Collecting McNeffs

I'm not done searching for and remembering Polly. I've decided though that to be a bit more active here, I will expand the scope of this extremely intermittent blog to Polly's descendants as well. Who knows? Maybe down the road it will help break a wall.

This was inspired by ebay. Maureen Taylor, the Photo Detective, had a podcast episode about finding family on the auction website. I figured McNeff was a unique enough name. I set up an ongoing search and forgot about it.

And then this gem appeared in my inbox:

Meet James Willard McNeff of New Albany, Indiana. He was born in 1857. Any educated guesses as to how old he is here?

I'm not a direct descendant. Not even close really. We are second cousins three times removed. Polly had two sons: Thomas Wright McNeff and William McNeff. I'm descended from Thomas. Young James here is William McNeff's grandson. Since we're not too close, I thought I shouldn't spend the money. I found a descendant on social media and reached out. I didn't get an answer though and the auction closed without the tin-type selling.

I panicked. Pictures are a strange thing. A shadow of a moment in the lives of those who have gone before. I'm not sure we value them now. They're so easy to take and share. I once saved a photo of my 3rd great Clark grandfather from the trash as my grandmother was on a house cleaning tear. I marvel still at how close that image was to being lost forever. I really treasure it ... and of course I've been happy to share it. I created a digital version and put it online. Once I heard from a distant cousin, and excitedly sent him a file of our shared ancestor. He said, "oh yeah, I've seen that before." I was gutted. He had seen it because I put it online. The victory in saving it just wasn't there for him. It only rated an "oh, yeah."

And what about all those orphans in shops, fairs and auctions? My aunt once told me that if no one wants the family photos she has, they should be burned. "Whatever happens, I don't want them in the antique shop." There's little fear that those photos will go unwanted, but what about after this generation is gone? Will the next one care?

And what if young James Willard McNeff hadn't ended up on an antique dealer's ebay auction? Why then, I wouldn't have swiftly emailed him saying, "I missed the auction! I'm so sorry! Please re-open it and I'll buy it immediately."

So Willard (as I gather from records he was called) is with family again. Welcome home.

Dramatis Personae

"Also Mr McNaff stands indebted to me one dollar exclusive of what mentioned in this note which I was of him throwing heads or tales."

Several years ago while on a trip to Indiana, I rented a car and headed south to Springfield, Kentucky. The trip was admittedly not very well planned, and a good portion of it was a race against the clock to make it to the Washington County Courthouse. It was worth the trouble though, and now that I know so much more than I did then, I have to make the trip again. What I found in the records was a series of debt suits and judgments against John T. Some happened before he went missing. Others were clearly a result of his absence, with court officers responding "Not found within my Bailiwick either in person or property."

Two marvelous lists can be made in from these documents. The first is a list of people who were part of John T and Polly's lives. The second is a list of goods that were sacrificed from the estate to cover the debts. I'll cover those in another post. Here is a list of people who had some of a relationship with John T - either business dealings or familial. What can't be said is how friendly these dealings were, though there are a few indications that there may have been some hostility. Did they harass our poor Polly and her family about the money? Were they sympathetic but backed into their own financial corners? I imagine each one may have played out in its own way.


Allies

• James Abell, apprentice, sued for discharge in Jan 1803
• Philip Cleland, in 1799, John T was appointed overseer of the a road that was bounded by Clelands' property, summoned as garnishee in Parrott debt suit
• Graham Family, in 1799, John T was appointed overseer of the a road that was bounded by "Graham's Hill." Mother-in-law was possibly Jane Graham Wright and Thomas Wright Jr, possibly Polly's brother, married a Mary Graham.
• John Gray, garnishee in Riley case and Drake case, Major Gray's property bounded patrol district, 1801
• Moses Rice, Witness to marriage bond in 1798
• Thomas Wright, Signed marriage bond in 1798, summoned as garnishee in Payne debt suit, Parrott debt suit 

Neighbors/Colleagues

• Richard Chandler, made district patroller with John T in 1801
• James Edmonsons, made district patroller with John T in 1801
• James Feanlland, captain of patrollers when John T was made a district patroller in 1801
• Samuel McElroy, property bounded patrol district, 1801
• George Young, took over road upkeep when John T was relieved in Jan 1802
• Capt Weaver, property bounded patrol district, 1801
• Their are several Thompson families in Washington County. That is John T's middle name. Could there be a connection?

