The tavern has been vacant for a few years, but it is reopening this week as The Inn at Glen Gardner. I wish the new proprietors the best of luck. In light of the reopening and the fact that I owe an Eveland descendent some information, I thought it would be a perfect time to write about my obsession. I’ve been researching the Inn and the Eveland family for years, and though I’m not complete, I feel it is time to present my version of the Inn’s early history.

Background

Many written accounts indicate that the Inn was started by a man named John Eveland in the 1760s and was operated by his family for over one hundred years. No references or evidence; simply a statement. Anyone who performs historical or genealogical research knows this is an all too common scenario and that the statement will need proof. The earliest source of the 1760 date that I have found was from History of Hunterdon and Somerset Counties, New Jersey, published in 1881, which I will refer to as “Snell,” as we advance:

[i]

According to Snell, “John Eveland built and kept a tavern as early as 1760.” The chain of ownership provided was that John Eveland owned the tavern for fifty-five years, his son Peter held it for forty years. The founder’s grandson, John, owned it for ten before selling it to E. [Edward] Humphrey. Snell’s statement was published in 1881, well after-the-fact, and is not based on first-hand knowledge.  

Tavern License Applications

Inns and Taverns were essential for travel, and the communities in the Colonies, therefore highly regulated. The first comprehensive law governing taverns was enacted in 1739. One of the requirements was that each tavern owner must apply for a license every year.[ii] I expected to search the Hunterdon County records and find John Eveland’s first application for a tavern in Lebanon Township as early as 1760. 

I searched the tavern license applications and court records, and the earliest application located was in 1795.[iii] The document wording is consistent with a first-time application. The Inn is near the Musconetcong River, the dividing line between Hunterdon county and present-day Warren county. In 1760 Warren County was part of Sussex County. I expanded my search to neighboring Sussex County, but there was no reference to an Eveland in the records there.

Figure 1 Tavern Application

Photo of the original document taken by the Author

The law required Freeholders who resided within the town to vouch for the applicant’s character and their ability to meet the minimum requirements. The application was an annual process conducted by the Court of Quarter Sessions, typically in April. In Hunterdon County, the Quarter Session minutes are co-mingled with the Court of Common Pleas. If an Inn-Keeper allowed too much drinking and rowdiness, it might be challenging to find neighbors willing to sign off on their annual application.

John Eveland’s earliest license application was made in 1795, which conflicts with Snell’s date of “as early as 1760.” It doesn’t mean that 1760 is incorrect, but the answer will require more research.

Next Post – The Eveland Family

Cover Photo – Special thanks to Sean Butler for allowing an image of from his Post Card collection to be used.

[i] James P. Snell, History of Hunterdon and Somerset Counties, New Jersey, with Illustrations and Biographical Sketches of its Prominent Men and Pioneers, (Philadelphia: Everts & Peck, 1881), 447 digital images, Internet Archive, (https://archive.org/ : accessed 14 February 2014). Link

[ii] Samuel Allinson, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey, from the Surrender of the Government to Queen Anne, on the 17^th day of April in the year of our Lord 1702, to 14^th day of January 1776 (Burlington, Isaac Collins, printer to the King, 1776), 102-107. [Requirement freeholder neighbors to sign the Tavern application]

[iii] Hunterdon County, New Jersey, Hunterdon Court of Common Pleas; Tavern Licenses, Applications and Recognizances, “Loose Licenses/ Applications (1762-1799),” John Eveland (1795), Box 11, New Jersey State Archives, Trenton.

The post When was Eveland’s Tavern Established and who was the Original Owner? Part 1 appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

New Jersey in 1793, contains copies of the law, and an overview of the existing records. In some cases, the records no longer exist, and the author instead used Tax Ratables for those locales. This book is out of print, but it found at some libraries.  I scored a copy on eBay, and it’s one of my favorite occupants of my home library.

Besides the names and location of the men, there isn’t too much other data, but it is variable.  Some lists are broken out by villages, or military unit.  The inclusion of women may be the result of Tax Ratables used as a replacement (Thanks, Michelle Chubenko).  Some lists have exempt individuals, and others do not. While not perfect, it is a unique snapshot of males between the ages of 18-45 in a state where the Census is not available until 1830.

