Thanks for your note.And thanks for your congratulations.
Herebelow I’ve organizedi in 3 separate files, what I hope will be helpful to you.
If you have comments, questions, additions, etc, I would enthusiasticly welcome them.
I have much more on the Sanfords and would be happy to try to help you further if you have specific questions.
One thing, apart from the message below, is that David Sr and wife Patience, and their extended family, stopped in Westchester Co NY before going on to Warwick.This is not widely known and I have some possibly interesting info if you think it would be helpful.
FILE # 1-- Wherein I attempt to demonstrate the identity of the father of John M. Sanford who in 1815 married Sarah Race / Rees in Columbia Co NY
JOHN SANFORD FATHER OF JOHN M. WHO MARRIED SARAHRACE / REES
My Sanford line from David and Patience (Burroughs / Burrows) as I see it today:
David b 1711/12 md 1736 Patience (Burroughs / Burrows)
David b 1737 md 1764 Mary / Patience (Sullivan / Silliman)
John M. b c1765 md estimated 1789 Unknown
John M. b 1790-94 md 1815 Sarah (Rees / Race)
Henry D. b 1827 md 1862 Ellen Harriet (Wright)
Sarah b 1863 md c1880 Miles Hood Louer
CENSUSES ANDNOTES -- 1790 - 1810
1790--NY ORANGE CO, Warwick
393 Ezra Sandford3-1-7-0-0
394 David Sandford3-2-5-0-0
394 John Sandford2-0-1-0-0--3rd from David
Ezra and David were brothers.They had a brother named John, but---THIS IS IMPORTANT---he had many more children in 1790 than the John shown here, and by this time was living in New Jersey.
Ezra did not have a son John, so the John shown here, as demonstrated elsewhere in a different way and by process of elimination,almost has to be a son of David or of David and Ezra’s other brother Thomas.
But, because there are records to show the christening of Thomas but no one has published any information concerning a wife or children, or of the year or place of his death,it is assumed that he died before he had a chance to marry, and therefore, ipso facto,the John shown above was a son of David, who was only 3 households away.
Another way of considering this is that the 1790 John’s proposed father David, who was christened in February 1737 and married in March 1764, is reported by numerous researchers to have had 2 sons(Thomas and Joseph) and 2 daughters, but in 1790 above he appears to have 4 daughters and 4 sons, even without John being in the household.
Some of these apparent “children”, however, might have been sons-in-law or daughters-in-law, so we cannot know for sure, although 1790 was only 26 years after their marriage so it seems doubtful that more than about one son had married by then, even though several daughters might have.The point is that there was ample opportunity in 26 years for David and his wife to have had several more than the four that are “known” to researchers.
As to John’s 1790 census, he is considered to be the same John found in Orange Co in 1800, where he had a son of under ten.In 1790 it seems safe to assume that John has just recently married and that the other over-16 male in his household is probably one of his brothers.
As demonstrated below, John was born between 1765 and July 1774, but almost certainly closer to 1765.
1800--NY ORANGE CO, Warwick
374 David Sanford0211112111
375 Matthew Sandford2001000100
375 Ezra Sanford2000113001--7th from Matthew
377 John Sandford1001000010
David and Ezra were brothers.Matthew was a son of Ezra.John was, I believe, a son of David
1810--NY COLUMBIA CO, Hudson
John M. Sanford2141001100
I cannot explain the “explosion” in the number of children in John’s household between 1800 and 1810 except that David, the proposed father of John of 1790 - 1810, is known to have diedbetween 1800 and 1810, and it is assumed that John, as evidently the eldest son, took some or all of his younger siblings into his household.For reference, David’s 1800 census looked like this:0211112111, so there appear to have been several potential siblings of John to attend to.
MY PROPOSED SCENARIO
The 1800 John was age 26-44, therefore born 1755 - 1774, and in 1800 was married with one son.The son was born between 1790 and 1800 but was not on the 1790 census.I propose that this son is the John M. born in 1790 - 1794 who in 1815 married Sarah Rees / Race..
The 1810 John M.,who I propose is the same man as the John in 1790 and 1800 Orange Co,is in the 26-44 column, but of course is 10 years older than he was in 1800, so his age is 36-44 in 1810, and therefore he was born between 1765 and 1784.
Thus John of 1790 - 1810 was born between 1765 and 1775, and, I suggest, because his first child was born between 1790 and 1794, as demonstrated in the third paragraph below,it seems probable that he was born closer to 1765 than to 1775.
Finally, because we know, if my estimates are accurate,that John was 16 or over in 1790,he therefore was born before August 1774, thus narrowing the range of birth to 1765 -- July 1774.