Debt Holders 

• Nathaniel Drake, Feb 1803, sued John T in the amount of 170 dollars, of Jessamine County (with John Starr); Drake appears to have been a tavern keeper
• Hillary Hays(t), Mar 1800, party in suit with Jonathan Payne 
• John Hurry, party in suit with Amos Riley
• Stephen Lankford, Jun 1803, sued John T in the amount of 35 dollars and interest, lent him money Mar of 1800?
• Rodham Parrott, Mar 1800, sued John T in the amount of 30 pounds or 29 pounds 13 shillings and 6 pence and 3 dollars 64 cents and 15 shillings costs 
• Jonathan Payne, Mar 1800, sued John T in the amount of 21 pound 15 shilling and 3 pence. 
• Amos Riley, Mar 1803, sued John T in the amount of 19 dollars and 99 cents, John T signed promissory note to him in April of 1802
• John Starr, Feb 1803, sued John T in the amount of 170 dollars, of Jessamine County (with Nathaniel Drake)

Officers/Functionaries

• Richard Beall, Sheriff of Washington County (Payne case, Parrott case)
• Frederick Beysey (?), witness on promissory note with John T to Amos Riley 
• A Grant, court officer (Parrott case) 
•  Head, Justice of the Peace
• John Reed, court clerk (Parrott case, Lankford case)
• Reason Richards, court officer, when John T appointed road overseer
• Terah Templin, Presbyterian circuit minister who married John T and Polly in 1798. 
• Charles Wickliff, Esq, Signed release of James Abell from apprenticeship
• Henry Young, court officer (Lankford case, Riley case, Drake case

There's clearly a lot of work to do here, and mapping out these names seems like a good step. I can't leave this as it is without one more gem. It was an addendum to Riley's suit that gives some insight into the lives and character of these men. I'm not entirely sure how I want to interpret it yet, so I'll leave you to your own devices:

Amos Riley, "Also Mr McNaff stands indebted to me one dollar exclusive of what mentioned in this note which I was of him throwing heads or tales."

Tensions in 1802

EarlyAmerica.com


You may recall that David T. McNeff's bio says John T. disappeared in 1802. I recently had the chance to travel briefly to New Orleans, and though I wasn't able to find newspaper's from the period - a trip to a State museum did set me thinking about the Louisiana Purchase.

Tensions seemed to be running high over US access to the port in New Orleans. In April of 1802, Thomas Jefferson wrote to the US ambassador to France:

Every eye in the U.S. is now fixed on this affair of Louisiana. Perhaps nothing since the revolutionary war has produced more uneasy sensations through the body of the nation.

In October, Spain had signed Louisiana over to France, and the port of deposit was closed to American trade.vThere's a nice summary on the Louisiana Purchase here.

Two lines of query present themselves:
1. What is the most likely time of year for John T. to have departed Kentucky by flatboat and when would he have arrived in New Orleans?
2. It's time to read an authoritative book on the Louisiana Purchase to better understand the political atmosphere of that summer.

The Concurrence of the Senate

Felix Grundy was US Attorney General from 1838 to 1839. In 1804, he was a member of the Kentucky House of Representatives. He also served on the committee which oversaw Polly's case, and delivered same to the Senate for their concurrence.

Day 2 in the musty journal of the Kentucky Legislature. Well, it would be musty if it hadn't been on microprint. I didn't learn anything new, but in the interest of a complete accounting, I submit for your concurrence the following records from the Kentucky Senate, 1804.

Journal of the Senate
of the Commonwealth of Kentucky,
At A General Assembly
Begun and held at the capitol in the town of Frankfort,
On Monday the Fifth Day of November, in the year
of our Lord one thousand, eight hundred and four,
and of the Commonwealth the thirteenth.
Being the fifth session of the General Assembly under the
present constitution of government.