Back to my research question. Who was the father of Peter Teeple?  We know that he was born in 1785, in either Warren County, New Jersey, or perhaps near Warren Township, Somerset County, New Jersey.[ii]  He married  Catherine Clawson (Clauson) in Bedminster, Somerset County in 1820, most likely at the Bedminster Reformed Church.[iii]  The couple settled in a village in Piscataway Township, Middlesex County, New Jersey. His son George mentioned that his Grandfather lived in Pluckemin, and was 101 years old when he passed away.[iv]  So if Peter was born in 1785, and his father had an extremely long life, then he would have likely been enumerated in 1793, when Peter was 8.

I begin with a strength rating as I did in the past.  For this derivative source, the results may be different, as the age range is quite broad.  In our last post, analysis of the 1830 Census, there was only one man in the entire state who could have been Peter’s father, based on his age; George Teeple of Bridgewater, Somerset County, New Jersey.  In this Census the age grouping is vast 18-45 so, it could be men born as early as 1748, or as late as 1775.^*  In theory, the list could contain his father and possibly siblings or cousins; in other words, the list will be longer, and I will have more people to eliminate.

The potential list has grown.  I am happy to see a George in Bridgewater, well actually multiple, but it is a Tax Ratable, which must be kept in mind.  We also now have men named Teaple [Teeple] in towns, which someday will be Warren County.  I will begin my process of elimination (research the individuals) with a strength of one and two but may expand as needed. Let’s hope they all left wills! 

New Jersey Tax Ratables (Census substitute) up next.

Related Posts:
https://once-removed.com/2020/03/14/census-analysis-newjersey-style-part-1/
https://once-removed.com/2020/03/15/census-analysis-new-jersey-style-part-2/

[i] Norton, James S. New Jersey in 1793. Salt Lake City: James S. Norton.1974.

[ii] Pellicane, Elizabeth. “Census Analysis, Jersey Style; Part 1,” Elizabeth Pellicane, Once-Removed; Blog,14 March 2020.  https://once-removed.com/2020/03/14/census-analysis-newjersey-style-part-1/ : 2020.

[iii] “New Jersey, County Marriages, 1682-1956,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/: accessed 14 December 2018), image 103 of 366; New Jersey State Archives, Trenton.

[iv] “85 Years Young; Guns For Rabbits George Teeple Enjoys Hunting Tells How to Live Many Years,” Trenton Evening Times, 30 November 1909, page 3, column 5; GenealogyBank (accessed : 14 December 2018).

Figure 2 –

James S. Norton, New Jersey in 1793, entries for Teaple, Teeple; Salt Lake City: James S. Norton.1974. Pages 154, 205, 206, 262, 274, 276, 283, 287, 385, 388, 390, 392 and 295.

Note* – Somerset County was missing from the Militia enumeration, and the author substituted Tax Ratables.  It should be known that for Somerset County, there is no guarantee that the people enumerated were aged 45 and under or counted only once.

The post Census Analysis, New Jersey Style; Part 3 appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

My research plan is to search the Federal Census, Militia Records, and New Jersey Tax Ratables for a man with the surname of Teeple, Deeple, and other variants who was born as late as 1765 and died after 1830, possibly as late as 1866.  I begin with the 1830 census.

I start with FamilySearch, and I will double up with Ancestry records.  This combination is my preference, yours may be different, but I do advise that you review two different sets; casting a wider net due to indexing variations.  Family search does an excellent job of picking up variants, but more importantly, it permits the downloading of records to a spreadsheet, which means less data entry.

I log into FamilySearch (always do this first, accounts are free), and search records with my starting criteria:

• Surname – Teeple
• Residence Place – New Jersey
• Residence Year – 1830 to 1830

[i]

I will limit my records by date and location but not “Match all terms exactly;” I want to see variants, and I can adjust later.

I scan the results, but ultimately I am going to isolate the 1830 census, select the “Collections” tab, click on the “United States Census, 1830” box, and then “Filter these Results.”

[ii]

I switch back to the records tab and see what returns, depending on the scenario, further filtering may be needed.  In this case, it is not, I am working with a relatively uncommon name, in an early period.  There aren’t pages of entries.  If there were, I would adjust the “Number of results to show” to 100.  Using the “Export Results” option, I download the results into *.xls format, page by page.  I would then eventually combine the files into a single workbook.

[iii]

The downloaded raw data will look like this:

There’s not a ton of fields populated because the 1830 census didn’t have many data points, but you can see that the fields are in place, so if this were the 1880 census, more data would be downloaded.

