Mary Ella Thornton Brooks

The following is from pp. 806-808 of Vol. 18 of The Encyclopedia Americana International Edition published by Grolier, Inc. of Danbury, CT: MEXICAN WAR. The annexation of Texas in 1845 laid the foundation for the war with Mexico. Although Texas had been for many years practically free, and had been recognized by the United States, Britain, France and other countries, Mexico refused to acknowledge its independence. When the United States proposed to admit Texas into the Union, Mexico gave warning that the annexation would be equivalent to a declaration of war. On March 6, 1845, Mexico protested, and soon afterward withdrew her minister and severed diplomatic relations. Her acts, however, scarcely justified her threats, as at that time at least little or no preparation was made for war. It has, therefore, been claimed that had the American government used a conciliatory policy peace might have been preserved and friendly relations reestablished. At the moment, however, the Mexican people and authorities were in a rather belligerent attitude, due in part to pride and in part to an expectation that the United States would soon be involved in a war with Britain over the Oregon boundary, in which case Mexico would have a powerful ally to aid her. Did President James Polk at this point seek to strengthen this hope in the minds of the Mexicans, intending at the proper moment to make a compromise and peace with Britain, as was done, and thus leave Mexico at the mercy of the United States? Perhaps history can never answer the question, but events at least seemed to march in harmony with the thought, For Mexico soon found itself in the dilemma that it must either sell California to the United States, receiving in return a goodly sum of money to appease its pride, or engage in a war to sustain its honor and territorial integrity. Mexico bravely, but perhaps not wisely, chose the latter alternative, not fully realizing the inequality of the contestants, nor the depth of the humiliation to which it would be subjected. Doubtless President Polk preferred to acquire California without war, but its acquisition was to be the principal measure of his administration. Hence if war was the only means to secure it, war it must be--at least enough to get possession of the desired territory. Causes of the War. The immediate occasion of the war was the dispute in regard to the western boundary of Texas. Proclaiming its independence in 1836, Texas asserted that its western boundary was the Rio Grande to its source thence due north to 42° north latitude. The following year the United States recognized its independence and, in December 1845, by a joint resolution admitted it into the Union as a state, providing that boundary disputes were to be settled by the United States. President Polk accepted the boundary claimed by Texas, and on Jan. 16, 1846, ordered Gen. Zachary Taylor to march to the eastern bank of the Rio Grande as the western boundary of the United States. Mexico insisted that the Nueces River--100 miles (160 km) east--was the true western boundary of Texas and therefore that General Taylor was now on Mexican soil. On April 25, 1846, the first blood was shed in a conflict between a band of Mexican troops that had crossed to the eastern side of the Rio Grande and a company of American soldiers. The news of this action was immediately communicated by General Taylor to President Polk, who sent his now noted message to Congress, asserting the war was begun by the act of Mexico on U. S. soil. Congress finally accepted, after a stormy debate in the Senate, the president's statement, and war was recognized as existing. Other causes were also at work and help to make a decision in regard to the justness of the war still more difficult. Mexico for many years had been in a chronic state of revolution. The natural result followed. American citizens in Mexico sustained property losses and doubtless were frequently unjustly arrested and even imprisoned. Claims arising from these causes had been in part settled under a convention of 1840 but many of them were still pending. Some were just; more, either unjust or extravagant in amount. President Polk united these unsettled claims with the boundary question and demanded that Mexico receive an envoy extraordinary with power to settle both--on its face an eminently fair proposition. On the other hand, Mexico professed to be ready to receive an ambassador to settle the boundary dispute but declined to receive John Slidell as U. S. minister when he was commissioned to settle all disputes, insisting that the two questions were distinct in kind and origin and should not be united. President Polk in his message asserted that this action of Mexico was in violation of its promise to receive a minister and hence justified his administration in its measures and forced him to take possession of the disputed territory. The need for more slave territory was perhaps another factor in causing the war. At least many from the South took an aggressive position on all questions in dispute between the two countries and thus made a peaceable settlement more difficult. Both the economic and the political reasons for more territory began to be felt by 1846--the one to have new soil over which to spread the land-exhausting system of slavery; and the other to have new territory out of which to carve new slave states so that the equilibrium between slave and free states might be maintained. Some other forces tending to arouse the war and aggressive spirit may be noted. The cry of "manifest destiny" played a part. Many, especially in the West, felt that the Pacific Ocean was the natural western boundary of the United States. They also demanded the "Golden Gate" that commerce might be opened up with the Orient. The two great parties--the Whigs and the Democrats-- divided sharply on the question. The war, in fact, became almost a party, instead of a national, issue. The Democrats, as a rule, supported the administration and its claim that the war was just. The Whigs, on the contrary, asserted that it was a most unholy and unrighteous war, and characterized it as "Polk's war." Abraham Lincoln, entering Congress in 1847, became a severe critic of the policy pursued, while Thomas Corwin of Ohio went so far as to use this language: "If I were a Mexican I would tell you, 'Have you not room in your own country to bury your dead men? If you come into mine we will greet you with bloody hands, and welcome you to hospitable graves.'" President Polk summarized his reasons for recommending that Congress recognize war as existing as follows: "The grievous wrongs perpetrated by Mexico upon our citizens throughout a long period of years remain unredressed; and solemn treaties ... have been disregarded.... Our commerce with Mexico has been almost annihilated." He then added: "As war exists, and ... exists by the act of Mexico herself we are called upon, by every consideration of duty and patriotism, to vindicate, with decision the honor, the rights, and the interests of our country." The Campaigns. The war with Mexico was accepted as a fact by Congress on May 13, 1846. There were four principal fields of action in its prosecution, (1) Along the Rio Grande, under the command of Gen. Zachary Taylor; (2) in California, where Capt. John Charles Fremont and Commodore Robert Field Stockton were in command, (3) in New Mexico, with Col. Stephen Watts Kearny leading the U. S. forces; and (4) from Veracruz to Mexico City, under the command of Gen. Winfield Scott, the commander in chief of the U. S. armies. Everywhere success attended the arms of the United States. It was one of the few wars in history in which no defeat was sustained by one party and no victory won by the other. General Taylor defeated the Mexican troops at Palo Alto on May 8, 1846, and at Resaca de la Palma the following day, and captured Matamoros on the 18th. He remained near that city for some weeks to recruit his army and prepare to advance into the interior. On September 24 he entered Monterrey, after a siege of four days and a gallant resistance by the Mexicans. Taylor's most famous victory, however, was won on Feb. 22-23, 1847, at Buena Vista. General Scott gave orders, which fell into the hands of Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, the Mexican general, for General Taylor to send some nine regiments to aid Scott in his proposed attack on Veracruz. Santa Anna immediately marched his whole command against Taylor expecting to crush him in this weakened condition. It was 20,000 men against about 5,000. But the skill of Taylor, the persistence of his army, and the organization and equipment of the U. S. troops won a great victory. Taylor became the hero of the hour, and Buena Vista made him an irresistible presidential candidate.... Fremont's course in California has been a subject of keen controversy. As leader of an exploring expedition he was already in northern California, and early in 1846 was recalled to the Sacramento Valley. California was the goal of the political policy of Polk's administration. The means to secure its acquisition were uncertain. It might be gained by war or by filling the territory with settlers from the United States, who in the course of time might bring it into the Union as Texas had already been annexed. Or it might be effected by securing the goodwill of the native Californians who were unhappy under Mexican rule. The latter policy seems to have been the one adopted by the administration. The U. S. consul at Monterey, Calif., Thomas Oliver Larkin, was developing this policy with a good prospect of success, it is claimed, when Fremont appeared on the scene. He seems to have developed a fourth policy--namely, the establishment of an independent government under the control of settlers from the United States in the Sacramento Valley. This movement resulted in the so-called Bear Flag Republic and in virtual civil war between the native Californians and the newer settlers. At this moment the Mexican War began, and the Bear Flag was replaced by the Stars and Stripes. It has been claimed by some California historians that Fremont's course, had not the Mexican War come at the moment it did, might have lost California to the United States. The native Californians, alienated as they were by his course, might have put themselves under a British protectorate in revenge for the treatment accorded them. Be that as it may, by the end of 1846 all California was conquered and held by U. S. troops and Fremont was regarded as the hero who had won the "Golden Gate" by his energy and decision. Santa Fe was captured by Colonel Kearny on Aug. 18, 1846, and New Mexico was secured with almost no loss of life. By the end of the year, therefore, all the territory that the administration desired was in the possession of its armies, but Mexico was still unconquered. Scott had been chafing in Washington during the summer and fall of 1846 while Taylor was winning his brilliant victories. He asked to go to the front to assume chief command, but the administration retained him at the capital under the plea of needing his advice. As it happened this Democratic war was officered by Whig generals. Scott had already been a candidate for the Whig nomination for the presidency. The charge was now made that Scott was kept from command for fear that success might make him a more formidable candidate in 1848. Finally, when he was sent to the front in January 1847, the cry was raised that the purpose was to dim the luster of Taylor's victories, or at least to divide the popular support between the two generals in such a way as to destroy the political prospects of both. General Scott besieged Veracruz in March 1847, and by the 27th had captured the fortress of San Juan de Ulua, which had been thought almost impregnable, and was ready to enter the city. On April 8 he started into the interior, and on the 18th captured Cerro Gordo, the 19th, Jalapa, and the 22d, Perote. On May 15 he entered the important city of Puebla. Remaining here for some weeks he again advanced, in August, toward the capital, and on the 10th came in sight of the city. Two important victories were won August 20--at Contreras and at Churubusco. He captured Molino del Rey on September 8, and the victory of Chapultepec on September 12-13 gave him Mexico City itself, which he entered on September 14 with an army of only 6,000 men. General Santa Anna escaped from the city and attempted, unsuccessfully, to organize further military resistance. The war was practically over, but the victory was so complete that it began to be a question whether there was any government left with sufficient power to negotiate a treaty of peace. An agitation began with friends both in and out of Congress, as well as in the cabinet, looking to the annexation of the whole of Mexico. John C. Calhoun, on the one hand, and Daniel Webster and a majority of the Whigs, on the other, joined hands to defeat this plan. President Polk was finally forced to make the ultimate decision. Nicholas Trist was sent in