Londonderry, where he met and married Geneva Jane, and had six more children before they returned to the colonies in 1799.
All these children were born in Ireland, including John Jr. and Robert; Robert would become the patriarch of our family. Geneva Jane's sister moved to Wallace Run in Pennsylvania. But when John and Geneva Jane finally moved back to the colonies, they settled in Cecil County Maryland. Robert would have been only three when they moved. His whole life was Ireland and Cecil County. Some of his siblings knew Ireland better than he did. But Scotland? Memory of Scotland was much more distant. I have been assuming/hoping that John was one of the pig brothers, but I have read that even their father was in Northern Ireland, and I'm no longer sure that was possible. In any case, Robert's mother seems to be thoroughly Northern Irish. Maybe research will clear it up.
This may have been true for many of the Scot-Irish settlers in Pennsylvania and the new world. The king had put Scots (Protestants) in Northern Ireland for years, and the Catholic Irish weren't fond of the practice. One of the promises of the new world was that it wouldn't matter so much if they were Protestant or Catholic; they wouldn't be unwelcome in their own home. Scotland was crowded and they couldn't go back; there was no work and no land; Northern Ireland was liveable but not prosperous, and they were in an ethnic and political minority, forced to defend themselves against Catholic leaders who never wanted them in the first place. The woods of Pennsylvania were looking better all the time.
All the Scot-Irish traced their families back to Scotland and were still proud of it. Within a few generations they stopped talking about it, though they kept some of their customs and beliefs. I have yet to run into any references to where in Scotland they were from or who they still knew back there. I suspect the people they knew were already in Londonderry/Donegal.
Geneva Jane was the daughter of a fisherman near Londonderry/Donegal. John Wallace (~1750), having lived in the colonies, married, had a son, saw his wife die, and left his son behind to be raised by grandparents. But rather than returning to Scotland, he returned to Londonderry, where he met and married Geneva Jane, and had six more children before they returned to the colonies in 1799.
All these children were born in Ireland, including John Jr. and Robert; Robert would become the patriarch of our family. Geneva Jane's sister moved to Wallace Run in Pennsylvania. But when John and Geneva Jane finally moved back to the colonies, they settled in Cecil County Maryland. Robert would have been only three when they moved. His whole life was Ireland and Cecil County. Some of his siblings knew Ireland better than he did. But Scotland? Memory of Scotland was much more distant. I have been assuming/hoping that John was one of the pig brothers, but I have read that even their father was in Northern Ireland, and I'm no longer sure that was possible. In any case, Robert's mother seems to be thoroughly Northern Irish. Maybe research will clear it up.
Friday, May 16, 2025
Wallaces - the early days
I thought I'd use this post to talk about the information I've gathered from various sources; some of it is not quite organized in my head, and when this happens I can confuse things. But based on what I now know I am revising some of my theories and targeting other areas to find out more about.
First, I had assumed that part of the "two boys stole a pig" legend was true: that I was looking for brothers that left Scotland, came over to Northern Ireland for a short while, then headed off to Pennsylvania to start a new life. My best guess was John (1788) and Robert (1796), who though eight years apart were the only two of a large family that had any known tracks in the new world. But more recent information has told me that their father John (~1750) was married in Pennsylvania; his wife died; he went back to Ireland and had six children with Geneva Jane Crawford, and then came back and resettled in Cecil County Maryland. In addition he had one child by his first wife, who was raised by grandparents, but that much is not very clear. He had seven altogether? They all came of age in Maryland???
But this makes it more likely that he, JOhn Sr., was one of the pig boys, because that story has him landing here, trying it out, deciding that maybe he wasn't ready, heading back...the other candidate for pig-stealer would be his brother James, who has a whole clan in Wallace Run Pennsylvania based on the fact that he arrived there a little earlier than the others.
We can see why Robert, who was only one when his father and Geneva Jane brought him and his five siblings to Maryland, found his way to Pennsylvania after he served in the War of 1812 (in which he was sixteen at best). His uncle James was up there establishing a family and by now had been there for a while (how long, I haven't determined). But his mother's sister Elizabeth was up there too. He had an aunt on his mother's side, and an uncle on his father's. Wallace Run was the place for him. But there's no pig-stealing in Robert's life - he was in the new world from the age of one.
Obviously I need to solidify the timeline. When did James get to Wallace Run? When did Elizabeth get there? Who else might have been there to draw them to begin with?
John Wallace Sr. and his brother James have very sketchy biographical information but it would be possible to find more, perhaps. John married his first wife in about 1772 and somewhere I found geography for that, somewhere in Pennsylvania I believe. So if John and James came together, as pig fugitives, it would be right before 1772, I presume. And John would now be about seventeen? That's beginning to make more sense. First time through Northern Ireland, they didn't even stop for long. But they did have connections, and saw and met people, enough so that John could go back and remarry.
Among John Sr.'s 6 + 1 children, John and Robert have the clearest trail, but the first, William, has a trail too that I haven't looked into much. The claim is that he's son of the first wife, and never left the country, but was raised by his grandparents. I'd like to see that, know more about it. One woman found a William Andrew Wallace (1774) - could that be him? My parents' genealogy has a William Walllace 1773 but no other information. There is also a Jane Wallace (>1784). But all the last six, including John Jr. and. Robert, would have grown up pretty much in Cecil County Maryland. Surely there is a trace? Or some clues in the raising of William Andrew?
I like the story about being thrown in jail for opposition to the Catholic Church. This however was Elizabeth's husband, who yes followed her to Pennsylvania. A relative not an ancestor. But sure as heck a Penssylvanian. Maybe Scott Township was named after him, or his kin.