Some excellent features offered by FamilySearch (besides being free!), is the “person url field.” Click on it, and it will pull up the image right from your spreadsheet.  FamilySearch provides citations to copy and paste; I, however, create my own: 

I copy the combined downloads into an excel template that I have prepared for the 1830 Census; this becomes the basis of my list.  I perform the same query in Ancestry.com and print the result summary.  I review a copy of each census image in Ancestry or FamilySearch manually, adding any households not picked up by FamilySearch. It’s not unusual to have different results in the two repositories, that’s the point of checking more than one set of an online census.  I view each image to ensure that it’s not an indexing error, if there are neighboring connected families (such as Teeple, or Clauson in this scenario), and document the findings. The 1830 census does not have more than the head of the household named, As I view and cite each census image, I record the number of inhabitants just as they were enumerated.  I also ensure that the indexing was accurate, sometimes F and T are confused. Once these steps are completed, I should have a solid list of those who were enumerated that match my criteria. However, I will also view an area line by line if I feel there is a gap. 

The Analysis

Recalling the research goal:

Find a man with the surname of Teeple, Deeple, and other variants who was born as late as 1765.  He could have been living in Warren County, New Jersey, or Warren Township, Somerset County, New Jersey.  Remember that only the head of the household was named, who could, in theory, be any male over 21.  In other words, we are looking for households that had a white male resident enumerated in the correct age group, keeping in mind that he may not have been the head of the household.  Based on my research goals, I create a color-coded key to determine the “strength” of the match.  In scenarios with vast

 numbers of entries it helps me tame the list with filtering and pivot tables:

Following is the result of today’s exercise; it is a short list:

In the 1830 census, there was only one household that matched our criteria for the father of Peter Teeple, George Teeple of Bridgewater, Somerset County New Jersey.  Is this sufficient evidence to say George Teeple was the father of Peter Teeple?  Not at all. Though, it is a building block. Remember, census records can have gaps, and misinformation.  We relied on an interview with Peter’s son, George, who indicated that his grandfather was from Pluckemin and lived to 101.  He never named his grandfather, and though he was speaking of his paternal line in the interview, it could have been his maternal grandfather as well.  The 1830 census analysis is just the start of the journey; more work is needed. George Teeple was the only adult male of the household, and there were no other Teeple households with a man of that age.  But what if Peter’s father was living with a married daughter?

My next step will be to utilize a census substitute and go back in time, closer to the birth date of Peter Teeple.

[i] FamilySearch (http://familysearch.org : accessed 15 March 2020), “Search Historical Records.”  

[ii] FamilySearch (http://familysearch.org : accessed 15 March 2020), “Filter These Results.”  

[iii] FamilySearch (http://familysearch.org : accessed 15 March 2020), “1830 Census Search results.”  

Figure 6:

1830 U.S. census, Middlesex County, New Jersey, population schedule, Piscataway, sheet 190 (written), Peter Teeple; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 14 December 2018), citing National Archives microfilm publication M19, Roll 83.
1830 U.S. census, Somerset County, New Jersey, population schedule, Bridgewater, page 60 (written), George Teeple; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 1 March 2020), citing National Archives microfilm publication M19, Roll 83.
1830 U.S. census, Somerset County, New Jersey, population schedule, Bedminster, page 75 (written), Wm {William] Teeple; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 1 March 2020), citing National Archives microfilm publication M19, Roll 83.
1830 U.S. census, Somerset County, New Jersey, population schedule, Bridgewater, page 55 (written), William Teeple; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 1 March 2020), citing National Archives microfilm publication M19, Roll 83.
1830 U.S. census, Somerset County, New Jersey, population schedule, Bedminster, page 75 (written), John Teeple; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 1 March 2020), citing National Archives microfilm publication M19, Roll 83.
1830 U.S. census, Hunterdon County, New Jersey, population schedule, Kingwood, page 378 (written), George Teeple; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 1 March 2020), citing National Archives microfilm publication M19, Roll 83.
1830 U.S. census, Morris County, New Jersey, population schedule, Washington, page 82 (written), Jacob Teeple; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 1 March 2020), citing National Archives microfilm publication M19, Roll 82.

The post Census Analysis, New Jersey Style; Part 2 appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

I’ve performed “One-to-one Autosomal Comparison” matches for each kit, and to each other to ensure that the “One-to-many DNA comparison” was accurate.  We three also match in Ancestry. None of our shared matches uploaded a Gedcom file (family tree), so no new information yet. I’ve decided to jump in feet first and map my chromosomes with my two known Fennimore matches. Maybe not the best move, but I learn by doing.