Frankfort
from the press of William Hunter
Printer to the Commonwealth
1804

Wednesday, November 21, 1804, p30f
A message from the house of representatives by mr. Grundy;
Mr. Speaker,
The house of representatives have passed a bill entitled "an act for the relief of Polly McNeff," so which they desire the concurrence of the senate. And then he withdrew.
... and the said bills, being severally read the first time, were ordered to be read a second.

Thursday, November 22, 1804, p32
A bill from the house of representatives entitled "an act for the relief of Polly McNeff;" and a bill entitled "an act for the conditional divorce of Rachel Branham;" were severally read and referred to a select committee of mr. Lancaster, mr. Henderson, mr. Hughes, mr. Ewing, mr. Pemberton, and mr. Thompson.

Tuesday, November 27, 1804, p44
Mr. Lancaster from the select committee to whom was referred the following bills, viz. A bill from the house of representatives entitled "an act for the relief of Polly McNeff;" and a bill entitled "an act for the conditional divorce of Rachel Branham," now reported on the same without amendments.
Ordered, That the first bill be recommitted to the further consideration of the same committee; and the second bill be laid on the table.

Wednesday, November 28, 1804, p46
Mr. Lancaster from the committee to whom the bill from the house of representatives was recommitted, entitled "an act for the relief of Polly McNeff;" reported the same with some amendments, which being severally twice read were agreed to. The said bill with the amendments was read the third time.
Resolved, That the same do pass with the amendments and that the title be "an act for the relief of Polly McNeff."
Ordered, That the clerk do acquaint the house of representatives and request their concurrence to the said amendments.

Ordered, that Miss Clark read the Journal of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, 1804

Christopher Greenup was Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky from September of 1804 to September of 1808. On December 6, 1804, he signed "An act for the relief of Polly McNeff"

Over Thanksgiving vacation, I found a journal article called "The Myth of the Abandoned Wife: Married Women's Agency and the Legal Narrative of Gender in Eighteenth-Century Kentucky" by Honor R. Sachs. It's an interesting piece, and essentially argues that regardless of the circumstances under which a marriage disintegrated in late 18th and early 19th centuries in Kentucky, the lawmakers that approved legislative divorces had a certain set of expectations. Marriages didn't fail because a woman wanted to leave her husband or make her own way in the world. They failed because these poor women were abandoned by their way-ward husbands. So, that's the grounds on which most divorces were based.

It was interesting - but I was looking for instructions. I got them. The article included an explanation of the legislative process that divorces underwent. I learned that each of these were debated in the legislative bodies, and that there are references to them in the Journals of the legislature.

Can they be entirely believed? Maybe not, but finding references to Polly's suit would certainly shed light on the situation. Much to my surprise, the University of Utah library has the records. They're found on an archaic medium - and it took me three library trips to finally access the information. But I did it. I now submit for your approval, dear reader, the results of my evening's perusal.

***********

Journal of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Kentucky
Begun and held at the capitol in the town of Frankfort, on Monday the Fifth of November, in the year of our Lord One Thousand, Eight Hundred and Four and of the Commonwealth the Thirteenth.
Frankfort, From the Press of William Hunter, Printer to the Commonwealth, 1804.

Friday, November 9, 1804, p. 18
Also a petition from Polly McNeff, praying that a law may pass, granting her a divorce from her husband, John T. McNeff; were presented and read, and ordered to be referred to the committee of religion.

Wednesday, November 14, 1804, p26
Mr. Russell from the committee of religion, made the following report viz.
The committee of religion have according to order had under consideration the petition of Polly McNeff, to them referred, and come to the following resolution thereupon to wit:
Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, that the said petition, setting forth that the said Polly did some years past, intermarry with John T. McNeff, who about two years past left the said Polly with three small children, without the smallest means of support; that the said Polly by industry, has procured a bare and scanty maintenance for herself and children, and is apprehensive that the said John will return and take that little earning from her, and praying that she may be divorced from the said John T. McNeff - is reasonable.
Which, being twice read, was concurred in.

