The H600 Project Genealogy DB
Notes
Matches 18,801 to 18,850 of 28,499
| # | Notes | Linked to |
|---|---|---|
| 18801 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Ritter, Hannah (I3100)
|
| 18802 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Hendryx, Hannah H. (I3099)
|
| 18803 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Dodge, (Female) (I2795)
|
| 18804 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Price, Lucinda (I2325)
|
| 18805 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Bay, Hattie (I1769)
|
| 18806 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Mahan, (Male) (I1641)
|
| 18807 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Grubbs, Cordelia Ann (I1590)
|
| 18808 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Huse, Howard Mark (I1589)
|
| 18809 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Linton, (Male) (I1583)
|
| 18810 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Jarvis, (Male) (I1578)
|
| 18811 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Cole, David J. (I1525)
|
| 18812 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | (Unknown), Elizabeth (I1510)
|
| 18813 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Drake, Clifford Eugene (I1452)
|
| 18814 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Story, Louis Earle (I1337)
|
| 18815 | At least one living or private individual is linked to this note - Details withheld. | Living (I1280)
|
| 18816 | At least one living or private individual is linked to this note - Details withheld. | Living (I1279)
|
| 18817 | At least one living or private individual is linked to this note - Details withheld. | Living (I1277)
|
| 18818 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Weiniaski, Jules (I989)
|
| 18819 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | (Unknown), Margaret (I769)
|
| 18820 | At least one living or private individual is linked to this note - Details withheld. | Living (I478)
|
| 18821 | At least one living or private individual is linked to this note - Details withheld. | Living (I444)
|
| 18822 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Lequire, Donald (I427)
|
| 18823 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Horr, Jamie (I426)
|
| 18824 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Wright, Christiana (I179)
|
| 18825 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Spicer, Russell (I177)
|
| 18826 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | McNickle, Pansy (I141)
|
| 18827 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Horr, Florence (I140)
|
| 18828 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Slick, Rex N. (I138)
|
| 18829 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Lowry, John David (I113)
|
| 18830 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com | Gregory, Maude (I49)
|
| 18831 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ 1850 Census: PO Brookhaven, Township 6, Lincoln Co, Mississippi Walter W. Turner, age 2, | Turner, Walter Watson (I21430)
|
| 18832 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ 1920 Census: Cambridge Ward 4, Middlesex, Massachusetts Charles Carr, boarder, age 49, widow, bp CAN, p's bp CAN, im 1890, na 1905, Painter- house 1930 Census: Cambridge, Middlesex, MA Charles H. Carr, lodger 59, m at age 36, bp Prince Edward Island, p's bp same, Painter -house | Carr, Charles A. (I21825)
|
| 18833 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Ancestry: Thomas Pierce1(Elizabeth Cole), Thomas2, Timothy3 (Hannah Bradhurst), Benjamin4 (Hannah Smith), Nehemiah5 (Lydia Sheppard), Hannah6 Pierce | Pierce, Hannah (I14830)
|
| 18834 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Carrie Lorinda Larson's mother-in-law. | Canfield, Hattie (I15486)
|
| 18835 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Cemetery: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GSln=ives&GSfn=mary&GSby=1812&GSbyrel=in&GSdyrel=all&GSob=n&GRid=21005304&df=all& | Ingalls, Mary (I3785)
|
| 18836 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ CHILD'S GAZETTEER OF JEFFERSON CO, TOWN OF WATERTOWN 1895 http://www.rootsweb.com/~nyjeffer/childwat.htm "Joel Ives, son of Erastus and Mary (Payne) Ives, was born in Connecticut, October 20, 1806. He married, first, Mary Ingalls, September 9, 1830, and they had five children, of whom two, Louisa (Mrs. Hoar), of Wisconsin, and Julia (Mrs. Hall), of J efferson County, survive. He married, second, Sarah, daughter of Asa Dodge, in December, 1843, and they had four children, viz. Lucy (deceased), Mary, James, and Edward (deceased). Mr. Ives was an active business man all his life. He died Februar y 22, 1871. Asa Dodge, father of Sarah Ives, was born near Watertown. He married Anna Collins, and reared three sons and six daughters. His fahter, Jesse Dodge, married Miss Waters. The Dodge family came to Jefferson County about 1800." | Ives, Joel (I3783)
|
| 18837 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Children 1. John Coombs b: 7 MAR 1783 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 2. Amos Coombs b: 11 APR 1785 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 3. Chloe Coombs b: 9 MAR 1787 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 4. Elnathan Coombs b: 25 MAY 1789 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 5. Huldah Coombs b: 15 MAR 1791 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 6. Experience Coombs b: 9 OCT 1794 in Leverett, Franklin Co MA 7. Simeon Coombs b: 28 SEP 1795 in Wardsborough, Windham Co MA 8. Polly Coombs b: 22 JUL 1797 in Jamaica 9. Stephen Coombs b: 30 JUN 1799 in Jamaica 10. Sally Coombs b: 22 DEC 1800 in Jamaica 11. Hannah Coombs b: 24 MAY 1804 in Jamaica 12. Abigail Coombs b: 22 JUL 1806 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 13. Henry Clark Coombs b: 3 SEP 1810 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA | Coombs, Rev. Simeon (I14731)
|
| 18838 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Children of William and Elizabeth (Kirkley) Cheney: 1. Rebecca CHENEY 2. Susanna CHENEY 3. Temperance CHENEY 4. Benjamin CHENEY 5. Robert CHENEY 6. Ebenezer CHENEY 7. Abner CHENEY 8. Jonathan CHENEY 9. William CHENEY 10. John E. CHENEY 11. David CHENEY 12. Asa M CHENEY | Cheney, William (I14727)