DNA Painter, like Gedmatch, has a free base option; subscribers receive premium benefits.  My general philosophy is if I am going to use it for more than a week, and it is within my budget, I’ll pay the fee. People should be paid for their work. Besides, I’ve attempted this in excel before, and this is much easier!

My goal is to map my segments to others that share a known ancestor or couple. DNA Painter should help me isolate my William Fennimore-Mary Day segments, allowing me to expand the family tree and contacts.

I am going to use the Gedmatch application “People who match both, or 1 of 2 kits.”  I will run it twice always, using my kit number, since I am using DNA Painter to map my chromosomes at this time.  Right now, I am only interested in the matches I share with each of the two “known” Fennimore kits.

There will be three sections; matches that our two kits share, and matches to each single kit not shared by the other.  As always, I will paste the results into a tab of an excel workbook.  I am only interested in the first sections, common matches shared by both kits. Below is the list of the kits in Gedmatch which share matches with both the descendant of Louis Fennimore, and the descendant of William Henry Fennimore (me). I’ve added a few fields to my spreadsheet:

• Project ID – This will tie back to my project tracking sheet.  I am sure that one is already in my tracker, and I have included it in that field.  The others will receive a new project ID.  The matches may appear already on my main tracker as Ancestry matches, but at this time, I can’t make the correlation. I can always merge later.
  
• Linked –  Some of my matches have the same email address, so a single individual likely manages them. Later, when I start contacting my matches instead of sending multiple requests, I can consolidate.  It will also be helpful to know that they have been correlated with each other by another party.
  
• Paint ID – This is the ID which I will use when adding this match to DNA Painter.  It consists of Project ID-Source abbreviation (G for Gedmatch), Match ID (in this case from Gedmatch)-Date.  I create a little template at the bottom of the screen using the excel concatenate function. I copy and paste the project ID and corresponding match ID, and the output can be copied and pasted into DNA Painter, and my project tracker instead of repetitive typing.  Less chance for errors and easier on the hands.

While I am calling this the Fennimore project, I am only able to map these two kits to a couple; William Fennimore and Mary Day, our common ancestor couple.  You can see by the Gen columns that none of our matches are very closely related, which I would expect for this particular exercise. If I were looking for biological relatives of a living person, I’d be ecstatic to see the opposite.  I believe that the research question (goal) will determine your best approach. But stated earlier, I am jumping in, and you are along for the ride. I welcome backseat drivers! So correct me if I take a wrong turn.

Time to Paint!

I’m firing up DNA Painter, and my prework will hopefully make it a bit easier. I am going to create a new profile in Chromosome Maps. 

I copy and paste each shared match (Gedmatch ID) into the Gedmatch “One-to-one Autosomal Comparison” utility with my kit number. The options selected are position only and display only chromosomes with matched segments.

Highlight the results, and cut and paste into the “Paint a Match” box:

After you have saved the match, another screen will pop up to classify the entry:

Once saved, you can view where the match is placed. Very Cool!

I will repeat this action for each unique match with the two kits. Eventually, I will see some patterns emerge:

Note – When I created my Gedmatch kit list, I worked off my main project tracker. I copied each of the two “People who match both Kits” to a new tab on a workbook.  Beginning with the larger group of shared matches (Louis Fennimore’s descendant).  I used the VLOOKUP feature in excel and eliminated the duplicates on my shared matches with the George Fennimore line and created a single list of unique matches.  Remember, I am mapping my chromosome right now, and they are the same for each comparison. Each unique match was added back into my project tracker with the appropriate information.  I may later find there are duplicates with the testing company matches and my list of Gedmatch kits, but at least I know I haven’t created two entries for the same Gedmatch ID.  How you manage your project is entirely up to you.  I may change over time as I learn, but for now, this is my approach.

It may be too tiny to see in the picture, but there are quite a few matches. Some of which are in a pile-up area, but segments in 5, 18, and 19 look promising. This step is just the beginning; I will repeat the action with my 23andMe, FamilyTree DNA, and My Heritage matches.  These companies provide chromosome mapping so that it will be the same process as Gedmatch. This tool handles them beautifully. I need to find matches of my Fennimore DNA, not descended from this base couple, and see if they have some clues that I could break this wall, so the more matches I map, the better my chances of finding someone. 

So far, the only people I have come across researching this line appear to be using some of my work as a basis. Twenty years ago, I  mailed letters with family trees to all Fennimore families listed in the “white pages “in the vicinity. I received a few responses.  I’ve also corresponded with others electronically, sharing documents when requested, and hearing their family stories. None of the people that I have communicated with knew much about William.  My goal is to find someone who isn’t descended directly from William Fennimore but match my Fennimore DNA. Maybe they will have some information I haven’t yet discovered.  I’ve looked at many matches, and I don’t see the surname or the variations often, which does make me wonder a bit about William.  Plenty of my matches have indirect Day lines in their research.