First, I had assumed that part of the "two boys stole a pig" legend was true: that I was looking for brothers that left Scotland, came over to Northern Ireland for a short while, then headed off to Pennsylvania to start a new life. My best guess was John (1788) and Robert (1796), who though eight years apart were the only two of a large family that had any known tracks in the new world. But more recent information has told me that their father John (~1750) was married in Pennsylvania; his wife died; he went back to Ireland and had six children with Geneva Jane Crawford, and then came back and resettled in Cecil County Maryland. In addition he had one child by his first wife, who was raised by grandparents, but that much is not very clear. He had seven altogether? They all came of age in Maryland???
But this makes it more likely that he, JOhn Sr., was one of the pig boys, because that story has him landing here, trying it out, deciding that maybe he wasn't ready, heading back...the other candidate for pig-stealer would be his brother James, who has a whole clan in Wallace Run Pennsylvania based on the fact that he arrived there a little earlier than the others.
We can see why Robert, who was only one when his father and Geneva Jane brought him and his five siblings to Maryland, found his way to Pennsylvania after he served in the War of 1812 (in which he was sixteen at best). His uncle James was up there establishing a family and by now had been there for a while (how long, I haven't determined). But his mother's sister Elizabeth was up there too. He had an aunt on his mother's side, and an uncle on his father's. Wallace Run was the place for him. But there's no pig-stealing in Robert's life - he was in the new world from the age of one.
Obviously I need to solidify the timeline. When did James get to Wallace Run? When did Elizabeth get there? Who else might have been there to draw them to begin with?
John Wallace Sr. and his brother James have very sketchy biographical information but it would be possible to find more, perhaps. John married his first wife in about 1772 and somewhere I found geography for that, somewhere in Pennsylvania I believe. So if John and James came together, as pig fugitives, it would be right before 1772, I presume. And John would now be about seventeen? That's beginning to make more sense. First time through Northern Ireland, they didn't even stop for long. But they did have connections, and saw and met people, enough so that John could go back and remarry.
Among John Sr.'s 6 + 1 children, John and Robert have the clearest trail, but the first, William, has a trail too that I haven't looked into much. The claim is that he's son of the first wife, and never left the country, but was raised by his grandparents. I'd like to see that, know more about it. One woman found a William Andrew Wallace (1774) - could that be him? My parents' genealogy has a William Walllace 1773 but no other information. There is also a Jane Wallace (>1784). But all the last six, including John Jr. and. Robert, would have grown up pretty much in Cecil County Maryland. Surely there is a trace? Or some clues in the raising of William Andrew?
I like the story about being thrown in jail for opposition to the Catholic Church. This however was Elizabeth's husband, who yes followed her to Pennsylvania. A relative not an ancestor. But sure as heck a Penssylvanian. Maybe Scott Township was named after him, or his kin.
Thursday, May 15, 2025
From the Find-a-Grave pages
This one is from the Geneva Jane Crawford Wallace page:
Her father was a fisherman in County Down Ireland. She married, "John Wallace, who after the death of his first wife, returned to Ireland and married a Miss Crawford, a sister of Mrs. John Scott , well known in the pioneer days of Beaver county. He remained near Londonderry until his children, six in number, were born, and in 1797 returned to America and settled in Cecil county, Md."
And this one is from her sister Elizabeth Crawford Scott:
Her father was a fisherman in County Down Ireland. She was married to, John Scott, and had four children, two being born in Ireland. She died in Chippewa Township. She had a sister in America, Mrs. John Wallace , whose son, Robert Wallace, lived in Beaver County also.
"My great-great grandfather, Crawford, was a fisherman. He lived in County Down, Ireland, At one time there was a great storm at sea. Grandfather and sons thought it was too bad to go out, and so stayed at home. All who did go out were lost and nearly all of the children and wives were left orphans and widows. After a time his daughter, Elizabeth, married a young fellow by the name of John Scott.
He was an earnest christian as well as a good weaver. He was in the habit of noon-day prayer. When working in the bog, he would stop at noon for prayer. He had one brother, David, who never married. He made his home with my grandfather for a time.
John Scott's, wife Elizabeth, 'was a small woman, and in her old days she was very much bent over and went crippling around. She was much loved by her grandchildren. I have heard father tell of her slipping money into his hand and telling him it was for his spending money. They lived together for a time. They had two children while in Ireland, one of whom was my grandfather.
About this time the Catholics got into power. Great grandfather made some remarks about the Catholics, which was in some way repeated to them and they put him, in prison. While he was in prison, it was decided that his wife should go to America. So with her two boys she left the Emerald lsle for America. What a sad aching heart she must have had!
She left her husband in prison not knowing what his fate would be. She came to Baltimore, Md. And stayed one year, when her husband came. He had been exiled from Ireland to America. In a very few years they moved to Beaver Co., Pa. He farmed the most of the time, though he never gave up his weaving. He made all kinds of cloth. They often made whole suits and gave them to their grandchildren.
Their children numbered four: William, John, Jane, James.
Great grandfather died in 1844, aged 82 yrs. His wife, died in 1853 aged 94."--Fay Scott Oline (Dec. 24, 1904)
Here are a couple of comments about the above. First, Lena Faye Scott Oline's Find-a-Grave site is here. Her father is David Scott, grandfather William Scott, great-grandfather John Scott Sr.; great grandmother Elizabeth Crawford Scott, sister of our Geneva Jane. This would make her something like my third cousin four times removed; in other words, she is a third cousin of my great great grandfather, J.J. Wallace the doctor.
Her ancestor who was jailed for speaking against the Catholic church does not appear to be my ancestor. Crawford the fisherman would be, as his daughter Geneva Jane was matriarch of our clan. Her great grandfather was John Scott Sr.; his wife who went without him, and with the two boys already born in Ireland, was Elizabeth Crawford Scott, Geneva Jane's sister. Elizabeth was quite brave, and fortunately he came and joined her. She had a daughter Jane who married a Wallace in Beaver County and had thirteen children, all Wallaces for a while at least. Her presence in Beaver Falls would be a good reason for any of Geneva Jane's children to go there and end up there, as some did.