The fact that John appears to be married in 1790, albeit very recently because there is not yet a child, again suggests that he was born close to 1765, which perhaps not coincidently is just one year after his proposed father David married.
John’s son born between 1790 and 1800 on the 1800 census is, in 1810,age 10 - 19 based on his 1800 census age, but the 1810 census shows him in the 16 - 24 column,so that by merging those two results it appears that in 1810 he was actually age 16 - 19, and thus born between 1790 and 1794.
The three censuses from 1820 to 1840 for the John M. Sanford who married Sally / Sarah Rees / Race in early 1815 show this same 1790 - 1794 result consistently.
The name of the mother of John M. “Jr” who married in 1815 may never be known, but she was in the 26-44 column in 1800, and so was born between 1755 and 1774.She apparently died between 1800 and 1810, but by 1800 had given birth to John M. and a sister whose name is not known.
FILE # 2 -- Wherein I describe seven John Sanfords who lived in approximately the same time period and location, and from those seven I eliminate five and then have the two who are “my” John M. Sanford and his father John.
If you have the time, interest and inclination,I would appreciate your comments, suggestions and / or questions about the following somewhat complex examination of seven Sanfords named John, of whom some may be the same person.
There are several John Sanfords who lived at about the same general time and could be “my” John, or could be related to him.“My” John is -5- of the seven below.
The following are short sketches of what I know about the main 7 Johns, and note that some of them are almost certainly the same person:
John christened in CT in 1744, the son of David and Patience (Burroughs).He came to Orange Co NY with his parents and some or all of his siblings in the 1760s.His brother Ezra remained in Orange Co for the rest of his life.His parents apparently died in Orange Co.John is alleged, probably correctly in my opinion, to have married Rebecca Debow, probably in Orange Co, although many say they mnarried in New Jersey.They did live in New Jersey at some time there is no doubt, but the question is when.His wife Rebecca is said to have died in “about 1811”and he is said to have died in “about 1815”.
There is a John Sanford who was on the tax roll of Orange Co NY in 1775, served in the Orange Co militia during the Revolutionary War, and was the same John, I think, who was on the 1790 census of Orange Co.
Note that the 1790 census seems to be for -2- but might be for -3-.
I think this John is almost certainly the same as -1-, and that he moved to New Jersey between 1790 and 1800.
There is a John on the 1800 census((1001000010)) of Orange Co who I think cannot be -2- or -1- unless the census numbers are wrong in 1800.More on this one later.
There was a John M. Sanford(notice the middle initial)in Columbia Co NY in 1810((2141001100)).
Assuming that John M. was the oldest male in the household,he was born evidently between 1764 and 1784, and appears to have several children, if they are his, and perhaps no wife.At any rate the oldest female’s age does not match Rebecca Debow,, the wife of -1-,so is this possibly -1- who has been widowed ?I don’t think so, but it remains a mystery.This John is almost certainly, I think, as noted in File # 1, a son of David Jr and a nephew of David’s brother Ezra.
A John M.(the same middle initial as -4- above) in January 1815 married Sarah / Sallie Race / Rees in Columbia Co NY.
I think this is the same John M. as -4-, OR, more likely,because later censuses of the John M. who married Sarah suggest that he was born in about 1790-1794, he was the son of -4-.
This John M. is known to have had a son Henry in 1827 and a daughter Mary in about 1833.It is almost certain they had a son George W. and a son John, as well as other children whose names are unknown, although there is information out there claiming to name several others.
The -1- John above and Rebecca DeBow had a son John, evidently John S. Sanford, who was born in about 1772 and married Sarah Miller.
A John Sanofred was born in 1767 Sharon, Litchfield Co CT to Amos and his wife Mary (Clugston / Cluckstone)
who at some time moved to Rensselaerville, Albany Co New York, which is not far from Columbia Co.
He is said, without evidence, to have married a Russ or Roos / Roose / Roosa, of which there were some in Columbia Co NY that would fit his age, etc.
I think that this “MIGHT” be John -4-.
“My” John is -5-, who might be the same as -3- or -4- or -7-, or might be a son of -3- or -4- or -7-.
If my -5- John was the same as -4- or -7-, that would mean that he was evidently a widower when he married in 1815.
So notice the following points:::
The Russ / Roos or whatever name of the wife of -7- is very close to Rees / Race.Did -7- marry Sarah Race / Rees in 1815 instead of a Russ / Roos ?I have now discarded this theory.
Could it be that Rebecca DeBow, the wife of -1-, died before the 1810 census instead of “about 1811”, and her widowed husband John was -4- who appears to be without a wife in 1810 Columbia Co NY ?I have now discarded this theory.