Painting can be time-consuming, and after a while, copying and pasting matches can get a bit tedious.  I listen to podcasts or music while I do this; it makes the time go by quicker.  Some of my personal favorites are the British History Podcast, Crime Junkie, Murder Squad, and Wondery/LA times series (Dirty John was terrific).  A little foreshadowing for my next post.

Have you used DNA Painter?  If So how did you approach your project?

GEDmatch – Tools for DNA and Genealogy Research ©Copyright 2011-2020 by GEDmatch, Inc.
Ancestry – © 1997-2020 Ancestry
23andMe – © 2020 23andMe, Inc.
DNA Painter – © DNA Painter, 2020
MyHeritage – Copyright © 2020 MyHeritage Ltd
FamilyTreeDNA – All Contents Copyright 2001-2020 Gene by Gene, Ltd.

The post The Fennimore Family of Somerset and Morris Counties New Jersey A DNA Project – Third-Party Tools, DNA Painter appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

I’ve chosen to create my Project Management tracking in Excel, but use what works best for you. I like a particular spreadsheet software because I use it daily for my “day job,” and I can pivot and parse data quickly with it. Also, I can add fields easily. I hope to use a third-party tool for analyzing the details, but for now, I need to track my matches across different testing companies and contact the individuals who share DNA. I’ve tested in multiple companies, and I am sure that I am not the only one. I want to track the tests they have taken, whether there is a paper trail, and, most importantly, whether they are willing to participate in the project.

Two crucial subjects to consider are privacy and permission. If I intend to write up my findings (which I do), then I need the approval of the test takers I will use in my proof statement. If a kit is in the “public domain,” it can be used for analysis, but our professional standards require permission to publish. But we will get into that in a later post. Privacy is paramount; I will mask the identity of the test takers. Even though the data is “public,” it is too easy to link kits, and living people to not take this extra step.

For today I am beginning with the shared matches in Ancestry DNA  between a descendant of William H. Fennimore (me) and the descendant of a brother with the most paper documentation.  One of my children is a match, that kit will not be included in the analysis since it is a subset of mine. We have 14 shared matches. I chose Ancestry because I feel more people will have started there, and I have communicated with a few of the other users over the years. The downside is that I don’t know precisely where we match. If I want to identify the potential chromosomes and segments, I will need to convince them to take their DNA to a third party program. Some of the testers have already done this, so I will work on locating them in our various companies and start building my project plan.

My initial project tracking database has the following fields:

I want to obscure the identity of the participants in any “sharing,” going forward, plus I need to link kits, so I don’t contact the same person multiple times, or consider them a separate person. I also want to ensure that I have adequate coverage across the children of William and Mary Fennimore. The matches must come from different lines, not just mine. Finally, I want to make sure I have adequate permission, that they have consented (or not), and to map them via traditional research. Looking at many of my matches, I can tell quite a few have not logged on in over a year. I’m sure the response rates will be low. I will be messaging a total of three times, and then move on.

I’m hopeful we will get enough participants willing to play along.

The post The Fennimore Family of Somerset and Morris Counties New Jersey A DNA Project -Organization and Privacy appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

The Marriage

William Fennimore of Morristown, Morris County New Jersey, married Mary Elizabeth Day of Bernards, Somerset County on 16 December 1859, in Millington, Morris County. Rev. Hopper officiated the marriage at the Parsonage of the Millington Baptist Church. Mary Elizabeth was the daughter of Israel Day and Gracia Ann Elizabeth Blazier.[1] William’s parents were not listed on the marriage record.

The couple would have thirteen children, of which nine would survive to adulthood; of the nine, it appears that seven would have children of their own.

The Project

Through traditional research, public trees, and correspondence, I have identified six* Ancestry.com kits that share DNA and have a “paper trail.” Using the “paper trails,” it can be determined that we are descended from four different children of William and Mary. 

The ultimate goal of the project is to identify the parents of William Fennimore of Somerset and Morris counties born 1834-37 in New Jersey. By contacting descendants, we can share traditional research, but also hopefully isolate the “Fennimore” DNA. If you match, I will be contacting you via Ancestry messages, and be asking you to help me with our quest. 