|
| 18839 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Deborah was the daughter of Owen Robey, Sr. and inherited a good part of the "Chew's Farm" from her father upon his death. In 1815 she and Richard sold part of her holdings, and later, she along with her brothers and sisters sold more of the farm to their brother, Owen Robey, Jr. After the death of her husband, Richard, she and her sons improved their father's claim. She then sold the claim and later purchased other land. Deborah lived to be 58 years, 9 months, and 13 days old. (note the date and age don't match) Deborah was the beloved wife of Richard Parriott Sr. and was given all of Richard's worldly possessions upon his death. He died in Stevenson County, Illinois in May of 1838, and the following year, Deborah, (and her children) Owen, and Knighton went to Wisconsin and purchased land. In the 1840's, Deborah returned to Illinois to the area where Richard Sr. had died and purchased more land with her sons. She appears along with Roby R., Knighton, Manly, and Owen on the Illinois Public Land Purchase Records. 9 children 1 Roby Richard Parriott B:Feb 2 1808, Tyler County Virginia D:abt 1871 Iowa M:Abigail Howard B:1813 (11 children *) 2 Caroline Parriott B:May 5 1809, Ohio County Virginia 3 Knighton Parriott B:Dec 9 1810, Ohio County Virginia D:Apr 9 1845, Stephenson County Illinois "Knighton is buried next to his parents. His headstone is illegible. He paid $100 for 80 acres of land in Stephenson County on July 30, 1844: Section 13, township 28N, Range 073 W2 NW; Vol. 712, page 165." 4 Owen Parriott Sr B:Sept 5 1812, Ohio County Virginia M: possibly Deborah Hughs, April 25 1847 Vermillion Co Indiana 5 Henrietta Parriott B:July 25 1814, Ohio County Virginia D:Stephenson County Illinois M:possibly David Spurlock June 29 1831 Indiana 6 Cordelia Parriott (Twin) B:Feb 21 1818, Ohio County Virginia M:Levi Lucas May 14 1839 Illinois 7 Richard Parriott Jr (Twin) B:Feb 21 1818, Ohio County Virginia D:Jan 23 1897, Buckeye township Illinois M:Perdita Chilton Oct 14 1849, Green County Wisconsin 8 Manly Parriott B:Oct 8 1819 P:Ohio County Virginia D:March 7 1870 P:Buckeye Township Illinois M: Betsey Jane Rimey (1 known child*) 9 Mary Ann Parriott B:July 11 1821, Ohio County Virginia D:Nov 9 1862, Brodhead Wisconsin M:John Jesse Dawson Nov 4 1840 (at least 8 children) | Robey, Deborah (I14644)
|
| 18840 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Descendant of Richard Warren of the Mayflower. William Reed & Sarah Warren married June 2, 1740 Sarah Warren> Samuel Warren & Eleanor Billington (also descendant of the Mayflower, her parents were Isaac Bilington and Hannah Glass)> Richard Warren II & Sarah Torrey> Nathaniel Warren & Sarah Walker> Richard Warren Sr. & Elizabeth Unknown. Sarah Warren's siblings: 1. Priscilla Warren b: 12 DEC 1704 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 2. Jabez Warren b: 3 FEB 1705/06 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 3. Samuel Warren , Jr b: 9 AUG 1707 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 4. Cornelius Warren b: 12 JUN 1709 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 5. James Warren b: 24 FEB 1710/11 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 6. Nathan Warren , Sr b: 5 MAR 1711/12 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 7. Joseph Warren b: 21 FEB 1714/15 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 8. Joanna Warren b: 25 MAR 1717 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 9. Benjamin Warren b: 30 JUL 1720 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA 10. Josiah Warren b: 9 MAY 1724 in Middleborough, Plymouth Co MA | Warren, Sarah (I5841)
|
| 18841 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Email from Richard Horrworth Horwai(at)aol.com Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 Richard Horrworth Dear Joyce S.... I am Richard Warren Horrworth (was 'Horr') son of Howard Miller Horrworth (Horr) Nephew of Elijah Arthur Horrworth (Horr) Grandfather Albert Vedder H married to Myrtle Amorine about 1896 in Marysville or Mechanicsburg, O. Four children: Charles A. Horr (Horrworth) 1000 Elijah Arthur h. Elaine H. Knull Howar M. H. My Aunt Ethylene divorced Arthur, remarried. I met her at her daughter, Judith's home still in Alexandria, VA. (on 519, Canterbury Lane. Judy has one child, a daughter. Judy is 78, very active in the AARP - winner of community recogniton awards. Father in law was a VA congresman. Husband John Drewry was chiief counsel, H of R Maritime committee. Ehylene lived in FL until a year or so before her death about 1988. My father, Howard Miller H. - author, Pathway of the Padres, publisher a > realtors national newspaper, > general manager of secy-treasuer of Mission Trails Assn of Los Angeles - funded by the counties that held the 21 Spanish missions - San Diego to Napa Valley. He joined brother Charlie in Chatauqua about 1920 - toured with William Jennings Bryan and others. Charles became pres of the California Hotel Assn about 1936 and Exec V P of the American Hotel Association 1944 (?) until is death about 1961. Venice, Chas, wife, was a leading real estate broker for 30 years in Coral Gables, FL. I am Richard. First marriage to Gloria Lyon produced sons Kim Robinson H > and John Christopher H. Gloria retired emeritus as a professor of education at George Washington University; lots of philanthropic donatons including one in memory of son John who died at age 14 of > leukemia. Kim teaches middle school, McLean school in Montgomery County MD. His kids Jenna, age 20 and Kevin age 16. Second and last marriage to Norma Davila H. One child, Emily is 20 years old, a junior and the University of Hartford. Graduated from a California H.S. Achievements: Editor in Chief of HS year book; marches for breast cancer, works on Habitat for Humanities projects from CT to S.Carolina; Academic Senator in her sophomore year. poet, Resident assistant. Majors in > psych and ed. MY mother, Irma Orr Lowe, was born in 1896 near Greeley, Co. Had brother > Irvin, sister