March 1847 to Mexico to make a treaty of peace. Failing, he was ordered in the fall to return to Washington, but disobeying instructions, he remained in Mexico. On Feb. 2, 1848, he concluded a treaty of peace in harmony with his original instructions. The administration was in a quandary. To ratify meant to condone the disobedience of Trist. To reject meant a prolongation of the war, and time to perfect the intrigue for the annexation of "All Mexico." President Polk, after some hesitation, decided to send the treaty to the Senate for its consideration. Received February 23, it was ratified, after some amendments, on March 10, by a vote of 38 to 14. On May 30, treaty ratifications were exchanged and the war ended. The Mexicans had fought bravely, even stubbornly and at times skillfully, yet in every contest, even when the odds were greatly in their favor, without a single victory. In part superior leadership and training won for the soldiers of the northern republic, and in part their cooler and more persistent character. But in the main it was not bravery, nor generalship, nor even character that won. It was science and education applied in the equipment of the armies, the guns of the soldiers, the cannon, and the powder in the arsenals that made the one so much more effective than the other that the most daring bravery was no counterpoise. The Treaty of Peace. The treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo gave to the administration of President Polk the territory that according to his diary he intended to acquire--California and New Mexico. Mexico in return for the loss of its fairest northern provinces was paid $15 million and was released from all claims of all kinds held by citizens of the United States against it, estimated at $3,250,000, which the United States assumed. Boundary lines were drawn, and provision made in regard to other questions at issue between the two countries. Results. Usually successfully waged wars redound to the credit of the party in power. In this case, however, the Democratic party, the author and supporter of the war, was defeated by the Whig party, the party of opposition and criticism, in the presidential election of 1848. The Whigs made use of the popularity of a successful general (Taylor) to defeat the party that had made his glory possible. Evidently the people were ready to accept the fruits of the war, but also were ready to punish the party they believed had acted wrongly. A large number of young officers, destined for renown in later years, proved their worth in this war. Ulysses S. Grant and William T. Sherman, Robert E Lee, "Stonewall" Jackson, and Jefferson Davis, foreshadowed, in this Mexican struggle, the greatness that was to be theirs in the Civil War from 1861 to 1865. The acquisition of some 522,568 square miles (1,353,450 sq km) of territory--about one sixth of the modern continental United States--was the most important immediate as well as remote result. It was important in the issues that its acquisition precipitated. Should it be slave or free territory? Who should determine its institutions? Out of this question grew the larger one who had the right to control the institutions of the territories in general? To settle the first question David Wilmot, a Democrat of Pennsylvania, proposed the celebrated Wilmot Proviso, which would exclude slavery forever from all territory acquired from Mexico. Four long years of intense and bitter debate followed. This question and a series of others were settled temporarily in the Compromise of 1850. The second question was answered by the term "nonintervention," which meant, or soon came to mean, one thing to Douglas and the Northern Democrats and another to Davis and the South. Three main theories were evolved or defended in answer to the third query: (1) the view that Congress had the right to control the institutions of the territories and could make them slave or free at its will, (2) the Dickinson-Cass-Douglas doctrine of popular or "squatter sovereignty--the doctrine that the people of a territory themselves, while yet in a territorial status, determined their own institutions, (3) the radical Southern view that slaves were property, and, as property, might be taken into any territory-- the common public domain of the states--with no constitutional power anywhere to hinder or prevent. The new territory was important secondly in its industrial and political effect on the nation. The United States now had an outlook on the Pacific Ocean comparable to that on the Atlantic. China, Japan, and the rest of the Orient were brought within the circle of its influence. Conditions favorable to further expansion were prepared. In addition to the great effect on commerce thus prefigured, that on wealth and industry was not less. The gold, silver, copper, and other mineral wealth of the Rocky Mountain region would flow into the pockets of the people of the United States. This vast addition of territory and wealth tended also to emphasize national pride and ambition, to arouse a still more intense belief in "manifest destiny," to develop a more optimistic tone, and perhaps also to produce a more materialistic spirit. HOWARD W. CALDWELL University of Nebraska



	Milton Elijah Thornton was the son of Mary Angeline Partridge and George Andrew Thornton......Aunt Tutor said that granny Partridge was an Indian./// Milton married Bessie Mae Hood in Elmore County and had Mary Ella Thornton. Mary Ella married James Edgar Brooks. . Husband G. W. THORNTON Pedigree Birth: Christening: Marriage: 16 SEP 1888 , Coosa, Alabama Death: Burial: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wife MARY A. PARTRIDGE Pedigree Birth: Christening: Marriage: 16 SEP 1888 , Coosa, Alabama Death ****** * George and his wife Mary, along with their children are listed in Elmore Co in both the 1900 and 1910 census records as follows: 1900, Central Precinct George Thorington, head, born July 1864, AL, AL, AL Mary A. Thorington, wife, born Oct 1870, AL, GA, GA Rhody A. Thorington, Dau, born Oct 1890, AL, AL, AL Mildred Thorington, Dau, born Aug 1892, AL, AL, AL Milton Thorington, Son, born May 1894, AL, AL, AL Robert M. Thorington, Son, born Jan 1899, AL, AL, AL 1910 Precinct 6 George Thornton, head, age 43 Mary A. Thornton, wife, age 38 Rhody Thornton, Dau, age 19 Mildred, Dau, age 17 Milton, Son, age 15 John T. Thornton, Son, age 14 (don't know why he was not on the 1900 record) Marvin Thornton, Son, age 11 (probably the Robert M. on the 1900 record) Lucy A. Thornton, Dau, age 9 Mamie L. Thornton, Dau, age 8 Jesse G. Thornton, Dau, age 6 Glennie Thornton, Dau, age 4 George A. Thornton, Son, age 1 == Indexed as Thorington, but fairly sure this is yours: 1900 Elmore County, Alabama - Precinct 6, Central - June 23, 1900 - ED 59/Sheet 17A - page 17 316 - Thorington, George, head; Jul 1864, age 35; married/11 years; AL AL AL; farmer; renting farm #297 Mary A., wife; Oct? 1870, age 29; married/11 years; 6 children/5 living; AL GA GA; no occupation Rhody A., dau; Oct 1890, age 9; born AL Mildred, dau; Aug 1892, age 7; born AL Milton, son; May 1894, age 6; born AL Robert M., son; Jan 1899, age 8 months; born AL 1910 Elmore County, Alabama - Precinct 6 - May 3, 1910 - ED 76/Sheet 10?A/page 100 179 - Thornton, George, head; M W 42 Md 1/21 years; AL AL AL; farmer; general farm; owns mortgaged farm #172 Mary A., wife; F W 38 Md 1/21 years; 11 children/10 living; AL AL AL; no occupation Rhoda, dau; F W 19 S; born AL; laborer/home farm Mildred, dau; F W 17 S; born AL; laborer/home farm Milton, son; M W 15 S; born AL; laborer/home farm; attends school John F., son; M W 14 S; born AL; laborer/home farm; attends school Marvin? Marion?, son; M W 11 S; born AL; laborer/home farm; attends school Lucy A., dau; F W 9 S; born AL; attends school Mamie? L., dau; F W 8 S; born AL; attends school Jessey, dau; F W 6 S; born AL; attends school Glennie, dau; F W 4 S; born AL George A., dau; M W 1 S; born AL In 1920 this couple was living in Chambers County with children: Lucy, age 19, Mamie?, age 17; Jessie, age 15; Glennie, age 14; Andrew (George Andrew), age 11, and Addie, age 6. George stated that his father was born in Virginia instead of Alabama, and Mary stated that she and both her parents were born in Georgia. Living also in the household in 1920 was Lula and Minnie Hodnett, shown as sister and niece, aged 34 widowed, and 17 single. Because Lula indicated that she and parents were born in Georgia, I assume she to be Mary's sister instead of George's, but that's just an assumption on my part. According to the 1860 census and the family tree listed below, George J. Partridge was the son of Robert Frank Partridge and Temperance DeLoach. Also, the Andrew Masters listed in the 1880 census (stepson) was really Andrew Martin. I checked the actual image of the census, and he was listed as Andrew Martin. If you go to familysearch.org, you can find the marriage record for George J. Partridge and a Mrs. Mildred Martin (probably a widow). They married in Upson County, Georgia. According to the family tree below, she was Mildred Smith (I think???)Hope this helps. ====================================================== 1860 Census, Upson County (Georgia Militia Dist. 537) Georgia Household#264 Partridge, Robt. F. Age 39 GA Partridge, Temperance Age 38 GA Partridge, C. E.(female)Age 14 GA Partridge, T.J. (male) Age 16 GA Partridge, J.W. (male) Age 12 GA Partridge, G.J. (male) Age 11 GA Partridge, L.C. (female)Age 07 GA Partridge, M.S. (female)Age 05 GA Partridge, E.J. (female)Age 9/12 GA ========================================================== http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi? op=GET&db=javan&id=I2197 ID: I2197 Name: Robert Frank Partridge Given Name: Robert Frank Surname: Partridge Sex: M Birth: Abt 1820 Death: Y _UID: 25C2EE9DC9F648668953E66D17C45C83C804 Change Date: 21 Jun 1999 Marriage 1 Temperance DeLoach b: Abt 1827 Married: 30 Jan 1842 in Upson County, Georgia Children Thomas Partridge b: Abt 1842 Martha Partridge b: Abt 1844 Jessie Partridge b: Abt 1846 Jane Partridge b: Abt 1848 Mary Melvina Partridge b: 22 Oct 1849 in Alabama George Partridge b: Abt 1850 Daughter Partridge b: Abt 1852 *************** Name: George W. THORNTON Given Name: George W. Surname: Thornton Sex: M Birth: 1867 Change Date: 14 Jan 2003 Father: Charles W. THORNTON b: 1827 in Georgia Mother: Nancy Catherine CULPEPPER b: 1831 in Crawford County,Ga. Marriage 1 Mary A. PARTRIDGE b: 1870 Married: 16 Sep 1888 in Coosa County,Alabama Note: _STATMARRIED Children Rhody A. THORNTON b: 1890 Mildred THORNTON b: Abt 1893 Milton THORNTON b: Abt 1895 John T. THORNTON b: Abt 1896 Robert M. THORNTON b: 1899 Lucy A. THORNTON b: Abt 1901 Marie L. THORNTON b: Abt 1902 Jessie G. THORNTON b: Abt 1904 Glennie THORNTON b: Abt 1906 George A. THORNTON b: Abt 1911 http://www.hometown.aol.com/kc90853/Charlie.html 1880 Upson County, Georgia - Flint District 537th - June 8, 1880 - ED 137/page 181A 203 - Partridge, George J., self; M W 30 Md; farmer; GA NC GA Mildred F., wife; F W 39 Md; keeping house; GA VA ___ MARY A., dau; F W 10 S; at home; born GA Augustus, son; M W 7 S; at school; born GA Josie, dau; F W 5 S; at home; born GA Martin, Andrew, stepson; M W 19 S; farm hand; GA GA GA Williams, Bill, servant; M B 16 S; servant; GA GA GA *** Charles W. Thornton Sex: M Change Date: 21 JAN 2005 Birth: ABT 1825 Death: BEF 1894 in Elmore Co., Alabama Census: 1860 Tallapoosa Co., Alabama Event: Census 1850 01 JUN 1850 Tallapoosa Co., Alabama 1 Census: 1880 Elmore Co., Alabama Marriage 1 Nancy Catherine Culpepper b: JAN 1831 in Crawford Co., Georgia Married: 28 JUN 1848 in Tallapoosa Co., Alabama Children James G. Thornton b: DEC 1849 in Tallapoosa Co., Alabama John Thornton b: ABT 1852 in Tallapoosa Co., Alabama Milton Thornton b: ABT 1855 in Tallapoosa Co., Alabama Louisa C. Thornton b: SEP 1863 in Alabama George W. Thornton b: ABT 1867 Martha Juliann Thornton b: DEC 1869 in Alabama William Jackson Thornton b: 02 JUL 1875 in Elmore Co., Alabama Sources: Title: 1850 US Census, Census Type: Federal Census, Place: United States Abbrev: 1850 US Census Publication: 1850 Page: Township 23, Tallapoosa, Alabama Page: 95 Roll: M432_15 ***** ************************ am still trying to connect the dots on some of these: George and his wife Mary, along with their children are listed in Elmore Co in both the 1900 and 1910 census records as follows: 1900, Central Precinct George Thorington, head, born July 1864, AL, AL, AL Mary A. Thorington, wife, born Oct 1870, AL, GA, GA Rhody A. Thorington, Dau, born Oct 1890, AL, AL, AL Mildred Thorington, Dau, born Aug 1892, AL, AL, AL Milton Thorington, Son, born May 1894, AL, AL, AL Robert M. Thorington, Son, born Jan 1899, AL, AL, AL 1910 Precinct 6 George Thornton, head, age 43 Mary A. Thornton, wife, age 38 Rhody Thornton, Dau, age 19 Mildred, Dau, age 17 Milton, Son, age 15 John T. Thornton, Son, age 14 (don't know why he was not on the 1900 record) Marvin Thornton, Son, age 11 (probably the Robert M. on the 1900 record) Lucy A. Thornton, Dau, age 9 Mamie L. Thornton, Dau, age 