[1] New Jersey, Department of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics, Marriage Returns, Somerset County, Bernards Township, AE:323 (1859), William Fennamore [Fennimore] and Mary Eliz^h. Day, New Jersey State Archives, Trenton

The post The Fennimore Family of Somerset and Morris Counties New Jersey A DNA Project appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

The Early Life of Julia Beam

Part 1 introduced Julia Beam who was tarred and feathered on 17 October 1891 by a group of men in Glen Gardner, Hunterdon County. Newspapers throughout the country followed the trials with great interest.

My Ladies – Julia Beam Part 1

The Beam Family
Julia Beam was likely born in August 1873 in Lebanon Township, New Jersey, in an area called Germantown in Tewksbury, Hunterdon County.  She was the oldest surviving child of Theodore Beam and his first wife, Ann Elizabeth Call. Typical of the time frame, the births of most of the children were not formally registered. Ann Elizabeth Beam would have twelve children in total, at the birth of her last child a boy; nine were still living. Julia’s mother died on 16 January 1894, five days after giving birth. The cause of death was puerperal peritonitis complicated by La Grippe, “childbed fever,” and the flu. Like many of her peers, Julia’s mom had children regularly until she passed away.

Theodore Beam would take a second wife, Catherine Frank [Franks]. The couple married in 1897, and the union would produce two sons before Theodore passed away in 1898. Catherine was still very young and went on to marry Joseph Apgar in 1899. The two youngest Beam sons, George and Alfred, possibly assumed the surname of their Stepfather, Joseph Apgar. The children of Theodore’s first marriage appeared to scatter or have passed after the death of their father.

The family was nothing out of the ordinary. Theodore was a laborer, owned no property, and kept out of the court records for the most part. One news article indicated that Julia was mistreated as a child. She was sent to work at age eleven,  had little education, and had not attended church. Another reporter suggested that she was lying about being married; Marvin Walters already had a wife, and it would have been impossible to wed. There is no way to know how Julia was raised or if she knew her husband was a bigamist. She was seventeen or eighteen when she married and likely more of a sympathetic figure than the horrible influence the people of Glen Gardner deemed her.

In the 1880 census, Theodore’s family and his younger brother’s family shared the same residence. Both men were laborers, and neither could read or write. Julia’s mother Elizabeth [Ann Elizabeth] was able to read. Julia was attending school at age seven. In the 1900 census, Julia and her younger sister, Sarah, both grown, indicated they could read and write. After the death of her parents, Julia was caring for her younger brother, William, and he was attending school. The Beam children weren’t entirely uneducated, as suggested. Though several news articles described Julia as simple or childlike, it was more likely a reflection of her youth and being placed in a difficult situation.

The Beam family was large, and Julia was the eldest surviving daughter. Her family likely expected her to marry and not be a burden. It doesn’t appear that her parents were willing or able to support her when she was alone.

The Marriage
Julia Beam and Melvin [Malachi] N. Walters were married in the Lower Valley Presbyterian Church 29 December 1890 by the Pastor. On the marriage return, it was indicated that it was Walter’s second marriage. The church was near Julia’s home; it seems unlikely the Pastor would marry the couple if he believed Melvin was still legally married. It was not as if the couple wed away from the area or were trying to hide the fact that the groom was married previously. Months before their union, the local newspaper stated that Walters was initiating divorce proceedings against his first wife. His first marriage seems to have been 1888 to a woman named Almira Harrison. A search of the state archives did not turn up a divorce record; his newspaper announcement may have misled different parties to believe that he could legally re-marry.

The time between when Julia was wed and deserted by her husband was not very long. In about ten months, she went from being a newlywed to homeless and victim of vigilantes. The headlines focused on her actions, but minimal mention was made of her husband or the events that led up to the attack.

Marriage Document of Julia Beam and Melvin Walters

Part 3 – The Groom

Sources
New Jersey, Department of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics, Death Certificate, no number, (1931), Julia Frank [Beam], SHEVS004 reel no. 708, New Jersey State Archives, Trenton.

New Jersey, Department of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics, Marriage Certificate, W-39, (1890), Melvin N Walters and Julia Beam, SHEVS003 reel no. 77, New Jersey State Archives, Trenton.

1880 U.S. census, Hunterdon County, New Jersey, population schedule, East Lebanon, Enumeration District (ED) 86, sheet 352 a (stamped), house number 125, family 2, Theodore Beam; digital image, Ancestry.com, (https://www.ancestry.com/: accessed 8 April 2018), citing National Archives microfilm publication T9. [Julia A. Beam aged 7 eldest child enumerated, birth year about 1873].