Her father was a fisherman in County Down Ireland. She married, "John Wallace, who after the death of his first wife, returned to Ireland and married a Miss Crawford, a sister of Mrs. John Scott , well known in the pioneer days of Beaver county. He remained near Londonderry until his children, six in number, were born, and in 1797 returned to America and settled in Cecil county, Md."
And this one is from her sister Elizabeth Crawford Scott:
Her father was a fisherman in County Down Ireland. She was married to, John Scott, and had four children, two being born in Ireland. She died in Chippewa Township. She had a sister in America, Mrs. John Wallace , whose son, Robert Wallace, lived in Beaver County also.
"My great-great grandfather, Crawford, was a fisherman. He lived in County Down, Ireland, At one time there was a great storm at sea. Grandfather and sons thought it was too bad to go out, and so stayed at home. All who did go out were lost and nearly all of the children and wives were left orphans and widows. After a time his daughter, Elizabeth, married a young fellow by the name of John Scott.
He was an earnest christian as well as a good weaver. He was in the habit of noon-day prayer. When working in the bog, he would stop at noon for prayer. He had one brother, David, who never married. He made his home with my grandfather for a time.
John Scott's, wife Elizabeth, 'was a small woman, and in her old days she was very much bent over and went crippling around. She was much loved by her grandchildren. I have heard father tell of her slipping money into his hand and telling him it was for his spending money. They lived together for a time. They had two children while in Ireland, one of whom was my grandfather.
About this time the Catholics got into power. Great grandfather made some remarks about the Catholics, which was in some way repeated to them and they put him, in prison. While he was in prison, it was decided that his wife should go to America. So with her two boys she left the Emerald lsle for America. What a sad aching heart she must have had!
She left her husband in prison not knowing what his fate would be. She came to Baltimore, Md. And stayed one year, when her husband came. He had been exiled from Ireland to America. In a very few years they moved to Beaver Co., Pa. He farmed the most of the time, though he never gave up his weaving. He made all kinds of cloth. They often made whole suits and gave them to their grandchildren.
Their children numbered four: William, John, Jane, James.
Great grandfather died in 1844, aged 82 yrs. His wife, died in 1853 aged 94."--Fay Scott Oline (Dec. 24, 1904)
Here are a couple of comments about the above. First, Lena Faye Scott Oline's Find-a-Grave site is here. Her father is David Scott, grandfather William Scott, great-grandfather John Scott Sr.; great grandmother Elizabeth Crawford Scott, sister of our Geneva Jane. This would make her something like my third cousin four times removed; in other words, she is a third cousin of my great great grandfather, J.J. Wallace the doctor.
Her ancestor who was jailed for speaking against the Catholic church does not appear to be my ancestor. Crawford the fisherman would be, as his daughter Geneva Jane was matriarch of our clan. Her great grandfather was John Scott Sr.; his wife who went without him, and with the two boys already born in Ireland, was Elizabeth Crawford Scott, Geneva Jane's sister. Elizabeth was quite brave, and fortunately he came and joined her. She had a daughter Jane who married a Wallace in Beaver County and had thirteen children, all Wallaces for a while at least. Her presence in Beaver Falls would be a good reason for any of Geneva Jane's children to go there and end up there, as some did.
Wednesday, May 14, 2025
Geneva Jane Crawford
I feel like I've cracked the case wide open because I've found personal testimony that is more powerful than the information that I had. Geneva Jane, I believe, is the key to the whole picture.
The family legend - that two boys stole a pig in Scotland, hightailed it for Northern Ireland, holed up there, then found their way to Pennsylvania - is still possible in some form or another. I have assumed that at its base it is at least partly true. They were Scot; they were in Ireland for a while, either in the northern part or in the southern; they were attracted to Pennsylvania and at least some of them ended up there as did thousands of others, and hundreds even from the Wallace clan. I had inferred that the two boys involved would be John and Robert, since they were the only ones we had birthdates for or anything approaching descendants.
In the genealogy are John and Robert's unknown siblings, and then their father remarrying Geneva Jane after they were born; this would make Geneva Jane a stepmother. but I found Janes on down the genealogy and even one great grandchild (I think?) named Geneva Jane; and, even in our line, a John Crawford Wallace who named his son John Crawford Jr., and his son John Crawford III, and down now to John Crawford IV. Wanting to keep that Crawford could just be wanting to associate with the name, but I think originally it was a tribute to Geneva Jane.
So when I read the accounts, which I will reprint in the above posts, I tend to believe them: that John married in the US; his wife died; he returned to Ireland; his children were all born in Ireland; and then he came back to the USA to resettle in Cecil County Maryland. The sons however settled far and wide; our ancestor settled in Wallace Run, where the aunt and an uncle were; John settled in Ohio; William I'm not sure of; maybe the last one was Uncle James, also in Beaver County? I may be getting confused about the generations here.
But in any case that would put the pig boys in the earlier generation. John and maybe his brother James?
Upon his return to Ireland, John found Geneva Jane, married her (probably) and had the four children, then, in Ireland. And this may not have been Londonderry, but rather further south. Her sister Elizabeth somehow ended up in Pennsylvania too. I'll have to read and reread, see if I can make sense of it. I'm tending toward believing these personal accounts over the guesses of our own genealogy. And Geneva Jane is definitely at the center of it.
The family legend - that two boys stole a pig in Scotland, hightailed it for Northern Ireland, holed up there, then found their way to Pennsylvania - is still possible in some form or another. I have assumed that at its base it is at least partly true. They were Scot; they were in Ireland for a while, either in the northern part or in the southern; they were attracted to Pennsylvania and at least some of them ended up there as did thousands of others, and hundreds even from the Wallace clan. I had inferred that the two boys involved would be John and Robert, since they were the only ones we had birthdates for or anything approaching descendants.