8 Jesse G. Thornton, Dau, age 6 Glennie Thornton, Dau, age 4 George A. Thornton, Son, age 1 == Indexed as Thorington, but fairly sure this is yours: 1900 Elmore County, Alabama - Precinct 6, Central - June 23, 1900 - ED 59/Sheet 17A - page 17 316 - Thorington, George, head; Jul 1864, age 35; married/11 years; AL AL AL; farmer; renting farm #297 Mary A., wife; Oct? 1870, age 29; married/11 years; 6 children/5 living; AL GA GA; no occupation Rhody A., dau; Oct 1890, age 9; born AL Mildred, dau; Aug 1892, age 7; born AL Milton, son; May 1894, age 6; born AL Robert M., son; Jan 1899, age 8 months; born AL 1910 Elmore County, Alabama - Precinct 6 - May 3, 1910 - ED 76/Sheet 10?A/page 100 179 - Thornton, George, head; M W 42 Md 1/21 years; AL AL AL; farmer; general farm; owns mortgaged farm #172 Mary A., wife; F W 38 Md 1/21 years; 11 children/10 living; AL AL AL; no occupation Rhoda, dau; F W 19 S; born AL; laborer/home farm Mildred, dau; F W 17 S; born AL; laborer/home farm Milton, son; M W 15 S; born AL; laborer/home farm; attends school John F., son; M W 14 S; born AL; laborer/home farm; attends school Marvin? Marion?, son; M W 11 S; born AL; laborer/home farm; attends school Lucy A., dau; F W 9 S; born AL; attends school Mamie? L., dau; F W 8 S; born AL; attends school Jessey, dau; F W 6 S; born AL; attends school Glennie, dau; F W 4 S; born AL George A., dau; M W 1 S; born AL In 1920 this couple was living in Chambers County with children: Lucy, age 19, Mamie?, age 17; Jessie, age 15; Glennie, age 14; Andrew (George Andrew), age 11, and Addie, age 6. George stated that his father was born in Virginia instead of Alabama, and Mary stated that she and both her parents were born in Georgia. Living also in the household in 1920 was Lula and Minnie Hodnett, shown as sister and niece, aged 34 widowed, and 17 single. Because Lula indicated that she and parents were born in Georgia, I assume she to be Mary's sister instead of George's, but that's just an assumption on my part. Name: George W. THORNTON Given Name: George W. Surname: Thornton Sex: M Birth: 1867 Change Date: 14 Jan 2003 Father: Charles W. THORNTON b: 1827 in Georgia Mother: Nancy Catherine CULPEPPER b: 1831 in Crawford County,Ga. Marriage 1 Mary A. PARTRIDGE b: 1870 Married: 16 Sep 1888 in Coosa County,Alabama Note: _STATMARRIED Children Rhody A. THORNTON b: 1890 Mildred THORNTON b: Abt 1893 Milton THORNTON b: Abt 1895 John T. THORNTON b: Abt 1896 Robert M. THORNTON b: 1899 Lucy A. THORNTON b: Abt 1901 Marie L. THORNTON b: Abt 1902 Jessie G. THORNTON b: Abt 1904 Glennie THORNTON b: Abt 1906 George A. THORNTON b: Abt 1911** * Charles W. THORNTON Given Name: Charles W. Surname: Thornton Sex: M Birth: 1827 in Georgia Death: Bef 1894 in Elmore County,Alabama Change Date: 14 Jan 2003 Note: Charles served in Company A, 31st Alabama Infantry during the Civil War. He was captured on June 15, 1864 at Big Shanty, Georgia and sent to a military prison in Louisville, Kentucky. On June 22, 1864 he was sent to Rock Island, Illinois and was released on June 20, 1865. Upon release he signed his oath of alligence to the United States with a mark. His military record states that he was a resident of Tallapoosa County, Alabama, that his complexion and hair were dark, his eyes blue, his height 5 ft. 7 plus inches. He was age 39 according to the report. Father: James THORNTON b: Abt 1788 in Georgia Mother: Elizabeth UNKNOWN b: Abt 1795 Marriage 1 Nancy Catherine CULPEPPER b: 1831 in Crawford County,Ga. Married: 28 Jun 1848 in Tallapoosa Co.,Alabama Note: _STATMARRIED Children James G. THORNTON b: Dec 1849 John J. THORNTON b: 24 May 1851 in Tallapoosa Co.,Alabama Milton THORNTON b: 1855 in Tallapoosa Co.,Alabama Louisa C. THORNTON b: 1864 George W. THORNTON b: 1867 Martha Juliann THORNTON b: Dec 1869 in Alabama William Jackson THORNTON b: 2 Jul 1875 in Elmore County,Alabama * Name Relation Marital Status Gender Race Age Birthplace Occupation Father's Birthplace Mother's Birthplace Andrew THORNTON Self M Male W 50 AL Farmer SC SC Margaret THORNTON Wife M Female W 34 AL Keeping House SC SC John THORNTON Son S Male W 22 AL On Farm AL SC Lucinda THORNTON Sister S Female W 20 AL At Home AL SC Smantha THORNTON Dau S Female W 7 AL AL SC Angeline THORNTON Dau S Female W 4 AL AL SC Thomas THORNTON Son S Male W 10M AL AL SC -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source Information: Census Place Lamar, Alabama Family History Library Film 1254017 Name Relation Marital Status Gender Race Age Birthplace Occupation Father's Birthplace Mother's Birthplace John COOK Self W Male W 78 SC Farmer VA NC Sarah COOK Dau S Female W 23 AL Keeping House SC SC S. THORNTON GDau S Female W 11 AL At Home SC SC -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source Information: Census Place Lamar, Alabama -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Household: Name Relation Marital Status Gender Race Age Birthplace Occupation Father's Birthplace Mother's Birthplace James THORNTON Self M Male W 50 GA Farmer SC GA Ann THORNTON Wife M Female W 33 AL Keeping House GA GA Major W. THORNTON Son S Male W 7 AL GA AL Mary Ann THORNTON Dau S Female W 5 AL GA AL George Ella THORNTON Dau S Female W 3 AL GA AL Thomas THORNTON Son S Male W 1 AL GA AL William LANLEUR Other S Male W 15 AL Laborer GA AL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source Information: Census Place Travelers Rest, Coosa, Alabama Family History Library Film 1254009 NA Film Number T9-0009 Name Relation Marital Status Gender Race Age Birthplace Occupation Father's Birthplace Mother's Birthplace Thomas O. PARTRIDGE Self M Male W 50 GA Farmer GA VA Mary A. E. PARTRIDGE Wife M Female W 50 GA Keeping House TN VA Josephene PARTRIDGE Dau S Female W 17 AL At Home GA GA Ida W. PARTRIDGE Dau S Female W 14 AL At Home GA GA Salome A. PARTRIDGE Dau S Female W 11 AL At Home GA GA Elizabeth A. PARTRIDGE Mother W Female W 76 VA At Home VA VA Eliza J. PARTRIDGE Sister S Female W 35 AL At Home GA VA Mary PARTRIDGE Other S Female B 18 AL Servant AL AL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source Information: Census Place Township 11, Beat 1, Winston, Alabama Family History Library Film 1254035 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Household: Name Relation Marital Status Gender Race Age Birthplace Occupation Father's Birthplace Mother's Birthplace James H. BAXLEY Self M Male W 34 AL Farmer AL AL Maranda BAXLEY Wife M Female W 32 AL Keeping House SC GA Joseph L. BAXLEY Son S Male W 10 AL At Home AL AL Ella O. BAXLEY Dau S Female W 9 AL AL AL Ophelia P. BAXLEY Dau S Female W 7 AL AL AL Annie B. BAXLEY Dau S Female W 4 AL AL AL Mary E. BAXLEY Dau S Female W 2 AL AL AL Sarah E. BAXLEY Dau S Female W 2 AL AL AL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source Information: Census Place Cold Spring, Elmore, Alabama http://hometown.aol.com/spiritwalkintall/Charlie.html James I. J. Culpepper Sex: M Change Date: 05 JUN 2005 Note: Mrs. J. W. (Ira Gay) Deam of Gay, GA a descendant of Joel Culpepper, John Culpepper's oldest son, preserved the record of James Culpepper's birth and death from the John Culpepper Bible and Mrs. D. W. (Lavyn Wright) Sisco transcribed the record as follows: _________________________James L. Culpepper _________________________b. 3 Jun 1806 _________________________On Tuesday about Midnight _________________________d. October 16, 1846 On the marriage certificate which was submitted by his widow in order to get a pension, the middle initial appears to be an "I." And in her 24 Aug 1897 application for a Mexican War pension, James' widow, Martha B. (Blackstone) Culpepper, wrote: I am the widow of James J. Culpepper, who served under the name James I. Culpepper.... However in a 12 Feb 1887 application Martha specified that James had served under the name James J. Culpepper. It seems likely that Mrs. Deam read the middle initial in the Bible record as a lower case "l." instead of an uppercase "I" but four documents in different handwriting in the pension file clearly show that the middle initial was an "I." However census, deed, and service records and his widow refer to James as James J. Culpepper. Perhaps James had three names or perhaps he didn't like his middle name and used another. A great-grandnephew was named "James Inman Carlisle" in 1869. This MIGHT have been James Culpepper's middle name as well. James' parents were recorded in the 1800 census of Lexington District, SC and this is probably where he was born. However, James' father, John Culpepper, is next noted administering the estate of John's presumed grandfather-in-law, Daniel Peek, in Richland District in 1807 and James' parents are noted living in Richland District in the 1810 census. So, depending on when the family moved to Richland District, it is possible that this was James' place of birth. James was noted living with his parents as one of five males 0-10 years of age in the 1810 census of Richland District, SC. Unfortunately, his parents have not been found in the 1820 census of South Carolina or Georgia but the family is presumed to have been living in Edgefield District since this was where James' father, John Culpepper, sold the land "where I now live" in 1823. Shortly after this, James presumably moved with his parents to Georgia where his father, John Culpepper "of Monroe" county is known to have purchased land in 1827. James found his way to Crawford Co., GA, by 1830 possibly moving with his older brother, Joel, who was recorded there in the 1830 census. There James married and is noted with a wife and child in the 1830 census. As a married man with children who was a U. S. citizen and a resident of Georgia for at least three years James would have been eligible for two draws in the 1832 Gold Lottery of Georgia. He drew lot 1133 in district 20 of section 3. This would have been a 40 acre lot near the southwest corner of Paulding Co., GA where it connects with Carroll Co., GA. It is not known if he ever mined the land or if he sold it. According to the Indian War pension application (#2073, no certificate) by James' widow, James was in Alabama by 1836, possibly having moved there with his older brother, Francis G. Culpepper, and his family. Both brother's are supposed to have taken part in the Creek War. The following is the pension application of James' widow: INDIAN WAR PENSIONS. - Act of July 27, 1892. DECLARATION OF WIDOW FOR PENSION. State of Georgia, County of Muscogee, ss: ON THIS 29 day of August, A. D. one thousand eight hundred and ninety 2 personally appeared before me J. C. Cook Clerk Supr Crt within and for the County and State aforesaid, Martha B. Culpepper aged 78 years, a resident of Columbus in the County of Muscogee in the State of Georgia who being by me first duly sworn according to law, deposes and says: I am the widow of Jas J Culpepper, who served under the name of Jas. J. Culpepper, as a private in the Company commanded by Captain Dudley in the _____ regiment of Ga Mil Vols., commanded by Col._________ in the war with Creed Indians in the year 1836. I think he served along the Chattahoochee river in Ga & Ala, and probably down into Florida. That my said husband enlisted at Dudleyville Ala, on or about the ___-___ day of May, A. D. 1836, for the term of months that I was married under my name of Martha B. Blackstone to my said husband by John Neal M. G. on or about the 21 day of Decbr A. D. 1828 at Crawford Co GA, in the State of Georgia, and lived with my said husband from the date of my said marriage until the day of his death, to wit: the 15th day of October, A. D. 1846, when my said husband died at Coosa Co. in the State of Alabama, and that I have not since remarried; that there was never any legal impediment to said marriage. No. 1. That my said husband, being duly enlisted, as aforesaid, actually served thirty days with the Army of the United States, in the war aforesaid, which service was as follows: Guarding the frontier against the approach of the Creek Indians, and his frequent skirmishing & fighting with said Indians and was honorably discharged at __________________ on the _________ day of _____________ A. D. 1836 No. 2. That my husband was personally named in a resolution of Congress for a specific service in said war, to wit: In the resolution of the Dont Know about it day of _______________, A. D. _____, and was honorably discharged at Dont remember. on the _____ day of refer to records. No. 3. That I am 78 years of age, and that I was born on or about the 28th day of Sept A. D. 1814, at ____________________, in the State of ____________________ That I have _____________ heretofore made application for pension or bounty-land, which said claim is No. 66.974 which B. L. Warrant was issued in my name about the year 1857. And that I also made an application for pension on account of death of my husband which resulted from gunshot wound rec'd in Mexico, which claim was rejected. Also she made application for pension under Act Jany 29 1887, rejected. That in support and proof of my right to pension, I tender herewith, under the regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior, the