Ila, and half sister, Helen all of Greeley. Mom graduated in Elocution from the Univ. of Nebraska about 1919. She worked as advance 'man' for the Chatauqua where she met my father. Moved to Montebello so I could start school and she could be near three of her aunts, one of whom lived in Montebello. Mother acquired a patent for a way to make corsages; made them and sold them to Robinsons and Bullocks departments stores in Los Angeles. She ran PTA's, the MTB Women's Club, gardened, and made flower arrangements, one of which was photogrpahed in color in the Los Angeles Times about 1938. Mom lived to see her to grand sons. Died of cancer in 1961. Buried > in Forest Lawn, Glendale CA. Myself. Called the father of 'value engneering' for buildings, chemical plants, hospitals and more. A pioneer practitioner of organization retreats - T Groups, Sensitivity Training, Encounter Groups. Taught planning to the Office of Emergency Planning - LBJ's time. With Gloria in the March on Washington, 1963. Witness and particpant in events from rocket engines to Head Start. Lots of fun. It continues; Am 77; run a small company > advancing products to clean air, water, land. Live in Silver Spring, MD > at 15010 Westholm Ct. 20906 Phn 301 598 7547 THANKS FOR YOUR WORK. YOU HAVE GONE SO FAR. IT MUST BE RESEARCH OF WHICH YOU ARE VERY PROUD. I AM. YOU CAN SHARE THAT WITH YOUR FAMILY. THANKS AND LOVE ACROSS OUR SPAN OF COUSIN HOOD!!! Richard (Dick) Horrworth Myself. Not much. Born 1/29/29. Grew up in WW II - Montebello, Ca. 104 commerical flower nurseries in a city of 6,000. | Horr, Richard (I1795)
|
| 18842 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ fathered 15 children: 1M: Elizabeth Childs Dec 22 1788, Anne Arundel County Maryland (1 child) B:Anne Arundel County, Maryland 1 Elizabeth "Luzy" Parriott B:Sept 30 1789 2 M:Anne Wood Feb 7 1792, Anne Arundel County Maryland (5 children) father: William Wood D:1802 -1804 the 5 children 1 Susannah Parriott B:Mar 8 1793 2 Nathan Parriott B:May 15 1795 3 Samuel Parriott B:Aug 9 1797 4 Wilford Parriott* B:Apr 14 1799 Maryland 5 Nancy Ann Parriott B:Oct 24 1800 *"Wilford Parriott acted as surety for the marriage of his half brother, Roby R, to Miss Abigail Howard in Vermilion County, Illinois in 1831. Abigail's surety was her father, Anthony Howard of Ohio. Wilford was the heir of one eleventh of his grandfather William Wood's estate, and later Wilford he was found on the 1840, 1850, and 1860 census for Porter County, Indiana. In 1850 he was in Union township, dwelling #666; age 52, a farmer. He had $1,500 in real estate and was born in Maryland." 3M: Deborah Robey December 12 1804 9 children* 1 Roby Richard Parriott B:1808 (married Abigail Howard) 2 Caroline Parriott B:1809 3 Knighton Parriott B:1810 4 Owen Parriott B:1812 5 Henrietta Parriott B:1814 6 Cordelia Parriott B:1818 7 Richard Jr. Parriott B:1818 8 Manly Parriott B:1819 9 Mary Ann Parriott B:1821 Taken from Portrait & Biographical Album of Stephenson County Illinois, 1888: "Richard Parriott was a native of Anne Arundel County, Maryland. In 1808 he removed to Tyler County, West Virginia where he purchased a partially cleared farm and brought a portion to a good state of cultivation. This he occupied until 1826, when he started for the prairies of Illinois via the Ohio and Wabash Rivers. He stopped a few months in Vermilion County, then removed across the line into Indiana where he purchased a partially improved farm, and lived there until 1836. He then sold out his possessions in the Hoosier State and, accompanied by his family, started for Northern Illinois. The removal was made with ox-teams and they proceeded in the pioneer fashion of camping and cooking by the wayside, and sleeping in their wagons at night. They stopped for a time at the home of William Robey, and then Mr. Richard Parriott, proceeding to Green County, Wisconsin, looked about for a location, but not finding anything to suit him, came back and made a claim on what is now section 12 of Buckeye township. This locality was then a part of Jo Davies County, and the land had not been subdivided. Richard put up a log cabin and commenced the improvement of his land, but was cut off in the midst of his labors; his death occurring the following spring." The Black Americans: "The earliest Negro arrival we know about was a woman, and we do not know her name. Richard Parriott, a native of Maryland living in (West) Virginia, freed his slaves, and being unpopular for his views on slavery, moved to Illinois. It was after the Parriott ox wagons and livestock had traveled too many difficult miles for her to be sent back that a freed black woman allowed herself to be discovered in one of the wagons. The family eventually settled in 1836 on land north of where Cedarville is now. Mr. Parriott had been wounded en route in a fight with highwaymen and died in a few months. He was buried in a plot on the farm. The Negro woman died not long afterward and was also buried there. Mr. Parriott's body was later moved to Bellview Cemetery when it was established, but no one now knows whether or not the body of the family's black follower was also moved. The widow sold her land claim to John Folgate and moved nearer relatives---the Robey family." "Religious: The first religious services in the township were held at the house or hotel of R.R.Parriott during the winter of 1854-1855." (Washington township, Butler County, Iowa) Church meetings held in the barn of James Monroe Caldwell. "It wasn't long before the women of the area demanded to have weekly religious services. A full-time minister could not be supported, so Mr. Roby R. Parriott set out weekly for Rev. Crippen* of Hardin County. Since Rev. Crippen could only come during the week, and nobody knew exactly when Mr. Parriott would return with Rev. Crippen. This was during the winter of 1854-55. During 1855....a church, the Methodist Episcopal Church, was organized by Elder Steward of Hazel Green in the home and hotel of Roby R. and Abigail Parriott. Earlier, in 1849 two school houses were erected; one at Parriott's Grove on section 30, and the other in the eastern part of the village of Aplington." (The township Monroe was named by James Monroe Caldwell) *Crippen The signal for his return on the following day was to be a blast from the dinner horn of Mrs. Parriott's, in order to call in the hands busy at work in the fields. The sound of the horn on the following afternoon apprised the settlers that their messenger had appeared in sight. Oxen and horses were turned to graze and rest while the barefooted, ragged, and dusty yeomanry assembled to hear the word of the Holy One expounded. Such a luxury could not often be indulged in, consequently the more appreciated.....In 1860, the society that had been organized at the residence of R. R. Parriott, met at the school house in Aplington to worship; Father John Connell being the preacher. In 1869, Elder Gossard started the project of building a church....a church was erected in 1870."