A final and very important twist
John -1-’s brother Ezra, mentioned above, in December 1772 married Annetje Hopper.As it turns out, the maiden name of the mother-in-law of John -5- who married in 1815 was Hopper.I “think”,but have not yet proved, that Ezra’s wife was the older sister of -5-’s mother-in-law.
And if that is true, then there is a very compelling connection between Ezra and John -5-.
So, even though -7- is still a tempting possibility,I think it must be that either one of the following happened:::
(a)John -1- was widowed before the 1810 census and then married in 1815.This seems very unlikely however because John -1- was christened in 1744 and the John who married in 1815...John -5-...died in about 1841-1844.
(b)My John -5- was the same as -3-.All accounts of Ezra’s children do not include a John, soI think -3- must be a nephew of Ezra by one of his two or three brothers other than Ezra’s brother John -1-, who did have a son John(-6-)but there seem to be enough records to prove that -6- was not -5-.
---My John -5-was definitely not -1- or -2- or-1-’sson -6-
---My John -5- was probably not -7- either, although that’s still a kind of remote possibility.
---My John -5- was probably -3-’s eldest son, seen in the 1800 census.I think John -3- was the same person as John -4-.
---My John -5-’s father was John -3- who was the same as John -4-, and the father of John -3- / -4- was most likely a brother of Ezra, either David or Thomas.
REFERENCE::: YEARS OF BIRTH
Known or calculated birth years, per christening records or censuses:::
-1- was christened in 1744
-2- same as -1- I believe
-3- calculated to be 1754-1774, but estimated to be actually closer to 1774 than to 1754;his only son in 1800 was born between 1790 and 1800, and thus fits the calculaated year of birth of -5-.
-4- calculated to be 1764-1784 as the eldest male, with the second eldest male calculated to be 1784-1794
My opinion is that -3- and -4- were the same, and that the eldest son in each household was -5-
-5- calculated by censuses beginning in 1820 and through 1840 to be 1790-1794, consistent in each census and thus suggesting that -5- was one of the second oldest males in the 1810 household of -4-
-6- known to have been born in about 1772
-7- known to have been born in 1767
REFERENCE:::BROTHERS OF EZRA SANFORD
(listed here as sons of David and Patience)
SONS OF DAVID & PATIENCE BURROUGHS
1737DAVID+ Patience / Mary Sullivan / Silliman
1741THOMAS+ No wife, children or death info found
1744JOHN+ c1771 Rebecca DeBow
1747 APREZRA + 1772 A Annatje Hopper
1747 APREPHRAIM+ Julia Huff / Hough & Esther Brown
Since John -3- was not a son of 1744 John above, and apparently not of 1747 Ezra,he is presumed to have been a son of either 1737 David, 1741 Thomas or 1747 Ephraim.
But it is known that 1747 Ephraim had a son John in 1783 who married Mary Coller and died in 1845 MI, so -3- cannot be a son of Ephraim under this scenario.
I can find no online records of a wife or children, or even the death, of 1741 Thomas.
As for 1737 David, he is reported to have had the following children:
c1763 Thomas(md Polly Townsend)
Jun 1766 Sarah
So, if -3- John was not a son of Ezra, he was likely an unreported son of Ezra’s brother, either David or Thomas, and as demonstrated elsewhere it was almost surely David.
NOTES ABOUT DAVID SR
He was mentioned as son David in the undated will of Thomas Sanford of Stratfield CT, proved 6 December 1757.
In 1759 David Sanford of North Castle, Westchester County, NY sold his right in the estate of his father Thomas. About 1764 the family emigrated to Warwick, New York.
FILE # 3 -- Wherein I demonstrate why the John who married Sarah Race / Rees is related to Ezra Sanford of Warwick, Orange Co NY
In December 1772 Ezra Sanford, son of David and Patience (Burroughs) married in Orange Co NY Annetje Hopper(often seen as Hoppe).
In November 1780, in Claverack, Columbia Co NY Jonathan Race / Rees married Caty / Cathalyntje (there are many other Dutch spellings) Hoeper (a misspelling of Hopper).This couple, Jonathan and Caty,were the parents in 1796 of the Sarah who in 1815 married John M. Sanford.
Ezra Sanford’s wife Annetje was born in May 1753 in the town of Tappan, NY, a daughter of Mattheus Hopper and his wife Aeltje (Kuyper).It is proposed, but not yet proven,that Caty Hopper who in 1780 married Jonathan Sanford was a younger, and in fact the youngest, sister of Annetje.
I propose that John M. Sanford, a son of John the nephew of Ezra, in some way---probably as a result of a family visit or possibly because of a purposeful introduction with the objective of marriage---became acquainted withEzra’s wife’s youngest sister.The rest, as they say, is history.