In the genealogy are John and Robert's unknown siblings, and then their father remarrying Geneva Jane after they were born; this would make Geneva Jane a stepmother. but I found Janes on down the genealogy and even one great grandchild (I think?) named Geneva Jane; and, even in our line, a John Crawford Wallace who named his son John Crawford Jr., and his son John Crawford III, and down now to John Crawford IV. Wanting to keep that Crawford could just be wanting to associate with the name, but I think originally it was a tribute to Geneva Jane.
So when I read the accounts, which I will reprint in the above posts, I tend to believe them: that John married in the US; his wife died; he returned to Ireland; his children were all born in Ireland; and then he came back to the USA to resettle in Cecil County Maryland. The sons however settled far and wide; our ancestor settled in Wallace Run, where the aunt and an uncle were; John settled in Ohio; William I'm not sure of; maybe the last one was Uncle James, also in Beaver County? I may be getting confused about the generations here.
But in any case that would put the pig boys in the earlier generation. John and maybe his brother James?
Upon his return to Ireland, John found Geneva Jane, married her (probably) and had the four children, then, in Ireland. And this may not have been Londonderry, but rather further south. Her sister Elizabeth somehow ended up in Pennsylvania too. I'll have to read and reread, see if I can make sense of it. I'm tending toward believing these personal accounts over the guesses of our own genealogy. And Geneva Jane is definitely at the center of it.
Percival Nott
Percival Nott married Jane Wallace, who would have been a cousin I believe of our Robert Wallace, father of ten and patriarch of a clan of New Castle Wallaces. Jane was in Ohio, and so was Percival, in a small town in Morgan County. They had eleven kids, ten of whom I missed in the first pass-around; I knew of only William.
Percival died in the Battle of Shiloh in 1862. He left Jane and the eleven kids behind.
His grandson Elmer moved down to Athens Ohio and worked in a coal mine. But the mine had an explosion, in 1922. Elmer lived but was never the same again. He died at the age of 58, leaving nine kids behind.
They are cousins, distant, not ancestors. But I'm enjoying learning about their lives.
Percival died in the Battle of Shiloh in 1862. He left Jane and the eleven kids behind.
His grandson Elmer moved down to Athens Ohio and worked in a coal mine. But the mine had an explosion, in 1922. Elmer lived but was never the same again. He died at the age of 58, leaving nine kids behind.
They are cousins, distant, not ancestors. But I'm enjoying learning about their lives.
Tuesday, May 13, 2025
Tracking down Elmer Nott
My pursuit of relatives and ancestors has led me to the hollows of southeastern Ohio and to Elmer Nott, a coal miner who died from an accident, leaving nine children. This was still a couple generations back, but it virtually guarantees that I have living relatives, and I've got a few observations about the process.
It started out that, if the story of two brothers stealing a pig, going to Northern Ireland, and from there to Pennsylvania is true, then my conclusion was that these two brothers were our Robert, who had ten kids in a house on Wallace Run in Beaver Falls, and his brother John Jr., who was eight years older, but was the only of the siblings anyone knew anything about. So I was curious what happened to John Jr., the older brother. Remember that Robert enlisted in the War of 1812 at the age of only sixteen, and at that time John Jr. would have been 24. His wife was from Pennsylvania and his daughter was born there, but he seems to have moved west to Morgan County Ohio where Pennsylvania relatives knew only his death date.
His daughter was an only child, and if my accounts are correct, her son was an only child, and so was his son, Elmer, who was born in Morgan County. But I'm not sure I trust these accounts, because sometimes they only mention the one that concerns them. Or they list only what they've found. It was the daughter that married Percival Nott; the Notts appear to be a big family with lots of members especially in Michigan and Minnesota.
These sites list John Jr.'s birthplace as Londonderry, as one source listed Robert's as simply Ireland. This leads to the question of how long these brothers were actually in Northern Ireland - more than a generation? Maybe they weren't the ones who stole the pig. They are the only two children of that generation that we know anything about.
There are variations in the story that comes out about Elmer. There are different birth dates for him, for example, which leads me to bellieve people may be confusing different Elmers. In some accounts the Nott family is spelled with a K. It's Find a Grave that lists nine children for him, and I trust it more than the others, which can be much more random. But even Find a Grave is not always right. It too is constructed by people who make assumptions, though when they find the graves themselves, the cold hard facts are sometimes etched right into them.
Elmer was born in 1876. The mine accident was in 1922, when he was 46. But he was virtually bed-ridden until his death in 1935, thirteen years, and who knows how those nine kids were supported. He reminds me of that old saw, "coal mine, moon shine, or walk on down the line," and of my father's advice, when we lived in coal country, to avoid those mines at all costs. Is it even possible? I'll investigate his descendants; I find it interesting what happened to people.
It started out that, if the story of two brothers stealing a pig, going to Northern Ireland, and from there to Pennsylvania is true, then my conclusion was that these two brothers were our Robert, who had ten kids in a house on Wallace Run in Beaver Falls, and his brother John Jr., who was eight years older, but was the only of the siblings anyone knew anything about. So I was curious what happened to John Jr., the older brother. Remember that Robert enlisted in the War of 1812 at the age of only sixteen, and at that time John Jr. would have been 24. His wife was from Pennsylvania and his daughter was born there, but he seems to have moved west to Morgan County Ohio where Pennsylvania relatives knew only his death date.
His daughter was an only child, and if my accounts are correct, her son was an only child, and so was his son, Elmer, who was born in Morgan County. But I'm not sure I trust these accounts, because sometimes they only mention the one that concerns them. Or they list only what they've found. It was the daughter that married Percival Nott; the Notts appear to be a big family with lots of members especially in Michigan and Minnesota.