(Gossard maybe a typo and could be Goddard.) Goddard settled south of the township, but claimed some Buckeye land. In the fall, Robert Jones and Levi Lucas arrived. Jones, an Englishman, settled just south of where Buckeye Town Hall was later built; Levi Lucas established his farm just south of Jones. In addition to these came George Trotter (Trott?) and Richard Parriott, who claimed the land where Buckeye Center was later, and Henry and William Hollenbeck. The year 1836 saw the families of William Robey, Jehu Pile, Andrew St. John, Ira, Job, and Daniel Holly move in. Pile settled near the future site of Cedarville....Buckeye Center at the intersection of the two old stage roads (now called Route 26 and Buckeye Road), and was an early settlement begun by Robert Jones and Richard Parriott, Sr. Here a post office was opened in 1876 in Jocob Folgate's country store. William Lied took over the store and post office in 1879 and kept them until 1894 when both were discontinued. The building became part of the Afolkey home which is still occupied." ...in 1857 A man named Shaw, from Waterloo, was the proprietor. R. R. Parriott furnished him with the logs to build a shop...he did not stop long, as he did not find much work...afterward the shop was used as a school." ...the first town meeting held in his house. At that meeting, an oyster can was used for a ballot box". R. R. Parriott was elected Supervisor of Roads for Monroe. He was also Butler County Assessor in 1857, County Drainage Commissioner in 1860 and 1865." Parriott's Grove, on section 30, and the other in the eastern part of what was the village." recorded on the 2nd of February, 1858, by the proprietors, Thomas Nash, R. R. Parriott, Zenas Aplington, and Theodore A. Wilson." There is a Parriott Street in Aplington." Note: These notes are I as found them. I do not know the complete information to print it entirely. The Last Will and Testament for Richard Parriott Sr. In the name of God, amen. I Richard Parriott in the county of Ohio and State of Virginia, being weak in body, but of sound mind and of disposing memory for which I thank God, and calling to mind the uncertainty of human life, and being desirous to dispose such worldly estate as it hath pleased God to bless me with. First, I devise that all my just debts, my funeral expenses be paid out of my perishable property. Secondly, I give to my beloved children, Susanna, Wilford, and Ann, with my grandson Wilford, the son of Samuel Parriott deceased, one dollar each. Thirdly, I give the balance of my estate, real and personal, after the payment of the above debts and legacies to my beloved wife Deborah as she remains my widow and no longer. Fourthly, at the death or marriage of my beloved wife Deborah if she should marry..ing, that on the day of her marriage or death either, I give all of the above property both real and personal, and all of my estate whatever, with the exception above of my just debts, funeral expenses, and the four dollars in legacies above mentioned to my beloved children, namely, Roby R., Caroline, Knighton, Owen, Henrietta, Cordelia, Richard, Manly, and Maryanne, to be equally divided between them, which said property I give to them, their heirs, or executives, or administrators. Fifthly, and lastly, I do here by constitute and appoint my beloved wife Deborah executive of this my last will and Testament there by revoking all other wills or testaments heretofore by me made. In witness thereof I have here unto sat my hand and affixed my seal this fifteenth day of December in the year 1824. Rich'd Parriott Signed, sealed and published and declared as and for the last Will and Testament. The above named Richard Parriott in presence of us. Source: Posted on Marshall County West Virginia Genealogy Page (Ohio County, Virginia was renamed Tyler County, West Virginia.) ("Mr. Parriott had been wounded en route in a fight with highwaymen and died in a few months.") | Parriott, Richard (I16576)
|
| 18843 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ George Riley Horr's mother-in-law. | Sharratt, Louise A. (I15473)
|
| 18844 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Hannah Diantha- Dyantha Horr- Harr's father-in-law. | Byington, Hyrum Norton (I15487)
|
| 18845 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:yf7LaD-CihAJ:www.claralaw.cpda.org/om_isapi.dll%3Finfobase%3Dcases2.nfo%26jump%3D72%2520Cal.App.2d%2520662%26softpage%3DDocument_Case+%2Bhorr+cattalini&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us [Civ. No. 7145. Third Dist. Jan. 24, 1946.] In re HAZEL CATTALINI et al., Minors. MARY HORR, Respondent, v. MARK CATTALINI, Appellant. COUNSEL John A. Hodges and Oliver J. Carter for Appellant. Glenn D. Newton for Respondent. OPINION PEEK, J. This is an appeal by the father of two minor children from an order of the Juvenile Court of Shasta County determining that said children had been abandoned by him and therefore were free from his custody and control. Mark and Mary Cattalini were formerly husband and wife. Two children, Hazel and Carolyn, who are minors, of the present ages of about 9 and 7 years, respectively, were born as the issue of the marriage. Dissensions arose between the spouses. On November 30, 1940, Mary Cattalini secured a divorce from her said husband in Nevada on the ground of failure to provide