following evidence: The rolls of Capt. Dudleys Company Ga Militia Vols war with Creek Indians in year 1836, which record is in the War Dept. Washington D. C. Also the evidence now on file in the Pension office relative to marriage, death, &c of soldier to Claimant. And the affidavits of Geo. W. Gordon, Esq, Hon Flynn Hargett Sr. et al all of whom have known me a long time. That since the death of my said husband I have resided at the following places, to wit: Rockford Coosa Co Ala, Harris Co Ga and now Columbus, Muscogee Co, Georgia. That I make this declaration for the purpose of being placed on the pension roll of the United States under the provisions of the Act of July 27th, 1892. And I hereby appoint, with full power of substitution and revocation, Flynn Hargett, Jr. of Hardeman Ga my true and lawful attorney, to prosecute my claim. My Post Office address is Columbus, Ga. /s/_R._S._Wilson________________/s/_Martha B Culpepper /s/_John W. Riddle State of Georgia, County of Muscogee, ss: Before me, a Clerk Supr Crt in and for the County and State aforesaid, on this 29th day of August A. D. 1892, personally appeared Martha B. Culpepper known to me as the person described in, and who executed and signed the foregoing declaration for pension, as widow of Jas. J. Culpepper, and whom I certify to be a credible person and of good repute for truth and veracity in the community in which she lives, who being by me first duly sworn, deposes and says that she has read (if claimant cannot read, read to her and so state in acknowledgement) the foregoing declaration and knows the contents thereof, and that all of the facts therein stated are true. ________________________________/s/_Jno_C_Cook_Clerk ________________________________________S_C_M_C Ga. On the cover of the application, it was noted that James J. Culpepper enlisted "May 1836" and was discharged at the "Close of War 1836." In an affidavit supporting the application, Geo. W. Gordon and Hattie E. Gordon noted that they had known Martha for 30+ years and: have lived near her and have heard her speak very ofter about her said deceased husband, Jas J. Culpepper, and his service in the Indian War, and also of his service in the War with Mexico. Affiants say that they never knew said Jas J. Culpepper, personally, but have heard said Martha B - say that he died in the County of Coosa and state of Ala. about the year 1846; and from their acquaintance with her they fully believe what they have heard her say about his death. Affiants further say that since they have known the said Martha B. Culpepper she has been a widow and for most all the time, or quite all the time, in very dependent circumstances; that claimant is now about 79 years old and her physical condition is very precarious and that they believe her pension claim is meritorious and should be made Special, placed on the completed files and adjudicated at the earliest day possible.... James has not been found in an 1840 U. S. census but presumably was living in Alabama since this where he enlisted to fight in the Mexican War in 1846. James' widow filed three pension applications which appear to be based on James' death in the Mexican War. The first application appears to be a generic widow's request for a pension: Widow's Declaration for Pension or Increase of Pension. This must be Executed before a Court of Record or some Officer thereof having Custody of the Seal. State of Georgia, County of Harris, ss ON THIS 22 day of September A. D., one thousand eight hundred and eighty 6 personally appeared before me a Notary Public of the Exofficio J. P. a Court of Record within and for the County and State aforesaid Martha B. Culpepper aged 72 years, who, being duly sworn according to law, makes the following declaration in order to obtain the Pension provided by Acts of Congress granting pension to widows: That she is the widow of James J. Culpepper, who Volr [volunteered] under the name of Jas J Culpepper at Mobile, Ala., on the _____ day of June A. D., 18 46 in Capt. Dennis' Co. Talladega Rangers, in the war of 1846-1848 who rec'd a most severe gunshot wound in his left hip while in a battle or skirmish at or near Buena Vista; on a/c [account?] of which, together from exposure & hardships endured while on the March, &tc he died on the 15 day of [September crossed through and written over by] October Oct., A. D. 1846, who bore at the time of his death the rank of private in the service aforesaid; that she was married under the name of M. B. Blackstone to said James J. Culpepper on the 21 day of December A. D. 18 28 by Rev. Jnoathan Neal at Crawford Co Ga there being no legal barrier to such marriage; that neither she nor her husband had been previously married (if either have been previously married so state, and give date of death or divorce of former spouse.) ________________ that she has to present date remained his widow; that the following are the names and dates of birth of all his legitimate children yet surviving who were under sixteen years of age at father's death, viz: __________ of soldier by __________, born _______ 18 __ __________ of soldier by __________, born _______ 18 __ __________ of soldier by __________, born _______ 18 __ __________ of soldier by __________, born _______ 18 __ __________ of soldier by __________, born _______ 18 __ __________ of soldier by __________, born _______ 18 __ __________ of soldier by __________, born _______ 18 __ __________ of soldier by __________, born _______ 18 __ That she has not abandoned the support of any one of her children, but that they are still under her care or maintenance. Only two of my children living. They are not under my care as both are married that she has not in any manner engaged in, or aided or abetted, the rebellion in the United States, that no prior application has been filed for a pension on account of soldier death; but that a bounty land warrant has been granted in her name, No. #66.974 that she hereby appoints, with full power of substitution and revocation Flynn Hargett, Jr. of Hardeman, Ga. her attorney to prosecute the above claim; that her residence is No. __________ street __________ and her Post Office address is Mulberry Grove, Harris Co. Ga. /s/_J_H_Reese___________________/s/_Martha B. Culpepper /s/_J._H._Beers Also personally appeared J H Reese, residing at near Mulberry Grove Ga, and J H Beers residing at near Mulberry Grove Ga, persons whom I certify to be respectable and entitled to credit, and who, being by me duly sworn, say that they were present and saw Mrs. Martha B. Culpepper, the claimant sign her name (make her mark) to the foregoing declaration; that they have every reason to believe from the appearance of said claimant and their acquaintance with her that she is the identical person she represents herself to be; and that they have no interest in the prosecution of this claim. ________________________________/s/_J._H._Reese ________________________________/s/_J._H._Beers Sworn to and subscribed before me this 22 day of September A. D. 188 6 and I hereby certify that the contents of the above declaration, &tc., were fully made known and explained to the applicant and witnesses before swearing, including the words "Sept." erased, and the words "15" Oct", added; and that I have no interest, direct or indirect in the prosecution of this claim. ________________________________/s/_G_W_Gordon ________________________________Notary_Public_Exof_J.P. In response to an 11 Dec 1886 request from the Department of the Interior, Pension Office for James J. Culpepper's service record, the War Department returned the following: War Department _____ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, __________Washington, Mch 4, 188 7 Respectfully returned to the Commissioner of Pensions. James J Culpepper, a Private of Capt Sumeral Dennis's Company Col Withers Regiment Ala Mex War Volunteers, was enroled on the 2d day of June 18 46, at Mobile for 6 months. He was mustered out June 16" 1846 a Private. Period of service 15 days. Books of organization are not on file. ________________________________/s/_A_C_Drum ________________________________Adjutant General The next pension application followed a few months after the first using a form specifically related to the Mexican War: MEXICAN WAR. CLAIM OF WIDOW FOR PENSION. This must be Executed before a Court of Record or some officer thereof having Custody of the Seal. State of Georgia, County of Harris, ss. ON THIS 12th day of February, A. D. one thousand eight hundred and eighty 7 personally appeared before me ____________________, the same being a Court of Record within and for the County and State aforesaid, (1) Martha B. Culpepper aged 72 years, a resident of Mulberry Grove in the State of Georgia who being duly sworn according to law, declares that she is the widow of (2) James J. Culpepper deceased, who was the identical (3) Jas. J. Culpepper who served under the name of (4) Jas J. Culpepper as a (5) private in the Company commanded by Captain Dennis Ala, Regiment of Vol commanded by __________________ in the war with Mexico, that her said husband (6) Vol[untee]r[ed] at Mobile, Ala. on or about the ________ day June A. D. 1846 for the term of 6 mos and continued in actual serivce in said war for the term of (7) mos, and whose services terminated by reason of (8) honorable discharge on the ______ day of ___________ A. D. 1846. She further states that the following is a full description of her said husband at the time of his enlistment, viz: 9 height 5 feet 9 inches, complexion, dark; eyes, blue; hair, black. She further states that she was married to the said Jas J Culpepper at the city (or town) of Knoxville in the county of Crawford and in the State of Ga. on the 21 day Decber A. D. 1828 by one (10) Jno. Neal who was a (11) Minister of Gospel and that her name before her said marriage was Martha B. Blackstone and that she has not remarried since the death of said soldier; and she further states that (12) neither herself nor her said husband had been previously married and she further declares that she is [space for specifying disability, etc.] (if claimant is over sixty-two years of age, this space need not be filled.) and that her said husband (13) James J. Culpepper died at Rockford in the State of Ala. on the 15th day of Octo A. D. 1846 and she further declares that the following have been places of residence of herself and her said husband since the date of his discharge from the army, viz: (14) In Coosa Co., Ala.; and the claimant since her husband's death, has resided near Mulberry Grove, Harris Co. Ga. She makes this declaration for the purpose of obtaining the Pension to which she may be entitled under the provisions of any act of Congress granting pensions to widows of Menican War soldiers, and hereby constitutes and appoints, with full power of substitution and revocation Flynn Hargett Jr. of Hardeman, Georgia her true and lawful attorney to prosecute her claim. And she further declares that she heretofore made an application for (15) bounty land & obtained one #66.974. The claim for pension, on account of death of her said husband from wound rec'd &c, is pending. and that her residence is No. ___________ Street, City (or Town) of ______________ County of Harris State of Georgia and that her post-office address is Mulberry Grove, Ga. /s/_S._J._Foster________________/s/_Martha B. Culpepper /s/_J_M_Huling Also personally appeared S. J. Foster, aged 33 years, residing at No. Mulberry Grove street, in Ga., and James M Huling aged 27 years, residing at No. Mulberry Grove street, in Georgia, persons whom I certify to be respectable and entitled to credit, and who being by me duly sworn, say that they have know the said Martha J. Culpepper for 15 years and for 12 years respectively; that they were present and saw her sign her name (or make her mark) to the foregoing declaration; that they have every reason to believe, from the appearance of said claimant and their acquaintance with her, that she is the identical person she represents herself to be; and they further say that they are able to identify her as the person who was the wife of the identical (16) Jas. J. Culpepper who rendered the service alleged in the above application (in the company of Captain Dennis in the regiment of Ala. Vols in the war with Mexico) by the following named facts and circumstances, viz: (17) That Mrs. Culpepper swears to the facts & we know her to be a person of veracity and eminently worthy of belief and that they have no interest in the prosecution of this claim. /s/_S._J._Foster________________/s/_S._J._Foster ________________________________/s/_J._M._Huling Sworn to and subscribed before me this 12th day of February A. D. 188 7 and I hereby certify that the contents of the above declaration, &c., were fully made known and explained to the applicant and witnesses before swearing, including the words _______________ erased, and the words _______________, added; and that I have no interest, direct or indirect in the prosecution of this claim. ________________________________/s/_A._J._Truett _____________Clerk of the Superior Court Harris Co. Affidavits supporting this application include one from neighbors A. L. Moon and L. C. Hargett, Jr. who swore that that they had known Martha for 30+ years and: They have Known the said Martha B Culpepper for the space of time above mentioned & have lived neighbors to her; have known her to visit relatives in Ala. where she & her husband lived prior to his death; have seen an affidavit from a person in Crawford Co. Ga. stating that the records there showed that Martha B. Blackstone and J. J. Culpepper were duly & legally married; They state further that they have seen a letter which was written by Jas J. Culpepper under date of June 11th 1846 from Mobile, Ala, and addressed to Martha B. Culpepper, his wife, which letter stated that his company had just been mustered into service &c. They further state that they have known persons visiting this County from Ala. Mrs. Culpepper's former home, identify recognize her as the widow of Jas J. Culpepper. They state further that the Dept of the Interior (Pension Office) has granted to M. B. Culpepper a B. L. Warrant No. 66.974 & there is no doubt of her identity. Two other witnesses, S. J. Foster and J. M. Huling signed an affidavit which added information about the land Martha had received: Which warrant was for 160 acres land. Act Mar 3d 1855, No. 66.974 and issued June 9" 1857. They state further that they have learned from claimant & other reliable authority that claimant move[d] from Ala. to Harris Co Ga, in 185-, and that she has lived here ever since.... It is interesting to note that Martha received land for her husband's service before the Civil War but does not appear to have been able to get a widow's pension after the Civil War. Martha made a final appeal (#455, rejected) for a pension in 1897: MEXICAN WAR PENSION.