These sites list John Jr.'s birthplace as Londonderry, as one source listed Robert's as simply Ireland. This leads to the question of how long these brothers were actually in Northern Ireland - more than a generation? Maybe they weren't the ones who stole the pig. They are the only two children of that generation that we know anything about.
There are variations in the story that comes out about Elmer. There are different birth dates for him, for example, which leads me to bellieve people may be confusing different Elmers. In some accounts the Nott family is spelled with a K. It's Find a Grave that lists nine children for him, and I trust it more than the others, which can be much more random. But even Find a Grave is not always right. It too is constructed by people who make assumptions, though when they find the graves themselves, the cold hard facts are sometimes etched right into them.
Elmer was born in 1876. The mine accident was in 1922, when he was 46. But he was virtually bed-ridden until his death in 1935, thirteen years, and who knows how those nine kids were supported. He reminds me of that old saw, "coal mine, moon shine, or walk on down the line," and of my father's advice, when we lived in coal country, to avoid those mines at all costs. Is it even possible? I'll investigate his descendants; I find it interesting what happened to people.
Monday, May 12, 2025
The hanging judge
There is, in our genealogy, a judge who sentence someone to death. This happened around the turn of the century, and was a well-publicized trial. When my cousin mentioned to me "pictures of the hanging judge" I was curious, but I figured, I should learn more about this. He is the topic of my present inquiry.
His name was William Davies Wallace, and he's a problem in our genealogy for this reason. Apparently he had only a daughter, Beatrice. But his brother, John Crawford Wallace the druggist, had four children, and my grandfather was the third of them. The fourth was a guy named William D. Wallace, and this William D. Wallace apparently had a son who would have been William D. Wallace Jr. or William D. Wallace II.
Now the name William Davies Wallace has been given to these two, or written into genealogies, but I'm not sure J.C.'s son was William Davies. Perhaps he was just William D. something else and people assumed that D. was for Davies (it could have been). But my confusion was, I thought that if there was a William Davies Wallace II that they would have to be the son of the hanging judge. And they're not. It's possible that the name Davies has been added on in this situation, or it's possible that J.C. named his kid William Davies Wallace in spite of having a brother by the same name. I find that second possibility a slim chance, but I'm still looking.
The hanging judge, by virtue of his prominence, is one of the more famous Wallaces of Wallace Run, New Castle, and Beaver Falls. He was involved in some kind of scrape when he became a judge, and being a judge got him out of it. I'm not sure of the whole story, but I'll find out.
His name was William Davies Wallace, and he's a problem in our genealogy for this reason. Apparently he had only a daughter, Beatrice. But his brother, John Crawford Wallace the druggist, had four children, and my grandfather was the third of them. The fourth was a guy named William D. Wallace, and this William D. Wallace apparently had a son who would have been William D. Wallace Jr. or William D. Wallace II.
Now the name William Davies Wallace has been given to these two, or written into genealogies, but I'm not sure J.C.'s son was William Davies. Perhaps he was just William D. something else and people assumed that D. was for Davies (it could have been). But my confusion was, I thought that if there was a William Davies Wallace II that they would have to be the son of the hanging judge. And they're not. It's possible that the name Davies has been added on in this situation, or it's possible that J.C. named his kid William Davies Wallace in spite of having a brother by the same name. I find that second possibility a slim chance, but I'm still looking.
The hanging judge, by virtue of his prominence, is one of the more famous Wallaces of Wallace Run, New Castle, and Beaver Falls. He was involved in some kind of scrape when he became a judge, and being a judge got him out of it. I'm not sure of the whole story, but I'll find out.
Sunday, May 11, 2025
Descended from Braveheart?
Looking into the Wallace genealogy I took a break from the more specific ones I was researching, namely a Dr. William Wallace of Washington DC, born sometime before or after 1926 (I was trying to figure out which), to find out about a few legends in the family. It is said that all Wallaces want to claim direct lineage from Braveheart, a William Wallace of about 1290 who fought fiercely against the English. Why then should we be any exception?
Well you don't get very far before you learn that the Braveheart William Wallace had no sons, and claims that he had a daughter somewhere are pretty thin, and even his brother's descendants seem to have died out, so the best one could claim would be to be related to him. But nevertheless many people have claimed to be directly descended from him, and one even claimed to have his kilt, while historians point out that kilts didn't show up until about 1500.
The Braveheart William Wallace was a large man, and fierce. But he was from Ayreshire, and his mother was a Crawford, and that rung a bell. The man at the top of our genealogy was a William Wallace, in the 1700's, and was from Ayreshire. When one of our early (1700s) Wallaces married a Crawford, others kept the name as long as possible, to the point that in the modern day we are dealing with John Crawford Wallace IV and V - they want to keep the name Crawford if only to make a point. And what would be the point? Well, the Crawford clan is a little more thorough about tracking its descendants, and it's more likely to go back to Braveheart's mother than to Braveheart himself. In other words, it's possible we could track our ancestors back to relatives of Braveheart, but more likely through the Crawfords than the Wallaces.
There are about 28 generations between today and Braveheart, someone said, and this directly contradicts those who said things like "Braveheart was my great great great great grandfather" - no, he lived in about 1290. Records are thin. Scholars are all over him, and they're still thin.
But I can say this. Finding a William Wallace today is like finding a needle in a haystack. I need a middle name, and a birth year, and in this case I don't have either, and I'm not sure what I'll do though I haven't exhausted the options. Scottish settlers filled up the Americas and scattered widely, not hanging around in enclaves of other Scottish settlers as, say, the Italians and others tended to do. Some, like my Uncle Bones, only male carrying the Wallace name, ended up out in the desert or someplace surrounded more by snakes and desert rabbits than other people let alone other Scots. But they didn't forget Scotland and that's why they'd name their kids William Wallace and carry on like they could trace everything right back. There's no tracing it right back, it seems. You get back to Ayreshire, and it gets muddy pretty quickly.