her with the necessaries of life. The children were awarded to the custody of the mother, but no order for their maintenance was made. On December 7, 1940, the mother married Clifford Horr, and since then has lived with him and her said minor children in Shasta County. On April 11, 1942, Mark, the father of said children, married his present wife, Helen, and since that time they have resided in South San Francisco. At the time of their marriage, Helen had one minor child by a former husband. Two other children were born as the issue of Mark Cattalini's second marriage. By her petition, respondent alleges that "since the entry of said final decree of divorce, the father has contributed nothing whatever towards the support of said minor children, Hazel Cattalini and Carolyn Cattalini, save and except the sum of Eighty and no/100 ($80.00) Dollars, nor has he Page 72 Cal.App.2d 664 shown any interest whatever in said minors, and in fact has never, on his own volition, visited said minors since said final decree of divorce; that your petitioner took said minor children to see said Mark Cattalini in the summer of 1942; that said Mark Cattalini since said date has never visited with, nor attempted to visit with, said minor children. That the last payment for the support of said minor children by Mark Cattalini was the sum of Ten and 00/100 ($10.00) Dollars in the month of February, 1943, and more than one year has passed since any contribution has been made by said Mark Cattalini for the support of said minor children." The petition further alleges that Clifford Horr, the present husband of respondent, in whose home the children have resided since their mother's remarriage, "is willing to adopt said minors as his own daughters." Appellant's demurrer to the petition, on the ground of want of jurisdiction and failure to state a cause of action, was overruled. He thereupon answered, denying the material allegations of the petition, and alleged that during all the times mentioned therein he communicated with his children and has contributed to their support to the extent of his financial ability. On the issues thus joined a hearing was had before said court, and at the conclusion thereof the court found and concluded: that it had jurisdiction of the persons and of the subject matter and that the procedure laid down in sections 720-727 and 775-777 of the Welfare and Institutions Code had been regularly followed; that all the allegations contained in the complaint were true; that the custody of the minors by judicial decree had been given to their mother; that appellant, their father, for a period of one year had wilfully failed to pay for the care, support and education of said children when able to do so; that "in case of adoption of said minor children that the petitioner, Mary Horr, formerly Mary Cattalini, alone, may consent to such adoption"; and that Hazel and Carolyn Cattalini should be declared free from the custody and control of their father, Mark Cattalini, and he should be deprived of their custody and control. The appeal from said order presents three principal questions for determination: (1) Did the trial court have jurisdiction to make said order; (2) Is there substantial evidence to support the findings; and (3) Do the findings support the judgment? Page 72 Cal.App.2d 665 Section 701 of the Welfare and Institutions Code provides, in part: "The jurisdiction of the juvenile court extends also to any person who should be declared free from the custody and control of either or both of his parents. The words 'person who should be declared free from the custody and control of either or both of his parents' shall include any person under the age of 21 years who comes within any of the following descriptions: "(a) Who has been left by either or both of his parents in the care and custody of another without any provision for his support, or without communication from either or both of his parents, for the period of one year with the intent on the part of such parent or parents to abandon such person. Such failure to provide, or such failure to communicate for the period of one year, shall be presumptive evidence of the intent to abandon. Such person shall be deemed and called a person abandoned by the parent or parents abandoning him." It is readily apparent from a reading of the quoted portion of said section that it is composed of three main elements: (1) the child must have been left with another; (2) without provision for support or without communication from either or both of his parents for a period of one year; and (3) all of such acts are subject to the qualification that they must have been done "with the intent on the part of such parent or parents to abandon such person." [1] We turn then to the first question to be resolved: Were the children "left" by appellant in the custody and care of the mother, within the meaning of said section, when they were placed in her custody by a court order? According to Webster's International Dictionary, "leave" means "to put, deposit, deliver, or the like, so as to allow to remain;--with a sense of withdrawing oneself from; as leave your hat in the hall; we left our cards." Thus the term appears to connote voluntary action. Therefore, it may not be said that appellant left his children in the care and custody of the respondent when, by an order of the court, they were taken from the joint control of their parents and placed in the sole care and custody of the mother. This very point was considered in the Matter of Cozza, 163 Cal. 514, 528 [126 P. 161, Ann.Cas. 1914A 214], where the Supreme Court, in construing Civil Code, section 224, stated: "It contemplates a case where a child has been voluntarily Page 72 Cal.App.2d 666 surrendered or left for a year in the care and custody of another without any agreement or provision for its support. This is not the situation here. The care and custody of this child was not so left by the mother with either Mrs. Merriman or the petitioners for adoption. It was taken away from her and placed in the custody of the former by order of the juvenile court. ... It was taken from her under process of