--Act of January 29, A. D. 1887. DECLARATION OF WIDOW FOR PENSION. State of Georgia, County of Muscogee, ss: ON THIS 24 day of August, A. D. one thousand eight hundred and ninety 7, personally appeared before me, clerk of the Superior Court of Said County the same being a court of record in the State of Columbus in the County of Muscogee in the State of Georgia who, being by me first duly sworn according to law, deposes and says: I am the widow of James J. Culpepper, who served under the name of James I. Culpepper, as a private in the Company commanded by Captain Dennis in the ______ regiment of ______________, commanded by ______________ in the war with Mexico; that my said husband enlisted at Mobile Ala. on or about the _________ day of June 1846, A. D. ______, for the term of six months; that I was married under my name of Martha B. Blackstone to my said husband, by Jonothan Neal a minister on or about the 21 day of December A. D. 1828 at Crawford County Ga, in the State of Georgia, and lived with my said husband from the date of my said marriage until the day of his death, to wit: the 15 day of October A. D. 1846 when my said husband died at New[?] Wetumpka [Wetumpka is in Elmore Co., AL and James was supposed to have died in Coosa Co., AL. Could New Wetumpka have been in Coosa Co., AL and later named Rockford where Martha is known to have lived and mentioned in one application as James' place of death?] in the State of Alabama, and that I have not since remarried; that there was never any legal impediment to said marriage. No. 1. That my said husband being duly enlisted, as aforesaid, actually served sixty days with the Army or Navy of the United States in Mexico, or on the coast or frontier thereof, or en route thereto, in the war with that Nation, which service was as follows: as a private in company known as Taledega Rangers at and was honorably discharged at Mobile on the ____ day of __________ A. D. 1846 No. 2. That my said husband was actually engaged in a skirmish in said war, some time in June 1846 and was brought home on or about the 8th day of Sept. 1846 and died from said wound on 15th Oct. 1846. No. 3. That my husband was personally named in a resolution of Congress for a specific service in said war, to wit: In the resolution of the ___________ day of ____________ A. D. _______, and was honorably discharged at __________________ on the __________ day of ______ A. D. No. 4. That I am 83 years of age, and that I was born on or about the 28 day of Sept A. D. 1814, at Richmond Co., in the State of Georgia No. 5. That I am disabled by reason of Age and the said disability was not incurred while I was in any manner voluntarily engaged in, or aiding or abetting the late rebellion against the authority of the United States. No. 6. That I claim pension by reason of the fact that I am dependent in whole or in part for my support upon a Grand Daughter, not legally bound for my support and that such dependence as alleged consists in this, to wit: _________________________________ That I have ______ heretofore made application for pension or bounty land, which said claim is No. ______ That I am a pensioner of the United States as ________________ under certificate No. ______, at the rate of _____ dollars per month. That in support and proof of my right to pension I tender herewith, under the regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interion, the following evidence: _____________ and the affidavits of _____________ That since the death of my said husband I have resided at the following places, to wit: in Coosa County Alabama and Harris County Georgia and in Columbus Georgia That I am not [smeared ink]ing under any political disabilities imposed by the 14th amendment to the Constitution of the United States. And I hereby appoint, with full power of substitution and revocation, H. J. Hayden & Co. War Claims Attorneys, of Washington, D. C. my true and lawful attorneys, to prosecute my claim. My Post-office address is Columbus Ga /s/_C.[?]_J._Thornton___________/s/_Martha_B_Culpepper /s/_S_E_Lawthon[?]_Notary_Public STATE OF Georgia, County of Muscogee, ss: Before me, Jno C Cook, a clerk of a court of record, on this 24 day of August, A. D. 1897 personally appeared Martha B Culpepper known to me as a person described in, and who executed and signed the foregoing declaration for pension, as widow of James J. Culpepper and whom I certify to be a credible person and of good report for truth and veracity in the community in which she lives, who, being by me first duly sworn, deposes and says that she has read (if claimant cannot read, read to her and so state in acknowledgement,) the foregoing declaration and knows the contents thereof, and that all the facts therein stated are true. ________________________________/s/_Jno_C_Cook_Clk _______________________________________S_C_M_C_[?] The following is from pp. 806-808 of Vol. 18 of The Encyclopedia Americana International Edition published by Grolier, Inc. of Danbury, CT: MEXICAN WAR. The annexation of Texas in 1845 laid the foundation for the war with Mexico. Although Texas had been for many years practically free, and had been recognized by the United States, Britain, France and other countries, Mexico refused to acknowledge its independence. When the United States proposed to admit Texas into the Union, Mexico gave warning that the annexation would be equivalent to a declaration of war. On March 6, 1845, Mexico protested, and soon afterward withdrew her minister and severed diplomatic relations. Her acts, however, scarcely justified her threats, as at that time at least little or no preparation was made for war. It has, therefore, been claimed that had the American government used a conciliatory policy peace might have been preserved and friendly relations reestablished. At the moment, however, the Mexican people and authorities were in a rather belligerent attitude, due in part to pride and in part to an expectation that the United States would soon be involved in a war with Britain over the Oregon boundary, in which case Mexico would have a powerful ally to aid her. Did President James Polk at this point seek to strengthen this hope in the minds of the Mexicans, intending at the proper moment to make a compromise and peace with Britain, as was done, and thus leave Mexico at the mercy of the United States? Perhaps history can never answer the question, but events at least seemed to march in harmony with the thought, For Mexico soon found itself in the dilemma that it must either sell California to the United States, receiving in return a goodly sum of money to appease its pride, or engage in a war to sustain its honor and territorial integrity. Mexico bravely, but perhaps not wisely, chose the latter alternative, not fully realizing the inequality of the contestants, nor the depth of the humiliation to which it would be subjected. Doubtless President Polk preferred to acquire California without war, but its acquisition was to be the principal measure of his administration. Hence if war was the only means to secure it, war it must be--at least enough to get possession of the desired territory. Causes of the War. The immediate occasion of the war was the dispute in regard to the western boundary of Texas. Proclaiming its independence in 1836, Texas asserted that its western boundary was the Rio Grande to its source thence due north to 42° north latitude. The following year the United States recognized its independence and, in December 1845, by a joint resolution admitted it into the Union as a state, providing that boundary disputes were to be settled by the United States. President Polk accepted the boundary claimed by Texas, and on Jan. 16, 1846, ordered Gen. Zachary Taylor to march to the eastern bank of the Rio Grande as the western boundary of the United States. Mexico insisted that the Nueces River--100 miles (160 km) east--was the true western boundary of Texas and therefore that General Taylor was now on Mexican soil. On April 25, 1846, the first blood was shed in a conflict between a band of Mexican troops that had crossed to the eastern side of the Rio Grande and a company of American soldiers. The news of this action was immediately communicated by General Taylor to President Polk, who sent his now noted message to Congress, asserting the war was begun by the act of Mexico on U. S. soil. Congress finally accepted, after a stormy debate in the Senate, the president's statement, and war was recognized as existing. Other causes were also at work and help to make a decision in regard to the justness of the war still more difficult. Mexico for many years had been in a chronic state of revolution. The natural result followed. American citizens in Mexico sustained property losses and doubtless were frequently unjustly arrested and even imprisoned. Claims arising from these causes had been in part settled under a convention of 1840 but many of them were still pending. Some were just; more, either unjust or extravagant in amount. President Polk united these unsettled claims with the boundary question and demanded that Mexico receive an envoy extraordinary with power to settle both--on its face an eminently fair proposition. On the other hand, Mexico professed to be ready to receive an ambassador to settle the boundary dispute but declined to receive John Slidell as U. S. minister when he was commissioned to settle all disputes, insisting that the two questions were distinct in kind and origin and should not be united. President Polk in his message asserted that this action of Mexico was in violation of its promise to receive a minister and hence justified his administration in its measures and forced him to take possession of the disputed territory. The need for more slave territory was perhaps another factor in causing the war. At least many from the South took an aggressive position on all questions in dispute between the two countries and thus made a peaceable settlement more difficult. Both the economic and the political reasons for more territory began to be felt by 1846--the one to have new soil over which to spread the land-exhausting system of slavery; and the other to have new territory out of which to carve new slave states so that the equilibrium between slave and free states might be maintained. Some other forces tending to arouse the war and aggressive spirit may be noted. The cry of "manifest destiny" played a part. Many, especially in the West, felt that the Pacific Ocean was the natural western boundary of the United States. They also demanded the "Golden Gate" that commerce might be opened up with the Orient. The two great parties--the Whigs and the Democrats-- divided sharply on the question. The war, in fact, became almost a party, instead of a national, issue. The Democrats, as a rule, supported the administration and its claim that the war was just. The Whigs, on the contrary, asserted that it was a most unholy and unrighteous war, and characterized it as "Polk's war." Abraham Lincoln, entering Congress in 1847, became a severe critic of the policy pursued, while Thomas Corwin of Ohio went so far as to use this language: "If I were a Mexican I would tell you, 'Have you not room in your own country