Well you don't get very far before you learn that the Braveheart William Wallace had no sons, and claims that he had a daughter somewhere are pretty thin, and even his brother's descendants seem to have died out, so the best one could claim would be to be related to him. But nevertheless many people have claimed to be directly descended from him, and one even claimed to have his kilt, while historians point out that kilts didn't show up until about 1500.
The Braveheart William Wallace was a large man, and fierce. But he was from Ayreshire, and his mother was a Crawford, and that rung a bell. The man at the top of our genealogy was a William Wallace, in the 1700's, and was from Ayreshire. When one of our early (1700s) Wallaces married a Crawford, others kept the name as long as possible, to the point that in the modern day we are dealing with John Crawford Wallace IV and V - they want to keep the name Crawford if only to make a point. And what would be the point? Well, the Crawford clan is a little more thorough about tracking its descendants, and it's more likely to go back to Braveheart's mother than to Braveheart himself. In other words, it's possible we could track our ancestors back to relatives of Braveheart, but more likely through the Crawfords than the Wallaces.
There are about 28 generations between today and Braveheart, someone said, and this directly contradicts those who said things like "Braveheart was my great great great great grandfather" - no, he lived in about 1290. Records are thin. Scholars are all over him, and they're still thin.
But I can say this. Finding a William Wallace today is like finding a needle in a haystack. I need a middle name, and a birth year, and in this case I don't have either, and I'm not sure what I'll do though I haven't exhausted the options. Scottish settlers filled up the Americas and scattered widely, not hanging around in enclaves of other Scottish settlers as, say, the Italians and others tended to do. Some, like my Uncle Bones, only male carrying the Wallace name, ended up out in the desert or someplace surrounded more by snakes and desert rabbits than other people let alone other Scots. But they didn't forget Scotland and that's why they'd name their kids William Wallace and carry on like they could trace everything right back. There's no tracing it right back, it seems. You get back to Ayreshire, and it gets muddy pretty quickly.
Monday, May 5, 2025
genealogy 4
This post is going to start out with a general report. I am now ready to send the genealogy out to relatives and ask for updates. I've done nothing with it except format it and read it.
One of the major observations that came from reading it was that I determined that the last half of it was descended not from Robert's ten children, but instead from his uncle James' clan, who were no doubt occupying the same valley and thus familiar to them. I am just beginning my research into the area in general. It seems it is not really all that isolated, with Youngstown, East Liverpool, Beaver Falls, New Castle, and a number of other cities all nearby. It is Appalachian, but so is everything out there. It became heavily populated soon enough.
But at the time, even the river, Wallace Run, was being named after the Wallaces, and the road along it, Wallace Run Road, was where Robert chose to settle. My research isn't complete. Where was his house? Where were the others?
My working theory is that John and Robert were the pig-stealers, left Scotland, stopped over in Northern Ireland, and arrived in Pennsylvania around 1811. Robert would join the service and fight in the War of 1812. John would move on to Ohio. After the war, Robert found his bride in New Castle and brought her back to Wallace Run, and had ten kids, the first seven of whom were boys. Lots of Wallaces. There would ultimately be lots of doctors, too.
Euphalia and Orpha ended up being in the other half, uncle James' clan. Their parents were first cousins, and their dad's parents were also first cousins. There was no sibling marriages as I'd originally suspected. I'm often wrong about these things after careful study. And they weren't even in Robert's family; they were in the other half. Relatives though, as were they all. Perhaps first-cousin marriage was just no big deal in the 1800's. Some of my questions revolve around that - how did that happen? What was the result? Were there any genetic issues?
As for Wallace Run, I'd still like to know, what or who was this river named for? What other Wallaces, besides Robert and Uncle James' clan, were in the valley?
1812 was actually a very busy era in western Pennsylvania. The area was bound up in British-English fighting, and soon to be French and Indian War, etc. They'd also had the whiskey rebellion if I'm not mistaken. But the joining of the service was the turn for Robert; he went off a pig thief, but came back an honorable soldier.
By my theory though he would have stolen the pig, with his brother, at the age of only about 14 or less. The brother was 8 years older than him, so in my mind, responsible. But responsible also for bringing a 14-yr-old to a foreign country. Two of them. This theory might need some work; perhaps the pig-stealers were in an earlier generation. Or were a fiction.
The wildest thing is that all this stuff is on the web, if you only know where to look for it.
Wallace genealogy
One of the major observations that came from reading it was that I determined that the last half of it was descended not from Robert's ten children, but instead from his uncle James' clan, who were no doubt occupying the same valley and thus familiar to them. I am just beginning my research into the area in general. It seems it is not really all that isolated, with Youngstown, East Liverpool, Beaver Falls, New Castle, and a number of other cities all nearby. It is Appalachian, but so is everything out there. It became heavily populated soon enough.
But at the time, even the river, Wallace Run, was being named after the Wallaces, and the road along it, Wallace Run Road, was where Robert chose to settle. My research isn't complete. Where was his house? Where were the others?
My working theory is that John and Robert were the pig-stealers, left Scotland, stopped over in Northern Ireland, and arrived in Pennsylvania around 1811. Robert would join the service and fight in the War of 1812. John would move on to Ohio. After the war, Robert found his bride in New Castle and brought her back to Wallace Run, and had ten kids, the first seven of whom were boys. Lots of Wallaces. There would ultimately be lots of doctors, too.
Euphalia and Orpha ended up being in the other half, uncle James' clan. Their parents were first cousins, and their dad's parents were also first cousins. There was no sibling marriages as I'd originally suspected. I'm often wrong about these things after careful study. And they weren't even in Robert's family; they were in the other half. Relatives though, as were they all. Perhaps first-cousin marriage was just no big deal in the 1800's. Some of my questions revolve around that - how did that happen? What was the result? Were there any genetic issues?