court--by force of law--invoked or, at least, employed for the very purpose of depriving her of the custody of the child." (Italics added.) The same rule may well be applied to the present controversy. Here, as in the Cozza case, the children were not voluntarily surrendered or left by appellant; they were taken away from him and placed in the custody of the mother by order of the court. There would appear to be no reason why this rule is not applicable to the facts disclosed herein. If then the children were not "left" by appellant with respondent, as that word is used in said section 701 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, does the record disclose evidence as to the conduct of appellant subsequent to said divorce sufficient to bring him within that portion of the said section relating to the failure of a parent (1) to make any provision for the support of a child, or (2) to communicate with the child for a year? We have heretofore summarized in full the allegations in respondent's petition with regard to these essential elements. It remains to be seen whether the evidence supports them, or at any rate, whether the evidence supports the findings which, in language at least, vary considerably from said allegations. [2a] The evidence shows that it was only during the seven or eight months immediately preceding the filing of the complaint that appellant was able to make provision for the children's support. Prior to that time, the births of two babies, about a year apart, to his wife, Helen, the death of his father, an operation on his eye, and a journey to see respondent and their children (which proved futile, as appellant could not find them), were matters that required the expenditure of all the wages appellant made--which he regularly turned over to Helen. Furthermore, it is made evident that, even under those circumstances, appellant and his wife would have contrived to send money for Hazel and Carolyn had not respondent discouraged them from doing so by indicating quite plainly at that time that such action would be neither necessary Page 72 Cal.App.2d 667 nor welcome. They were given to understand by respondent that she and her husband, Clifford Horr, were able to support the two girls without assistance, and that Horr would resent the sending of gifts. From such evidence it would appear that at least in part the failure of appellant to furnish support for the children might well be attributed to his inability to do so. In the case of Moch v. Superior Court, 39 Cal.App. 471, 477 [179 P. 440], it was held that "failure to provide for a period of one year does not operate to constitute the child an abandoned child. It is merely 'presumptive evidence of an intent to abandon.' The presumption thus created could, therefore, be overcome by opposing evidence, and when it is made to appear that the failure to provide was by reason of the inability to do so, less evidence than under other circumstances would naturally be required to overthrow such presumption." Turning again to the record, we find that when all was well with respondent and her second husband no demands were made upon appellant for assistance in providing for the children. In fact, appellant, as noted, was specifically requested to remain away from them and not to assist financially nor to send presents. When all was not well between respondent and Horr demands were made upon appellant. This was true, for example, when respondent was desirous of obtaining appellant's services as a witness in her behalf in opposing divorce proceedings which Horr had instituted against her. [3] No contention is made by respondent that appellant failed to communicate with the children; neither did she so contend at the hearing. As previously mentioned, the allegations in her complaint were that appellant had shown no interest in the children and of his own volition had never visited them since the divorce decree. Upon this question the evidence shows that appellant communicated with the children both directly and indirectly--directly when he sent Christmas and birthday cards and a locket, and indirectly when he communicated with them through the letters written at his specific request by his wife. Such actions on his part surely come within the meaning of "communication" which, according to the text in 15 Corpus Juris Secundum, pages 638-639, means "intelligence, news, that is communicated or imparted, a written or verbal message," and is not restricted to mere words, but "includes Page 72 Cal.App.2d 668 acts as well, embracing every variety of affairs which can form the subject of negotiation, interviews, or actions between two persons, and every method by which one person can contrive impressions or information from the conduct, condition, or language of another." See, also, Words and Phrases, volume 8, page 142 et seq. As previously noted, the provision in said section 701 relative to the failure to provide for a child left with another for a period of one year is qualified by the phrase "with the intent on the part of such parent or parents to abandon such person." [2b] Upon this question the evidence shows without contradiction that appellant at all times, including the period between February 23, 1943, and March 16, 1944--the period when appellant and his wife did not send money for the support of Hazel and Carolyn--kept insisting that he had no intention of giving up his children. This, coupled with the undisputed facts upon which is based the explanation of appellant and his wife of their failure to send money during said period, should have been deemed sufficient to dispel the presumption of intentional abandonment that otherwise might have arisen, and requires a determination that appellant in fact did not intend to abandon said children. [4] The crucial issue here then was whether or not the alleged acts of appellant were committed by him "with the intent to abandon" the children, and, if so, whether or not such intent persisted for a period of one year thereafter (Moch v. Superior Court supra). In other words, each of the elements set forth in said section 701(a) is qualified by the provision "with the intent on