to bury your dead men? If you come into mine we will greet you with bloody hands, and welcome you to hospitable graves.'" President Polk summarized his reasons for recommending that Congress recognize war as existing as follows: "The grievous wrongs perpetrated by Mexico upon our citizens throughout a long period of years remain unredressed; and solemn treaties ... have been disregarded.... Our commerce with Mexico has been almost annihilated." He then added: "As war exists, and ... exists by the act of Mexico herself we are called upon, by every consideration of duty and patriotism, to vindicate, with decision the honor, the rights, and the interests of our country." The Campaigns. The war with Mexico was accepted as a fact by Congress on May 13, 1846. There were four principal fields of action in its prosecution, (1) Along the Rio Grande, under the command of Gen. Zachary Taylor; (2) in California, where Capt. John Charles Fremont and Commodore Robert Field Stockton were in command, (3) in New Mexico, with Col. Stephen Watts Kearny leading the U. S. forces; and (4) from Veracruz to Mexico City, under the command of Gen. Winfield Scott, the commander in chief of the U. S. armies. Everywhere success attended the arms of the United States. It was one of the few wars in history in which no defeat was sustained by one party and no victory won by the other. General Taylor defeated the Mexican troops at Palo Alto on May 8, 1846, and at Resaca de la Palma the following day, and captured Matamoros on the 18th. He remained near that city for some weeks to recruit his army and prepare to advance into the interior. On September 24 he entered Monterrey, after a siege of four days and a gallant resistance by the Mexicans. Taylor's most famous victory, however, was won on Feb. 22-23, 1847, at Buena Vista. General Scott gave orders, which fell into the hands of Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, the Mexican general, for General Taylor to send some nine regiments to aid Scott in his proposed attack on Veracruz. Santa Anna immediately marched his whole command against Taylor expecting to crush him in this weakened condition. It was 20,000 men against about 5,000. But the skill of Taylor, the persistence of his army, and the organization and equipment of the U. S. troops won a great victory. Taylor became the hero of the hour, and Buena Vista made him an irresistible presidential candidate.... Fremont's course in California has been a subject of keen controversy. As leader of an exploring expedition he was already in northern California, and early in 1846 was recalled to the Sacramento Valley. California was the goal of the political policy of Polk's administration. The means to secure its acquisition were uncertain. It might be gained by war or by filling the territory with settlers from the United States, who in the course of time might bring it into the Union as Texas had already been annexed. Or it might be effected by securing the goodwill of the native Californians who were unhappy under Mexican rule. The latter policy seems to have been the one adopted by the administration. The U. S. consul at Monterey, Calif., Thomas Oliver Larkin, was developing this policy with a good prospect of success, it is claimed, when Fremont appeared on the scene. He seems to have developed a fourth policy--namely, the establishment of an independent government under the control of settlers from the United States in the Sacramento Valley. This movement resulted in the so-called Bear Flag Republic and in virtual civil war between the native Californians and the newer settlers. At this moment the Mexican War began, and the Bear Flag was replaced by the Stars and Stripes. It has been claimed by some California historians that Fremont's course, had not the Mexican War come at the moment it did, might have lost California to the United States. The native Californians, alienated as they were by his course, might have put themselves under a British protectorate in revenge for the treatment accorded them. Be that as it may, by the end of 1846 all California was conquered and held by U. S. troops and Fremont was regarded as the hero who had won the "Golden Gate" by his energy and decision. Santa Fe was captured by Colonel Kearny on Aug. 18, 1846, and New Mexico was secured with almost no loss of life. By the end of the year, therefore, all the territory that the administration desired was in the possession of its armies, but Mexico was still unconquered. Scott had been chafing in Washington during the summer and fall of 1846 while Taylor was winning his brilliant victories. He asked to go to the front to assume chief command, but the administration retained him at the capital under the plea of needing his advice. As it happened this Democratic war was officered by Whig generals. Scott had already been a candidate for the Whig nomination for the presidency. The charge was now made that Scott was kept from command for fear that success might make him a more formidable candidate in 1848. Finally, when he was sent to the front in January 1847, the cry was raised that the purpose was to dim the luster of Taylor's victories, or at least to divide the popular support between the two generals in such a way as to destroy the political prospects of both. General Scott besieged Veracruz in March 1847, and by the 27th had captured the fortress of San Juan de Ulua, which had been thought almost impregnable, and was ready to enter the city. On April 8 he started into the interior, and on the 18th captured Cerro Gordo, the 19th, Jalapa, and the 22d, Perote. On May 15 he entered the important city of Puebla. Remaining here for some weeks he again advanced, in August, toward the capital, and on the 10th came in sight of the city. Two important victories were won August 20--at Contreras and at Churubusco. He captured Molino del Rey on September 8, and the victory of Chapultepec on September 12-13 gave him Mexico City itself, which he entered on September 14 with an army of only 6,000 men. General Santa Anna escaped from the city and attempted, unsuccessfully, to organize further military resistance. The war was practically over, but the victory was so complete that it began to be a question whether there was any government left with sufficient power to negotiate a treaty of peace. An agitation began with friends both in and out of Congress, as well as in the cabinet, looking to the annexation of the whole of Mexico. John C. Calhoun, on the one hand, and Daniel Webster and a majority of the Whigs, on the other, joined hands to defeat this plan. President Polk was finally forced to make the ultimate decision. Nicholas Trist was sent in March 1847 to Mexico to make a treaty of peace. Failing, he was ordered in the fall to return to Washington, but disobeying instructions, he remained in Mexico. On Feb. 2, 1848, he concluded a treaty of peace in harmony with his original instructions. The administration was in a quandary. To ratify meant to condone the disobedience of Trist. To reject meant a prolongation of the war, and time to perfect the intrigue for the annexation of "All Mexico." President Polk, after some hesitation, decided to send the treaty to the Senate for its consideration. Received February 23, it was ratified, after some amendments, on March 10, by a vote of 38 to 14. On May 30, treaty ratifications were exchanged and the war ended. The Mexicans had fought bravely, even stubbornly and at times skillfully, yet in every contest, even when the odds were greatly in their favor, without a single victory. In part superior leadership and training won for the soldiers of the northern republic, and in part their cooler and more persistent character. But in the main it was not bravery, nor generalship, nor even character that won. It was science and education applied in the equipment of the armies, the guns of the soldiers, the cannon, and the powder in the arsenals that made the one so much more effective than the other that the most daring bravery was no counterpoise. The Treaty of Peace. The treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo gave to the administration of President Polk the territory that according to his diary he intended to acquire--California and New Mexico. Mexico in return for the loss of its fairest northern provinces was paid $15 million and was released from all claims of all kinds held by citizens of the United States against it, estimated at $3,250,000, which the United States assumed. Boundary lines were drawn, and provision made in regard to other questions at issue between the two countries. Results. Usually successfully waged wars redound to the credit of the party in power. In this case, however, the Democratic party, the author and supporter of the war, was defeated by the Whig party, the party of opposition and criticism, in the presidential election of 1848. The Whigs made use of the popularity of a successful general (Taylor) to defeat the party that had made his glory possible. Evidently the people were ready to accept the fruits of the war, but also were ready to punish the party they believed had acted wrongly. A large number of young officers, destined for renown in later years, proved their worth in this war. Ulysses S. Grant and William T. Sherman, Robert E Lee, "Stonewall" Jackson, and Jefferson Davis, foreshadowed, in this Mexican struggle, the greatness that was to be theirs in the Civil War from 1861 to 1865. The acquisition of some 522,568 square miles (1,353,450 sq km) of territory--about one sixth of the modern continental United States--was the most important immediate as well as remote result. It was important in the issues that its acquisition precipitated. Should it be slave or free territory? Who should determine its institutions? Out of this question grew the larger one who had the right to control the institutions of the territories in general? To settle the first question David Wilmot, a Democrat of Pennsylvania, proposed the celebrated Wilmot Proviso, which would exclude slavery forever from all territory acquired from Mexico. Four long years of intense and bitter debate followed. This question and a series of others were settled temporarily in the Compromise of 1850. The second question was answered by the term "nonintervention," which meant, or soon came to mean, one thing to Douglas and the Northern Democrats and another to Davis and the South. Three main theories were evolved or defended in answer to the third query: (1) the view that Congress had the right to control the institutions of the territories and could make them slave or free at its will, (2) the Dickinson-Cass-Douglas doctrine of popular or "squatter sovereignty--the doctrine that the people of a territory themselves, while yet in a territorial status, determined their own institutions, (3) the radical Southern view that slaves were property, and, as property, might be taken into any territory-- the common public domain of the states--with no constitutional power anywhere to hinder or prevent. The new territory was important secondly in its industrial and political effect on the nation. The United States now had an outlook on the Pacific Ocean comparable to that on the Atlantic. China, Japan, and the rest of the Orient were brought within the circle of its influence. Conditions favorable to further expansion were prepared. In addition to the great effect on commerce thus prefigured, that on wealth and industry was not less. The gold, silver, copper, and other mineral wealth of the Rocky Mountain region would flow into the pockets of the people of the United States. This vast addition of territory and wealth tended also to emphasize national pride and ambition, to arouse a still more intense belief in "manifest destiny," to develop a more optimistic tone, and perhaps also to produce a more materialistic spirit. HOWARD W. CALDWELL University of Nebraska Birth: 03 JUN 1806 in Lexington District, South Carolina Death: 15 OCT 1846 in Coosa Co., Alabama Event: Census 1830 01 JUN 1830 Crawford Co., Georgia Note: Unaccounted for is 1 M0-5 1 Event: Land Lottery 1832 Crawford Co., Georgia Note: lot 1133/20/3 in what became Paulding Co., GA 2 Father: John Culpepper b: 01 OCT 1772 in Camden District, South Carolina Mother: Nancy Gillespie b: ABT 1778 in South Carolina Marriage 1 Martha Byne Blackstone b: 28 SEP 1814 in Richmond Co., Georgia Married: 21 DEC 1828 in Crawford Co., Georgia 3 Marriage License: 20 DEC 1828 in Crawford Co., Georgia Children Nancy Catherine Culpepper b: JAN 1831 in Crawford Co., Georgia John G. Culpepper b: ABT 1834 in Crawford Co., Georgia Martha Custis Culpepper b: 17 JUL 1841 in Montgomery, Montgomery Co., Alabama Virginia Culpepper b: ABT 1847 in Georgia Sources: Title: 1830 US Census, Census Type: Federal Census, Place: United States Abbrev: 1830 US Census Publication: 1830 Page: Page 399, Crawford Co., GA James J. Culpepper, 1 M0-5, 1 M20-30, 1 F15-20 Title: The 1832 Gold Lottery of Georgia Abbrev: 1832 Gold Lottery of Georgia Author: Rev. S. Emmett Lucas Jr. Publication: Southern Historical