As for Wallace Run, I'd still like to know, what or who was this river named for? What other Wallaces, besides Robert and Uncle James' clan, were in the valley?
1812 was actually a very busy era in western Pennsylvania. The area was bound up in British-English fighting, and soon to be French and Indian War, etc. They'd also had the whiskey rebellion if I'm not mistaken. But the joining of the service was the turn for Robert; he went off a pig thief, but came back an honorable soldier.
By my theory though he would have stolen the pig, with his brother, at the age of only about 14 or less. The brother was 8 years older than him, so in my mind, responsible. But responsible also for bringing a 14-yr-old to a foreign country. Two of them. This theory might need some work; perhaps the pig-stealers were in an earlier generation. Or were a fiction.
The wildest thing is that all this stuff is on the web, if you only know where to look for it.
Wallace genealogy
Sunday, May 4, 2025
genealogy 3
I've found through deep reading a few more details about the genealogy. I had two burning questions: What was up with Euphelia & Orpha appearing on there three times? And who exactly were the brothers who allegedly stole the pig, got run out of Scotland, and came to Pennsylvania by way of Ireland?
To start with Euphelia, I originally thought that parts of the genealogy were repeated; they were. But it was because her parents were cousins. And, her dad's parents were also cousins, first cousins. At first I thought they were brother and sister and they were our Robert's, but no, they are in another branch of the family, not our ancestors, and no brother-sister incest involved that I can see. Just two first-cousin marriages.
Late tonight I found a bizarre #2 in the middle of the genealogy which implied that Robert and his brother (3s) had cousins in Pennsylvania when they arrived, if indeed they were the two who stole the pig. That answered my other question. Euphelia and Orpha were on the side of the family with Robert's uncle, who apparently were already there in Pennsylvania. On that side it was quite extensive, but people were clearly marrying their cousins. Not all residents of Wallace Run were Robert's descendants. And his older brother went on to Ohio. Robert joined the army at the age of 15/16, fought in the War of 1812, and came back, marrying a New Castle girl and having ten kids in the valley with all his cousins and their descendants. That's what I'm figuring at the moment.
Wallace genealogy
To start with Euphelia, I originally thought that parts of the genealogy were repeated; they were. But it was because her parents were cousins. And, her dad's parents were also cousins, first cousins. At first I thought they were brother and sister and they were our Robert's, but no, they are in another branch of the family, not our ancestors, and no brother-sister incest involved that I can see. Just two first-cousin marriages.
Late tonight I found a bizarre #2 in the middle of the genealogy which implied that Robert and his brother (3s) had cousins in Pennsylvania when they arrived, if indeed they were the two who stole the pig. That answered my other question. Euphelia and Orpha were on the side of the family with Robert's uncle, who apparently were already there in Pennsylvania. On that side it was quite extensive, but people were clearly marrying their cousins. Not all residents of Wallace Run were Robert's descendants. And his older brother went on to Ohio. Robert joined the army at the age of 15/16, fought in the War of 1812, and came back, marrying a New Castle girl and having ten kids in the valley with all his cousins and their descendants. That's what I'm figuring at the moment.
Wallace genealogy
Saturday, May 3, 2025
genealogy part 2
After some time reading the genealogy, I finally began applying myself to a few mysteries that I'd carried around for years, the most pressing of which was the pig mystery. I'll get to it but first a few general comments about the genealogy.
It is labelled Descendants of Robert Wallace because that's what it mostly is. But it actually starts, at number one, with William Wallace of whom little is known. Robert is in the third generation along with his brother John, and those two I believe are the pig boys. First and second generation were back in Scotland and lost. In the colonies John went off to Ohio; they knew where he was, and knew when he died, but didn't have access to or write down his descendants. He was about eight years older than Robert. I can now see that he had a son and daughter and their descendants are findable and start right there in Ohio.
Robert married Margaret Hendrickson and had ten children in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. By the time he died everyone had all kinds of good things to say about him; he was a pillar of the community. And whoever collected the genealogy was clearly after his descendants as he had many and most of course ended up right there in Beaver County. Robert was born in 1796 and married in 1818 (?) so I would guess the pig incident happened, back in Scotland and then Ireland, in about 1808 or soon after. He would have to have been old enough to be dragged by his brother John over to Ireland, and from there to Pennsylvania, though we can guess he married soon after he arrived, and he may not have stayed in Ireland very long.
There's more. He may have actually served in the war (1812?) but I'll do my research and get back to you. To me he is one of the most important characters in the line because he was the ancestor of almost everyone on the document. A patriarch of Beaver County. The one who picked up, even if dragged by his brother, and came from Scotland to Pennsylvania, albeit indirectly.
I am still quizzical about the twins. Euphalia and Orpha. They seem to appear three times on the genealogy. Two different ones appear to be because both their parents were Wallaces, so they appear beneath each of their parents separately. A third time seems to be a repeat of one of the others and should be investigated so that I can make the genealogy free of redundancy. But it raises questions. Were their parents cousins? What came of them? My problem here is that I can't print, and because of that, I'm considering taking some time to fix the printer so I can at least have a working copy of the genealogy to do research off of. A possible project is updating the genealogy; after all, it goes only up to births in my generation, and several of us twelve cousins have died already, or become grandparents, or both, thus creating two or three more generations at least.
My parents' voice rings through the stuff I have on the Wallaces, my mom's in particular. They have some good anecdotes that sound like they are right out of their mouths. It all deserves to be written down somewhere even if it has to wait for a good story about Uncle Bones to tie it all together.
Wallace genealogy
It is labelled Descendants of Robert Wallace because that's what it mostly is. But it actually starts, at number one, with William Wallace of whom little is known. Robert is in the third generation along with his brother John, and those two I believe are the pig boys. First and second generation were back in Scotland and lost. In the colonies John went off to Ohio; they knew where he was, and knew when he died, but didn't have access to or write down his descendants. He was about eight years older than Robert. I can now see that he had a son and daughter and their descendants are findable and start right there in Ohio.