the part of such parent or parents to abandon such person"; and this in turn is qualified by the further provision that such failure to provide or communicate for one year shall be only "presumptive evidence of the intent to abandon." In the case of In re Cordy, 169 Cal. 150 [146 P. 532, 534], wherein the principal question involved was the interpretation to be placed upon the word "abandon," as it was used at that time in section 224 of the Civil Code, the court, at page 153, stated that "The first and most pertinent question raised by a reading of this section is the question as to whether it contemplates that a child, left in the care and custody of another without provision for its support, may be declared by the court to be 'an abandoned child,' without an intent on Page 72 Cal.App.2d 669 the part of the parent to abandon it having been shown." First the court quoted the definition of "abandon" as found in Webster's New International Dictionary, as follows: "To relinquish or give up with the intent of never again resuming or claiming one's rights or interests in; to give up absolutely; to forsake entirely; to renounce utterly; to relinquish all connection with or concern in; to desert, as a person to whom one is bound by a special relation of allegiance fidelity; to quit; to forsake." The court further went on to say that "If this is the usual and ordinary meaning of the word 'abandon' then it is not to be construed as having a different signification in the section of the code above quoted, unless the intent of the legislature to give it another and narrower meaning is to be clearly discerned in the context and from the whole language of the section." Concluding this portion of its discussion, the court said: "We think rather that the meaning of the word 'abandoned' as above given was intended by the makers of the law to dominate the section, and to cause to be read into every part and provision of it the idea that the acts of the parent in relation to the child enumerated in the statute must have been done with an intent to abandon the child. She must have left it to the care and custody of others with that intention, and a like intent must be shown to underlie her failure, if she has failed, to make provision for its support." In this the court was reiterating in different language the rule as enunciated in Guardianship of Snowball, 156 Cal. 240 [104 P. 444], and in the case of Matter of Cozza, supra. In the latter case it was held that the word "abandon" must be given its strict meaning when applied to an adoption proceeding wherein it is sought to deprive a parent of his child in derogation of his natural right. The proceeding herein likewise involves the exercise of a special power which may be likened to the power of a court in adoption proceedings. This being so, as the court in the case last cited stated, where absolute severance of the relation of parent and child is sought "the inclination of the courts, as the law contemplates it should be, is in favor of maintaining the natural relation," and "Every intendment should have been in favor of the claim" of the parent under the evidence, and "if the statute was open to construction and interpretation should be construed in support of the right of the natural parent." See, also, Matter of Kelly, 25 Cal.App. 651, 653 [145 P. 156]. Page 72 Cal.App.2d 670 This same rule was followed in the case of In re Edwards, 117 Cal.App. 667 [4 P.2d 560], wherein the court specifically held that "abandon" must be given the same meaning in the juvenile court law that it was designed to convey when used in the early language of section 224 of the Civil Code. [5] With respect to the absence of a sufficient showing of an intent to abandon, appellant places a considerable amount of reliance on the previously cited cases of In re Edwards, Matter of Kelly, In re Cordy, and Matter of Cozza, cases involving the alleged abandonment of a child by its parent to a third person. Appellant's position in this regard appears to be entirely proper, for if he is to be charged with the duties and responsibilities of a parent who has turned over the custody of his child to a stranger, certainly he should be permitted to make the same defense that the parent in such a case would be permitted to make. However, even if it properly could be said that appellant had failed to support the children, this circumstance alone would be of no avail to respondent, for it is the law of this state that in a case where, by the decree of a divorce court, custody of a minor child has been awarded to the mother without any provision for the support of the child by the father, and where in such custody the child is being supported and maintained in a proper manner, as between the parents the immediate legal duty of support and maintenance rests with the mother as long as such conditions continue. Civ. Code, ?G196; Pacific Gold Dredging Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 184 Cal. 462, 465 [194 P. 1, 13 A.L.R. 725]; Watkins v. Clemmer, 129 Cal.App. 567, 574, 576 [19 P.2d 303]; see, also, 15 A.L.R. 569; 81 A.L.R. 887.) As was stated in the case of Watkins v. Clemmersupra, at page 577, "the primary parental obligation in this case was with the mother, and will continue with her until the order (under ?G138) is modified or vacated; that so long as the order remains in force it is the measure--at least as between the former spouses--of the father's obligation." Of course, this is not to say that one who by his own misconduct has made himself unfit to be the custodian of his child has by the same misconduct absolved himself from all legal responsibility for the child's support. On the other hand, before a father may be charged with dereliction in this regard it must be made to appear that he has intentionally shirked that responsibility at a time when, and under circumstances where, he should have assumed it. Page 72 Cal.App.2d 671 In the case at bar the evidence on this phase of the matter is not conflicting, nor is it reasonably susceptible of different inferences. As we have pointed out, during the critical period herein involved appellant was not called upon to