Press, Easley, SC, 1988 Repository: Name: LDS Family History Library - Salt Lake City Call Number: 975.8 R2lb Page: James J. Culpepper, Morris District, Crawford Co., GA, drew lot 1133/20/3 in what became Paulding Co., GA, 1832 Title: Georgia Marriages to 1850, Url: http://www.ancestry.com/search/rectype/inddbs/2085a.htm Abbrev: Georgia Marriages to 1850 Author: Jordan Dodd / Liahona Research, Compiler: Ancestry.com Publication: 1997 Page: James L. Culpepper and Martha B. Blackstone on 21 Dec 1828 in Crawford Co., GA Martha Byne Blackstone Name: Martha Byne Culpepper Sex: F Change Date: 03 OCT 2005 Birth: 28 SEP 1814 in Richmond Co., Georgia Death: AFT 1897 in Columbus, Muscogee Co., Georgia Event: Census 1850 23 OCT 1850 Coosa District, Coosa Co., Alabama 1 Event: Census 1880 01 JUN 1880 Harris Co., Georgia 2 Event: Census 1870 01 JUN 1870 Harris Co., Georgia 3 Father: John M. Blackstone b: 06 JAN 1781 in Natural Bridge, Rockbridge Co., Virginia Mother: Catherine Harvey b: 07 MAR 1782 in South Carolina Marriage 1 James I. J. Culpepper b: 03 JUN 1806 in Lexington District, South Carolina Married: 21 DEC 1828 in Crawford Co., Georgia 4 Marriage License: 20 DEC 1828 in Crawford Co., Georgia Children Nancy Catherine Culpepper b: JAN 1831 in Crawford Co., Georgia John G. Culpepper b: ABT 1834 in Crawford Co., Georgia Martha Custis Culpepper b: 17 JUL 1841 in Montgomery, Montgomery Co., Alabama Virginia Culpepper b: ABT 1847 in Georgia Sources: Title: 1850 US Census, Census Type: Federal Census, Place: United States Abbrev: 1850 US Census Publication: 1850 Page: Page 63, Lines 1-6, Coosa District, Coosa Co., AL Martha Culpepper, 35, F, GA John Culpepper, 16, M, Farmer, GA George W. Culpepper, 14, M, AL Nathan Culpepper, 11, M, AL Martha Culpepper, 8, F AL Vianna Culpepper, 2, F, AL Title: 1880 US Census, Census Type: Federal Census, Place: United States Abbrev: 1880 US Census Publication: 1880 Page: Page 553C, Family 156, ED 61, Lower 19th, Harris Co., GA Martha (Blackstone) Culpepper, Self, F, Md, 65, GA/VA/SC Vianna L. Culpepper, Dau, F, S, 30, --- , AL/SC/GA Lucy E. Culpepper, GDau, F, S, Mulatto, 9, GA/GA/AL G. Catharine Culpepper, GDau, F, S, Mulatto, 2M, GA/GA/AL Title: 1870 US Census, Census Type: Federal Census, Place: United States Abbrev: 1870 US Census Publication: 1870 Page: Page 127B, Family 176, Hamilton PO, Harris Co., GA Martha Culpepper, 56, F, Keeping House, GA Viana Culpepper, 21, F, Farm Laborer, GA Title: Georgia Marriages to 1850, Url: http://www.ancestry.com/search/rectype/inddbs/2085a.htm Abbrev: Georgia Marriages to 1850 Author: Jordan Dodd / Liahona Research, Compiler: Ancestry.com Publication: 1997 Page: James L. Culpepper and Martha B. Blackstone on 21 Dec 1828 in Crawford Co., GA Page: James L. Culpepper and Martha B. Blackstone on 21 Dec 1828 in Crawford Co., GA ****** Catherine Harvey Name: Catherine Blackstone Sex: F Change Date: 24 JAN 2005 Note: Catherine's tombstone apparently reads "8 May 1782 -- Jul 1878." Birth: 07 MAR 1782 in South Carolina Death: JUL 1878 in Crawford Co., Georgia Census: 1830 Crawford Co., Georgia Event: Research note 07 DEC 2004 Note: From Tina Keene Peddie: "I believe my APSELIA who mar. BENJAMIN MORRIS (SC), may be a sister to this CATHERINE 'HARVEY' who mar. JOHN M. BLACKSTONE. These families are very close, and some say APSELIA was a HARVEY. They are closely related to families also of HATCHER, HANCOCK & STEMBRIDGE, that went to Hancock & Crawford Co.GA. If anyone has any info on my APSELIA (Harvey or Blackstone?), who mar. my BENJ. MORRIS, I'd sure appreciate hearing from you! Thanks! Cuz'n Tina/CA" 1 Census: 23 OCT 1850 Coosa District, Coosa Co., Alabama Census: 1860 Crawford Co., Georgia Marriage 1 John M. Blackstone b: 06 JAN 1781 in Natural Bridge, Rockbridge Co., Virginia Married: 11 APR 1799 in Richmond Co., Georgia Children Eliza Blackstone b: 03 AUG 1800 Icy Snow Blackstone b: 13 JUN 1802 James Harvey Blackstone b: 19 OCT 1805 Thomas Walker Blackstone b: 05 JAN 1808 Gasaway Davis Blackstone b: 14 SEP 1809 Sarah Porter Blackstone b: 20 AUG 1812 in Milledgeville, Baldwin Co., Georgia Martha Byne Blackstone b: 28 SEP 1814 in Richmond Co., Georgia Commodore Anson Blackstone b: 10 MAY 1817 in Georgia Catherine Hale Blackstone b: 24 JAN 1820 Louiza Marien Blackstone b: 31 JUL 1825 *** John M. Blackstone Sex: M Change Date: 05 JUL 2004 Note: According to Paula Millhollon in a 12 Feb 1991 letter, John M. Blackstone's father died before he was born. "His mother was Winfield Zachary Blackstone: she married Jonathan Paine in 1795." The following inscription is from his tombstone in the cemetery of Salem Primitive Baptist Church, three miles northeast of Knoxville, Crawford Co., GA: "Crawford Co. first Senator & held the honor nine successiveterms. Helped to organize Crawford Co. & locate the county site and named it Knoxville. Helped to organize the first Inferior Court ever held in the county. Salem's first pastor, helped to organize Mt Paron 1824, Mt Carmel 1826, Salem, Providence, Union & Mt Calvery. Acted as first moderatorof Echeconnee Association at Mt Carmel 1829." The family Bible of a son, Commodore Anson Blackstone, gives John M. Blackstone's date of birth as 6 Jan 1781. Since John M. Blackstone listed himself as 69 years of age in the 1850 census, this would tend to support the 1781 date. Mrs. Paula Millhollon wrote that in 1815/16, John M. Blackstone was pastor of a church in Burke Co., GA. She believes that he was in Warren Co., GA in 1820. Mrs. Paula Millhollon also said that there is a card in the Atlanta Archives that states that John M. Blackstone's "father killed in the Revolution." Birth: 06 JAN 1781 in Natural Bridge, Rockbridge Co., Virginia Death: 28 JUN 1859 in Crawford Co., Georgia Census: 1830 Crawford Co., Georgia Burial: Knoxville, Crawford Co., Georgia Census: 1840 Chambers Co., Alabama Census: 23 OCT 1850 Coosa District, Coosa Co., Alabama Marriage 1 Catherine Harvey b: 07 MAR 1782 in South Carolina Married: 11 APR 1799 in Richmond Co., Georgia Children Eliza Blackstone b: 03 AUG 1800 Icy Snow Blackstone b: 13 JUN 1802 James Harvey Blackstone b: 19 OCT 1805 Thomas Walker Blackstone b: 05 JAN 1808 Gasaway Davis Blackstone b: 14 SEP 1809 Sarah Porter Blackstone b: 20 AUG 1812 in Milledgeville, Baldwin Co., Georgia Martha Byne Blackstone b: 28 SEP 1814 in Richmond Co., Georgia Commodore Anson Blackstone b: 10 MAY 1817 in Georgia Catherine Hale Blackstone b: 24 JAN 1820 Louiza Marien Blackstone b: 31 JUL 1825 *** Nancy Gillespie Name: Nancy Culpepper Sex: F Change Date: 20 JAN 2005 Note: In the Bible records of the John Culpepper family which were preserved by Mrs. J. W. (Ira Gay) Deam of Gay, GA, and copied by Mrs. D. W. (Lyvyn Wright) Sisco, John Culpepper's wife was recorded as "Nancy Gillespie" born "about 1778." Joseph Richard Culpepper, in a letter to Rev. George Bright Culpepper circa 1910-1915, wrote that Nancy Gillespie's "mother was a Peek." Mrs. John (Dorothy Culpepper) Wingfield preserved a 25 page typed manuscript "ONE FAMILY - CULPEPPER" written by her grandfather, Rev. George Bright Culpepper, who noted: According to the same [John Culpepper Bible] record, John William Culpepper married Nancy Gillespie on May 18, 1794, the ceremony being performed by Reverend Reese, at his house on the Congaree. It was on Sunday, cloudy in the morning and fair in the evening. As best it can be figured, Nancy Gillespie was six years younger than John William, the man she married, and was born on the Peedee River, in South Carolina, near Cheraw. The record recites that to this couple were born eight sons and two daughters. Nancy Gillespie is presumed to have been the daughter of Francis Gillespie of South Carolina since one of her sons was named Francis Gillespie Culpepper. Francis Gillespie owned land in Cheraws District, SC and family tradition is that this was where Nancy Gillespie was born. Francis Gillespie's wife was named Elizabeth based on South Carolina deeds (Book O-3, pp. 436-450) as was Nancy's sister Elizabeth "Betsy" Gillespie who married John Slappey (John Culpepper letter 1853). Nancy and Betsy Gillespie's presumed mother, Elizabeth, was perhaps a daughter or sister of Daniel Peek. In 1807, John Culpepper and John Slappey were listed as administrators of Daniel Peek's Richland District estate. The bond was also signed by Joseph Culpepper and George Slappey. Buyers at the estate sale included John Culpepper and John Slappey, Elizabeth Gillespie, and others. Prior to his death, Daniel Peek may have given land to John and Nancy Gillespie Culpepper which would account for their move back to Richland District, SC. Daniel Peek's surviving estate records do not mention land but include sixteen slaves, several horses, hogs, and farm produce, indicating that he had been a planter and landowner. In Feburary 1823 when John Culpepper sold (Deed Book 43, pp. 322-323, Edgefield Co., SC) 144 acres "where I now live" on Cuffeetown Creek in Edgefield District, SC, this was not the land that he had been granted in 1814. Nancy Gillespy had to relinquish her dower rights to the land: John Culpepper____Deed._____South Carolina______ _____To_____________________Edgefield District____Know all Josiah Langley____men by these presents that I John Culpepper of Edgefield district in the State aforesaid for and In consideration of the Sum of Eight hundred dollars paid to me paid by Josiah Langley Senr of the State and district aforesaid have granted bargained sold and released and by these presents do grant bargain sell and release unto the Said Josiah Langley all that plantation or tract of land where I now live originally granted to George Shelnut Containing one hundred and forty four acres be the Same more or less. Lying and being in Edgefield district on Cuffeetown Creek waters of Stephen's Creek and Savannah River and adjoining Land held by the Said Josiah Langley and the heirs of Rovert Bell beginning at a White oak corner on the Creek thence South 60 E to 50 chain to Stake, thence N 30 E 27 ch 50 Links to white oak corner, thence Nor 60 W. 50 chains to white oak on Cuffeetown Creek, thence down the Said Creek following the windings and bendings of the Said Creek to the beginning corner, containing one hundred and forty acres; Together with all & Singular the rights members hereditaments and appurtenances the said premises belonging or in any wise ________[?] or appertaining; To Have and to hold all and Singular the premises before mentioned unto the Said Josiah Langley Senr. his heirs and assigns for Ever; and I do hereby bind myself, my heirs Exrs and admns to warrant and for Ever defend all and Singular the Said premises unto the Said Josiah Langley Senr. his heirs and assigns against myself, my heirs and assigns, and against any other person or persons whomsoever Lawfully Claiming or to claim the Same or any part thereof. Witness my hand and Seal this third day of February eighteen hundred and twenty three, and in the forty Seventh year of American Independence Test James Harrison_____________/s/ John Culpepper [Seal] Mathew (his X mark) Rodes__ South Carolina________Personally appeared before me Edgefield District____James Harrison Sn. and made oath that he was present and see John Culpepper Sign Seal and as his Act to deed, Sign Seal and deliver the within instrument of Writing to and for the uses and purposes therein mention, and did also See Mathew Roads with himself Sign his name as a Witness to the due Execution thereof - Sworn to before me this 29th March 1823. __________William Thurmond J.Q_____James Harrison The State of South Carolina____I William Thurmond Edgefield District_____________one of the Justices of the quorum for Said District do hereby Certify unto all whom it may concern that Nancy Culpepper the wife of the within named John Culpepper did this day appear before me and upon being privately and Separately Examined by me did declare that She does freely Voluntarily and without any Compulsion dread or fear of any person or persons whomsoever renounce release and forever relinquish unto the within Josiah Langley his heirs and assigns all her Interest and estate and also all her right and claim of Dower, of, in or to all and Singular the premises within mentioned and released. Given under my hand and Seal this the 29th March 1823___________________________Nancy Culpepper [Seal] William Thurmond J. Q.