Robert married Margaret Hendrickson and had ten children in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. By the time he died everyone had all kinds of good things to say about him; he was a pillar of the community. And whoever collected the genealogy was clearly after his descendants as he had many and most of course ended up right there in Beaver County. Robert was born in 1796 and married in 1818 (?) so I would guess the pig incident happened, back in Scotland and then Ireland, in about 1808 or soon after. He would have to have been old enough to be dragged by his brother John over to Ireland, and from there to Pennsylvania, though we can guess he married soon after he arrived, and he may not have stayed in Ireland very long.
There's more. He may have actually served in the war (1812?) but I'll do my research and get back to you. To me he is one of the most important characters in the line because he was the ancestor of almost everyone on the document. A patriarch of Beaver County. The one who picked up, even if dragged by his brother, and came from Scotland to Pennsylvania, albeit indirectly.
I am still quizzical about the twins. Euphalia and Orpha. They seem to appear three times on the genealogy. Two different ones appear to be because both their parents were Wallaces, so they appear beneath each of their parents separately. A third time seems to be a repeat of one of the others and should be investigated so that I can make the genealogy free of redundancy. But it raises questions. Were their parents cousins? What came of them? My problem here is that I can't print, and because of that, I'm considering taking some time to fix the printer so I can at least have a working copy of the genealogy to do research off of. A possible project is updating the genealogy; after all, it goes only up to births in my generation, and several of us twelve cousins have died already, or become grandparents, or both, thus creating two or three more generations at least.
My parents' voice rings through the stuff I have on the Wallaces, my mom's in particular. They have some good anecdotes that sound like they are right out of their mouths. It all deserves to be written down somewhere even if it has to wait for a good story about Uncle Bones to tie it all together.
Wallace genealogy
Friday, May 2, 2025
An old genealogy
There is an old family origin story in my branch of the Wallaces that goes like this: Two brothers stole a pig in Scotland, and were being chased by the authorities, so they escaped to Northern Ireland. There, they were able to survive and live with friends or relatives, but they weren't happy. So they decided to go to Pennsylvania, where some other Wallaces had settled, and they did. And that's how our ancestors got to Pennsylvania.
Naturally I had questions about who they were: when did they live? Where did they start out and what was their transit point in Northern Ireland? It seems they were from Ayreshire in Scotland. There were thousands of Wallaces in Ayreshire (sp.?) at the time so the trail seems to have gone cold.
But I turned up a genealogy the other day, and got it off an ancient computer where it was actually in html form; I reformatted it and now have a word document that I can send around. I am not sure if it is the only one I have for the Wallaces, or how it compares to others that might be around. It had huge formatting issues and lots of typos which I only fixed if they were obvious.
I might now be able to answer a couple of questions from above. It seems my best guess would be John and Robert Wallace, born at the end of the 1700's, John about eight years older than Robert. They knew their siblings' names, as well as their parents and their grandfather William Wallace who is the only #1 character in this genealogy. Of course all of us Wallaces would like to think we are descended from a William, if not THE William.
So John and Robert are in the third generation, and many of the lower generation are listed. Nobody knew much about John's descendants but they knew when he died. Robert then had most of the ones we know, twelve pages of them, many of them Wallaces, including our own Wallace family with its twelve cousins me among them. Some dates and names are wrong. It doesn't go past my birth, and therefore was probably updated by my parents as early as the sixties when the Leverett one was made (the Leverett one now has my children, if not theirs, but that probably reflects the fact that my dad was still updating it for years. I'm not sure if there is anything updated on my mom's side, the Wallaces; this one is not updated though).
I may put it on this blog. I may even update it on this blog. If you're interested, contact me. I'll make sure you get one.
Update: found it on this very blog.
Wallace genealogy
Naturally I had questions about who they were: when did they live? Where did they start out and what was their transit point in Northern Ireland? It seems they were from Ayreshire in Scotland. There were thousands of Wallaces in Ayreshire (sp.?) at the time so the trail seems to have gone cold.
But I turned up a genealogy the other day, and got it off an ancient computer where it was actually in html form; I reformatted it and now have a word document that I can send around. I am not sure if it is the only one I have for the Wallaces, or how it compares to others that might be around. It had huge formatting issues and lots of typos which I only fixed if they were obvious.
I might now be able to answer a couple of questions from above. It seems my best guess would be John and Robert Wallace, born at the end of the 1700's, John about eight years older than Robert. They knew their siblings' names, as well as their parents and their grandfather William Wallace who is the only #1 character in this genealogy. Of course all of us Wallaces would like to think we are descended from a William, if not THE William.
So John and Robert are in the third generation, and many of the lower generation are listed. Nobody knew much about John's descendants but they knew when he died. Robert then had most of the ones we know, twelve pages of them, many of them Wallaces, including our own Wallace family with its twelve cousins me among them. Some dates and names are wrong. It doesn't go past my birth, and therefore was probably updated by my parents as early as the sixties when the Leverett one was made (the Leverett one now has my children, if not theirs, but that probably reflects the fact that my dad was still updating it for years. I'm not sure if there is anything updated on my mom's side, the Wallaces; this one is not updated though).
I may put it on this blog. I may even update it on this blog. If you're interested, contact me. I'll make sure you get one.
Update: found it on this very blog.
Wallace genealogy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Here's my uncle, Jim Wallace, who lived most of his life in the deserts around Las Vegas, Utah and arizona. In this picture he was in ... -
Robert Wallace Genealogy Descendants of: William Wallace 1 William Wallace b. ca. 1710 m. Mary Unknown 2 John Wallace b. ca...
-
I ran across this somewhere, and now have lost track of where. My goal is to do the research. In the past I have stopped at the ocean, and n...