New Jersey, Department of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics, Death Certificate, no. B75, (1894), Elizabeth Beam [Call], SHEVS004 reel no. 141, New Jersey State Archives, Trenton.

New Jersey, Department of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics, Birth Certificate, number, (1897), George Beam, SHEVS002 reel no. 153, New Jersey State Archives, Trenton.

Find A Grave, database and images (https://www.findagrave.com : accessed 08 April 2018), memorial page for Theodore Beam (1846–1898), Find A Grave Memorial no. 71533016, citing Middle Valley Cemetery, Washington Valley, Morris County, New Jersey, USA ; Maintained by Donna (contributor 46910450).

New Jersey, Department of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics, Marriage Certificate, A-2, (1899), Joseph Charles Apgar and Catherine Frank [Beam], SHEVS003 reel no. 147, New Jersey State Archives, Trenton.

1900 U.S. census, Hunterdon County, New Jersey, population schedule, Clinton Township, Enumeration District (ED) 3, sheet 57b (stamped), house number 51, dwelling 167, family 174, Joseph C. Apgar; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 8 January 2018), citing National Archives microfilm publication T623. [Joseph Apgar is the head of the household, two Step-Sons George Beam (3), and Albert (1), but 10 years later on the 1910 census they are listed as sons with the last name Apgar].

1910 U.S. census, Hunterdon County, New Jersey, population schedule, East District Lebanon Township, Enumeration District (ED) 8, sheet 230b (stamped), dwelling 99, family 104, Joseph C. Apgar; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 8 January 2018), citing National Archives microfilm publication T623.

“For Tarring a Woman,” The Sun [New York], 20 November 1891, page 1, column 1, digital image; Newspapers.com, (http:www.newspapers.com : accessed 21 October 2017).

“Tarred and Feathered because she was Bad; Glen Gardner’s Young Men were being Corrupted,” New York Herald, page 18, column 3, digital image; Genealogybank (http://ww.genealogybank.com : accessed 7 October 2016).

1880 U.S. census, Hunterdon Co., N. J., pop. Sch., E. Lebanon, ED 86, sheet 352 a, house no. 125, family 2, Theodore Beam; digital image, Ancestry.com.
1900 U.S. census, Hunterdon County, New Jersey, population schedule, West Lebanon, Enumeration District (ED) 18, sheet 248A (stamped), house number NA, dwelling 257, family 260, Edward Lisk; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 8 January 2018), citing National Archives microfilm publication T623.

1900 U.S. census, Hunterdon County, New Jersey, population schedule, East Lebanon, Enumeration District (ED) 17, sheet 229A (stamped), house number NA, dwelling 80, family 85, Luther Frank; digital image, Ancestry.com, (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 8 January 2018), citing National Archives microfilm publication T623.

New Jersey, Department of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics, Marriage Certificate, W-39, (1890), Melvin N Walters and Julia Beam, SHEVS003 reel no. 77, New Jersey State Archives, Trenton.

Brief News Items from Glen Gardner,” transcript by Bill Hartman, Rootsweb (”http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ : accessed 4 November 2016); citing original publication in the Hunterdon County Republican, 4 June 1890.[Note: Rootsweb is currently experiencing hosting issues, but I have Mr. Hartman’s pdf].

“Married,” transcript by Bill Hartman, Rootsweb (”http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ : accessed 4 November 2016):citing original publication in the Hunterdon County Republican, 7 January 1888.[Note: Rootsweb is currently experiencing hosting issues, but I have Mr. Hartman’s pdf].

The post My Ladies – Julia Beam Part 2 appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

A rainy summer weekend.  My favorite outdoor activity, kayaking is off the agenda.  That means more time for genealogy!  However, I had promised myself I would not do any further research until I scanned the pile of wills, deeds, and NYC vital records collecting dust on my desk.  Once that is complete then I could look into ordering Elizabeth Shown Mill’s latest edition of Evidence Explained, and only then start some new research.   Then it happened, an email kicking off the “Donegal Distraction.”

We were running early errands.  I was a passenger in the “white knuckle express,” a combination of New Jersey traffic and my husband’s unique style of driving.  When it gets to be too much I will glance at my personal emails on my phone.  I have a tendency towards motion sickness when I read in the car, so it’s not something I do frequently.  The message was several emails down, but it stated “Donegal Ancestry” in the title.  Well, what’s a girl to do? It’s not like I was at my desk at the moment with my scanner and document pile, so of course I opened it.  It was an email from a nice gentleman, introducing himself, his research and why he contacted me.  I was a match for 5 DNA kits he managed for his family.  He wanted to know if I knew anything about my Donegal ancestors, ca. 1830.