discharge the duties of a father toward these children but was expressly discouraged from so doing. On the one occasion which may be said to fall generally within this period, when he was requested to give aid to his daughter on account of illness, he responded readily and eagerly. [6] The circumstance that in 1939, prior to his divorce, his conduct might have warranted a different determination, is immaterial. [7] It is likewise immaterial to this case that the motivating reason for the proceeding herein, as indicated by respondent in her petition, and its indirect effect, as indicated by the court, may be to dispense with the necessity of procuring appellant's consent to an adoption of the children by their stepfather, Horr (and presumably also to dispense with the necessity of citing appellant to appear in the adoption proceeding and show cause, if any, why the petition therein should not be granted). The willingness of Horr to adopt the children has no place in a consideration of whether or not they were left by appellant in the custody of respondent or "another," as that word is used in said section 701, without support or communication for a period of one year with the intent on the part of appellant to abandon them. The judgment is reversed. Adams, P. J., and Thompson, J., concurred. | Petroff, Mary (I13203)
|
| 18846 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~bowe/WC01/WC01_064.htm | Huntington, Solomon (I4784)
|
| 18847 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=mrmarsha&id=I04410 The family of Gilberts are well considered together, since all of them were more or less great factors in the making of Vermilion County. Samuel Gilbert, with his family, consisting of his wife and three sons, Alvan, James and Elias, came to Vermilion County from Ontario County, New York, in 1826. They had really come west the previous year but stopped in Crawford County until this time. When they came to Vermilion County they settled two miles south of Danville. There was, at that time, no town in the county containing more than fifty white families. The nearest mill was at Eugene. The great need of this section was a mill and in 1831, Mr. Solomon Gilbert, the brother of Samuel came from the east and put up one at near the mouth of the North Fork of the Big Vermilion. Another brother, Jesse, established a ferry across the Vermilion river, a much needed improvement. Mr. Samuel Gilbert lived in Danville until 1839, when he went to Ross township and there was made the first justice of the peace. He was also the first postmaster, serving in this office for twenty years. He held the office of justice for ten years. Mr. Gilbert's wife died the year he moved from Danville, and was buried in the Williams' burying ground. Mr. Gilbert afterward married Mrs. Elizabeth (Dougherty) Ferrier, the daughter of one of the early settlers of Varice township. Mr. Samuel Gilbert lived to be seventy-two years old. He died and was buried in the Williams' burying ground. Alvan Gilbert, the oldest son of Samuel Gilbert, was fifteen years old when he came to Vermilion County. He spent the first years after coming here in the work provided by the many interests of his father and uncles. In 1831 he married Miss Matilda Horr and the following year he went with his father to Ross township, where his father-in-law owned land. Mr. Gilbert bought a small farm of his father-in-law which he afterward enlarged to 240 acres. This farm he afterward sold to his father and brother James, and bought another farm of his uncle Solomon. This later farm included the northern limits of Rossville. He lived her about three years when he again sold and bought another farm of Mr. Leggitt which included a part of the southern limits qt Rossville. He traded extensively in real estate and personal property, and it has been claimed that during his life he had more deeds recorded than any other man in the county. Mr. Gilbert's first wife died in 1840, leaving two daughters, one of whom afterward married George C. Dickson and the other became the wife of Frederick Grooms. Mr. Alvan Gilbert served as Supervisor of his township for many years, being president of the Board for a part of the time. Upon the adoption of the township organization he was one of the three commissioners appointed to divide the county into townships. He was also one of the three commissioners appointed to divide the swamp lands between this county and Ford, when Vermilion lost that territory. Mr. Gilbert and Mr. Lamm represented the old county and Judge Patton, the new one. He had Judge (Guy) Merrill and John Canaday as associates in the act of making the division of the county into townships. The three who divided the swamp lands were about three months in making the division. Mr. Alvan Gilbert's second wife was Nancy (Horr) Elzy. "The oldest burial ground in the Rossville area is adjacent to the chapel.The first person buried in the cemetery was the 11-day-old grandson of Samuel Gilbert. The first Justice of the Peace and first Postmaster of Ross Township, Gilbert donated the land on which the chapel and school were built. After the church was built in 1857, the cemetery became known as Mann's Chapel Cemetery." http://www.rossvilleshops.com/manns.html | Gilbert, Samuel (I15744)
|
| 18848 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Irene Rosella Horr- Hoar's father-in-law. | Seymour, Frederick Wales (I16127)
|
| 18849 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Is this him? Florida Divorce Index, 1927-2001 Florida Divorce Index, 1927-2001 Name:Nathan T Prather Jr Gender:Male Spouse's name:Jean Prather Divorce Date:Jun 1961 County:Dade Certificate Number:8865 | Prather, Nathan Thomas Jr. (I5279)
|
| 18850 | If you have corrections and/or updated information on this person please contact Roz Edson at MrsEdson@gmail.com [[ Is this him? Name: George Washington TAYLOR Birth: 28 Jul 1883 in Ono, Shasta Co., California Death: 25 Feb 1956 in Shasta County, California Father: Alanson TAYLOR b: 11 Feb 1829 in Randolph County, Illinois Mother: Sarah MCFARLIN b: 7 Mar 1845 in Wisconsin Marriage 1 Antonia June HIGHTOWER | Taylor, George W. (I21851)
|