____Recorded 4th Oct 1828. There is a question about whether Mrs. John (Nancy Gillespie) Culpepper died in Meriwether Co., GA or in Randolph Co., AL. Mrs. J. (Clara Haralson) Moorcroft wrote in "THE WILLIAM CULPEPPER AND SALLY LESLIE FAMILY," that the widowed John Culpepper accompanied the William Henry Culpepper family from Meriwether Co., GA to Randolph Co., AL when Clara's mother's was six years old. This would seem to indicate that Nancy Gillespie Culpepper died in Meriwether Co., GA. However there were Elliott descendants living near the Wadley City Cemetery, Randolph Co., AL in the mid 1970's who believed that both John and Nancy Culpepper were buried on their land in Randolph Co., AL. Unfortunately, no records of the location of that land have been found. Lavyn (Wright) Sisco wrote 15 Apr 1994 that she had visited the Wadley City Cemetery with a Dean descendant in 1985 and was told that the two graves to the left of William Henry Culpepper were the graves of John and Nancy (Gillsepie) Culpepper. However Lavyn was also told in a 1973 letter from James Harris that William Henry Culpepper's first wife, Sarah Leslie, was the first person buried in the cemetery. If that is correct then Nancy died a year before Sarah and is not buried in the cemetery. It is possible that the two graves to the left of William Henry are those of Sarah O. (Culpepper) Elliott and her daughter Cynthia, both of whom are supposed to be buried in the cemetery but whose graves have not been identified. The cemetery was known as the Elliott family cemetery before it became the Wadley City Cemetery. Birth: ABT 1778 in South Carolina Death: 25 JUL 1848 in Meriwether Co., Georgia Death: 25 JUL 1848 in Randolph Co., Alabama Father: Francis Gillespie b: DEC 1745 in South Carolina Mother: Elizabeth Peek b: ABT 1755 Marriage 1 John Culpepper b: 01 OCT 1772 in Camden District, South Carolina Married: 18 MAY 1794 in Richland District, South Carolina Event: Deed FEB 1823 in Edgefield District, South Carolina Note: John Culpepper to Josiah Langley Sr. for $800, the tract “where I live” as granted to George Shelnut, 144 acres on Cuffeetown Creek and waters of Stephens Creek and Savannah River, adjoining said Josiah Langley and the heirs of Robert Bell. Witnesses: James Harrison, Mathew Rhodes. Nancy Culpepper gives consent. 1 Children Sarah O. Culpepper b: 05 FEB 1802 in Lexington District, South Carolina James I. J. Culpepper b: 03 JUN 1806 in Lexington District, South Carolina Mary Elizabeth Culpepper b: 31 JUL 1811 in Richland District, South Carolina Sources: Title: Edgefield Co. SC Deeds abstracted by Lew Griffin Abbrev: Edgefield Co. SC Deeds Repository: Name: LDS Family History Library - Salt Lake City Call Number: 975.737 R2 Page: Edgefield Deed Bk 43, p. 322 *** Elizabeth Peek Name: Elizabeth Gillespie Sex: F Change Date: 05 JAN 2003 Note: Elizabeth Peek was probably born circa 1755, location unknown. Nothing is known of her early life or whereabouts. Around 1775, she married Francis Gillespie of Cheraws District, SC. One would assume either that the Peek and Gillespie families lived near one another, or that Francis met his bride while traveling on business, or visiting relatives. Since he was a member of the Committees of Correspondence prior to the Revolution, it is conceivable that he might have visited Boston, and met his bride there. But it seems more likely that she was related to other Peeks in the general area, who seem to have come from Virginia. She and her daughters, and their husbands, are found in records with Daniel Peek, who appears to have been Elizabeth's brother. Daniel Peek died in Richland District, SC, in 1807, and Elizabeth's sons-in-law, John Culpepper and John Slappey, were administrators of his estate. In 1790, he was noted in Lancaster County SC deed records with Robert Down and William Tate, witnessing a deed of gift of four lots in the town of Camden from John Chesnut of Camden to Chesnut's daughter, Mary McRae ,the wife of Duncan McRae. John Chesnut was one of the leading merchants in Kershaw Co. SC. Daniel Peek apparently lived in or near Camden in Kershaw Co., SC since he was mentioned several times in the Minutes of the Kershaw County Court. On March 5, 1792 Daniel was appointed as overseer of a road which ran south/southwest out of Camden across Town Creek. An 1825 map of the county from the Mills' Atlas of the State of South Carolina shows that Chestnut's and McRae's were still living along the river near this road. In August of 1794 Daniel Peek served on a Grand Jury, indicating that he was someone of means in the county, since Grand Jurors were selected from those who paid the highest taxes. Based on the Minutes of the Kershaw County Court, Daniel continued to serve as an overseer of roads at least until 1797. Sometime after 1800 he moved to Richland District SC, where his estate was probated in 1807. Daniel Peek's personal estate included 15 slaves, nine horses, 34 head of cattle and nearly 50 hogs. He had various farm implements and household items, plus a canoe and a safe. John Culpepper and John Slappey, the husbands of Elizabeth (Peek) Gillespie's daughters, Nancy and Betsey, were named administrators of the estate which required a $20,000 administration bond. Buyers at the estate included John Culpepper, who bought a shotgun and a pickle tub, John Slappey, who bought a horse and horseman's sword, and Elizabeth (Peek) Gillespie, who bought horses and farm implements. Elizabeth had moved to Richland District from Cheraws District after her husband Francis' death. Daniel O'Guin, Thomas Watts, and William Gupphill, the three appraisers of the estate, were also buyers. Although it is tempting to think that Daniel was Mrs. Francis (Elizabeth Peek) Gillespie's father, the fact that he was active at least until the late 1790's suggests a younger man. Elizabeth's father would probably have been in his late 70's or mid-80's by that time. Daniel was probably Elizabeth's brother. A Lewis Peak was noted as a witness of the will of Enoch Linerieux of Craven Co., SC who died April 24, 1778. His relation to Daniel and Elizabeth is not known but he is noted since John and Nancy (Gillespie) Culpepper named one of their sons Lewis Peek Culpepper. Elizabeth and Daniel may have been related to Abel Peek, born 1765 in Virginia. Among Abel's children were Louis Peek, Elizabeth Peek, and Daniel Peek. Abel moved to Franklin County, GA, but may have been in SC in the 1790's. Nancy (Gillespie) Culpepper's mother, "Elizabeth Gillespie of the District of Richland" was also noted in a Marlborough District deed in 1806 selling 133+ acres of land to William Wright who had apparently been renting the land since the deed notes that he was purchasing land where he "now lives." The land was on the northeast side of the Pee Dee River and was bounded on the southeast by John Wilson's land and on all other sides by James Gillespie's land. Elizabeth (Peek) Gillespie died in Richland District sometime after the February 1808 estate sale, but no record of her death has been found. Francis and Elizabeth (Peek) Gillespie's daughter, Nancy, was apparently able to read and write. No doubt both Nancy and her sister, "Betsey," had attended the school funded by the St. David's Society which their father had supported. Birth: ABT 1755 Father: Lewis Peek ? b: EST 1730 Mother: Unknown b: EST 1732 Marriage 1 Francis Gillespie b: DEC 1745 in South Carolina Married: ABT 1775 Children Nancy Gillespie b: ABT 1778 in South Carolina Elizabeth Gillespie b: ABT 1779 *** Francis Gillespie 1 Sex: M Change Date: 12 FEB 2005 Note: On 3 January 1767, Francis Gillespie, planter, (son of James Gillespie and Mary, one of the daughters of Francis Young), and Elizabeth his wife, sold to Samuel Butler, gentleman, both of Craven Co., SC, for 350 pds. SC money, their undivided fourth part of 1100 acres (see pages 363-376 for details regarding the 1100 acres formerly belonging to Francis Young, grandfather of the said Francis Gillespie). Francis Gillespie being entitled to the said fourth part of 1100 acres through his mother, Mary, deceased, sells his share to Samuel Butler. Witnesses: John Thompson, William Pegues. Before Claudius Pegues, J. P. Recorded 23 January 1770 by Henry Rugeley, Deputy Register. In 1769 Francis Gillespie was listed as one of the voters for St. David's Parish near Long Bluff. On May 22, 1772, a Memorial was exhibited by Samuel Butler to be registered in the Auditor's office and persuant to an act of Assembly in that case made & provided of a plantation or tract of land containing 275 acres Situate in Craven County on the Peedee River and is part of two tracts of Land of 700 acres granted the 24th of May 1745 to Francis Young grandfather to Francis Gillespie butting and bounding NE on the Pee Dee river, NW on the Land of John Thompson Junr Dec'd, partly on the said Thompson and partly on the said Young's land, and SE on Mary Evan's Land and on all other sides uninhabited lands and 500 acres originally granted 18 November 1747 to Andrew Johnson, lying on the SW of the Pee Dee River, bounding NE & on all three sides on Francis Young's land & conveyed by him [Andrew Johnson] to Francis Young, which 275 acres of Land is part of the two tracts of Land above mentioned which became vested in Francis Gillespie by Intermarriage with Elizabeth his wife who conveyed the same by Lease and Release and bearing the date respectively the 12(?) day of Jany 1767 to Samuel Butler the Memorialist Quit Rent of 3/Stg or 4/proclamation money per 100 acres. Also another plantation or tract of Land containing 275 acres Situate as above (and is part of the two tracts of 700 acres of Land) aforementioned which became vested in John Flower by Intermarriage with Obedience his wife, one of the four female heirs and partners who Sold & Conveyed the Same by Lease and release bearing the date respectively the 1 and 2 days of Octr 1765 to Samuel Butler the Memorialist Quit Rent 3/Stg or 4/pro money per 100 acres. In witness Whereof he hath hereunto Set his hand this 22 May 1772. Francis was one of a group of men "from every part of the state who met in Charleston on July 6, 1774 to consider lans to support Boston. By account published by Comm. appt. by Boston to receive donations... July 18, 1778, it appears that those of South Carolina exceeded both in money & supplies, any other, not excepting Mass. itself" (South Carolinians in the Revolution, by Ervin). On 3 January 1775, Alexander Gordon and his wife Mary and son Robert Gordon of St. David's Parish, Craven Co, SC, sold to Thomas Lide of the same place, planter, for 3500 pds. SC money, 546.5 acres: one tract of land containing 300 acres on the northeast side of the Peedee adj. lands now possessed by John Husbands on a creek commonly known by the name of Hainer's or Husband's Creek and also, that plantation on which I now live on the northeast side of the Peedee River, 246.5 acres 100 acres of which is adjacent to land now belonging to Francis Gillespie, willed to Elizabeth Gordon and conveyed to me by Robert Gordon, 50 acres formerly granted to John Ellerbe conveyed to me by Edward Ellerbe adjacent to the lands mentioned, a tract of 96.5 acres conveyed to me by William Black. Alexander Gordon (LS), Mary Gordon (/) (LS), Robert Gordon (LS), Wit: Calvin Spencer, Sarah Foster (+). Proved in Cheraw Dist. Before Charles Augustus Steward, J.P., by the oath of Calvin Spencer, 4 January 1775. Recorded 3 April 1775 (SC Deeds, Bk. Q-4, p. 264-267) In 1776 Francis was elected a church officer of St. David's. Francis Gillespie was one of the original benefactors of St. Davids Society, which was established January 31, 1778 to promote public education in St. David's Parish. The society was founded "purposely for the establishing and founding a Public School in the said Parish for educating youth of all Christian denominations being protestants in the Latin and Greek Languages, writing, mathematics, arithmetic, and other useful branches of Literature...." (Darlingtoniana: A History of Darlington County, Eliza C. Ervin and Horace F. Rudisill, eds.) In 1779 Francis is named on a Jury List for Cheraws District, which is attached to Manuscript Act #1127, a new list to replace the one made up in 1778 (South Carolina Magazine of Ancestral Research, Vol. V, No. 1, Winter 1977, p.13) According to a Bible in the possession of Miss Olivia Moore, of Kollock, Marlboro Co, SC, Francis Gillespie was born in December (torn, but probably 1744-1746). And from the same source, he died in April 1780 (South Carolina Historical & Genealogical Magazine, Vol. 33, p. 177). On November 25, 1783, John Husbands of St. David's Parish, SC, bought 90 acres, part of 200 acres granted to John Bury on Oct 6, 1748, for 700 Spanish milled dollars, adjacent to property of the heirs of Francis Gillespie (Marlborough Co SC Deed Bk. A, p.7). On May 25, 1786, Thomas Lide of Marlborough Co. Sold 246 acres on the NE side of the PeeDee adjacent to the river and the estate of Francis Gillespie dec'd. Recorded June 8,1786 (Marlborough Co Deed Bk. A, p.22). On January 10, 1787, John Brown of Marlborough Co. sold to Morgan Brown 200 acres originally granted to John Berry on October 6, 1748, land adjacent to Husband's Creek and James Gillespie, and the estate of Francis Gillespie. Recorded June 5, 1787 (Marlborough Co. Deeds, Bk A, p.136) Birth: DEC 1745 in South Carolina Death: APR 1780 in South Carolina Father: James Gillespie b: ABT 1715 in Northern Ireland Mother: Mary Young b: ABT 1720 Marriage 1 Elizabeth Peek b: ABT 1755 Married: ABT 1775 Children Nancy Gillespie b: ABT 1778 in South Carolina Elizabeth Gillespie b: ABT 1779 Sources: Title: South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine Abbrev: SC Hist & Gen Magazine Note: Comments: Last edited in ROOTS III on 10/04/1990. Page: Vol 33, p 175-179**