To my knowledge, all my Irish ancestors were from Dublin.  The furthest back I have been able to get was 1842 on one surname, and 1856 on another.  I was fortunate that some of the churches in Dublin have had their records online for a few years.  I was hoping that as more records open up online I would get a little further back.  I have no evidence of anyone from Donegal, yet, and the locations are on opposite sides of Ireland.  I could have easily ignored the email, but it instead I gave a quick reply that I would look into it, and once I had a chance would look at it more closely.

I am a member of a few genealogy based Facebook groups and it appears one major gripe of genetic genealogy discussions is private family trees, and positive connections.  My family trees are private.  Earlier there was a time my main tree was public, and then my documents ended up on another public tree which was grossly incorrect.  The error was replicated, and my user name was on the document. After fruitless attempts to contact other users, I decided to keep my research private.  I am more than happy to share my findings with others, upon request, but I no longer have my work in the public domain.   Now that I have entered the DNA-based genealogy “playground,” I do feel more than ever it is important to at the very least reply to requests for information.  While I have no record of a Donegal ancestor, I clearly have a genetic connection with a group of people that have that ancestry.  I gladly shared what information I had on my Irish ancestors, and I responded quickly.  Although Ireland is probably not my main focus right now, you never know what might come of the collaboration.

For those of you that are looking at the long list of “matches” with private family trees.  It doesn’t hurt to ask nicely.  Introduce yourself, explain why you are contacting the user, and hope for the best.  If you haven’t joined Gedmatch yet, you might want to give it a try.  I find these users are more willing to respond to emails, and the basic edition is free, although I encourage you to donate or subscribe if you find you will be using it.

I am back to my piles of documents, wistfully wishing for time to explore my DNA matches further.

Mills, Elizabeth Shown. Evidence Explained. https://www.evidenceexplained.com/ : 2015.

GEDmatch.  Online databases. GEDmatch Inc. http://v2.gedmatch.com/login1.php : 2015.

The post The Donegal Distraction appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

If you haven’t been to microforms at Alexander library, Rutgers University in a while you will be pleasantly surprised.  Last semester the University (and the New Jersey taxpayers) installed new microfilm scanners, and they are wonderful.  I had been dreading using the old machines, I never could find one that worked properly.    It took me a few minutes (ok maybe more) to get acquainted with the new devices.  I was fortunate to sit next to a fellow genealogist; Joan Betancourt and she helped me get going.  If you aren’t so lucky, there are work-study students in the room and they seemed to be able to assist people get over the initial shock.

I had the pleasure of viewing some very old tax records and well even the new equipment can only do so much; particularly when the reading part of your progressive lens probably could use an update.  The wonderful thing however is that I could easily email the images, or save them to a thumb drive.    I now have the entire 1812 Newark Township New Jersey Tax Ratables on my PC.

Why do I need the entire list you ask?  It seems a published list had this fellow listed however he was not where he should be on the microfilm.  I did notice the list on film was “semi alphabetical.”  I need to go through the entire town to see if my man was really there in 1812.  Well at least I can do it at home in my fuzzy slippers, instead of the poorly lit basement.

Never take a printed source as fact, and always do an exhaustive search….

The post New Microfilm Scanners at Rutgers! appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.

Two decades of research sits in my file cabinets and on my PC.  In the past I’ve tried fan charts, and a few other ways to display my research, nothing made it to the wall.  For the longest while it was because I wanted to find just one more ancestor, my tree was never quite “done”.  I then realized I would never really be finished, however I was proud of my work and really wanted to display it in a manner that wouldn’t bore the regular folks.  While a fellow genealogist may find my five-year search for the name of my Great-Great Grandmother, most people aren’t interested.  I decided finally to look for an esthetically pleasing family tree.  The search for an item that would fit into my home took a bit of time, but I finally found the perfect match.

I searched on Etsy.com, a web marketplace for unique and handcrafted items.  There were quite a few choices but I settled on the Staker Store.  She designs trees out of the names of family members, with leaves indicating place of birth.  I was even able to include my stepparents in my display, something a fan chart wouldn’t allow.  I’m very happy with my artwork, and couldn’t wait to get it up on the wall.  I really should have done it years ago.

The post Get your Family History out of the Files! appeared first on Once-Removed Genealogy Services.