Monday, November 19, 1804, p40
"A bill for the relief of Polly McNeff;" was read a second time, and committed to a select committee of messrs. F Grundy, Watkins, Spaulding, and J Grundy.

Tuesday, November 20, 1804, p42f
Mr. F. Grundy from the select committee to whom was referred "a bill for the relief of Polly McNeff, reported the same with an amendment, which being read, was agreed to by the house. The said bill with the amendment was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time tomorrow.

Wednesday, November 21, 1804, p47
The engrossed bills with the following titles, were severally read the third time viz "An act for the relief of Polly McNeff" ...
Resolved, That the said bills do pass, and the titles be as aforesaid.
Ordered, that mr. F. Grundy carry the first bill to the senate and desire their concurrence.

Wednesday, November 28, 1804, p67
A message from the Senate by mr. Lee their secretary;
Mr. Speaker,
The senate have passed a bill entitled "an act concerning attornies at law;" in which they desire the concurrence of this house. They have also passed the bills from the house with the following titles, to wit; "An act for the relief of Polly McNeff." And "an act for the relief of Rachel Branham;" with amendments, in which amendments they desire your concurrence. And then he withdrew.

Thursday, November 29, 1804, p69
The house then proceeded to consider the amendments proposed by the senate to the bills with the following titles, viz. An act for the relief of Polly McNeff. An act for the conditional divorce of Rachel Branham. And an act erecting sundry counties into election precincts; and the said amendments being severally read were concurred in.

Monday, December 3, 1804, p76
Mr. Kercheval from the joint committee of enrollments, reported that the committee had examined the enrolled bills with the following titles, viz. "an act for the relief of Polly McNeff;" and "an act giving Alvin Montjoy the further time of one year to erect a slope upon South Licking;" and that the same were truly enrolled. Whereupon the speaker affixed his signature thereto.

Friday, December 7, 1804, p84
A message from the Governor by mr. Gano:
Mr. Speaker,
The Governor has directed me to inform this house that he did on the 6th inst. approve & sign the enrolled bills with the following titles, viz. "an act for the relief of Polly McNeff;" "giving Alvin Montjoy the further time of one year to erect a slope upon South Licking;" "for the conditional divorce of Rachel Branham;" "erecting sundry counties into election precincts;" "for the relief of John Lewis;" "adding a small portion of Cumberland to Adair county." And he withdrew.

**********

And he withdrew. Did it solve anything for Polly? Make her sleep better at night? May I point out to those of you keeping count that it says she had *THREE* small children. (Let's hear it for Nancy McNiff Chamberlain! Daughter?)

With most discoveries, this increases my "to-do" list. Next up, the journal of the Senate ...

Polly's Brothers and Sisters

This all seems so hypothetical I haven't posted it anywhere - until today. I know Thomas Wright of Washington County, Kentucky signed Polly and John T's marriage bond. So, If I start with the assumption that Thomas was her father - this gives me a list of possible siblings:

Thomas Wright, Jr. m Mary Graham in Washington Co, KY, Aug 8, 1810
Harriet Wright m William Ramsey in Washington Co, KY, Jan 20, 1819
William Wright - who moved to Indiana ~1807 and who I assume brought bros. Thomas Wright McNeff and William McNeff to Indiana. William Wright m first around 1800 to unk and again ~1807 to Mary Inyard.
Andrew J. Wright, born around 1874 and married March 10, 1817 in Washington Co, KY to Mildred Ramsey.
Ann Wright m in Washington Co, KY on Aug 26, 1801 to Samuel Robertson

This information comes from Washington Co, Kentucky Bicentennial History, 1792-1992. Turner Publishing Co, Paducah KY p442.

Mainly, I'm typing this up so that if a researcher is googling last names, they may arrive here.

Always looking for answers ...

Along the Boatman's Trail

"Old Natchez Trace" Photo by jimmywayne on flickr.com



I've got a new dream vacation. I want to hike the Natchez Trace. If by chance John T McNeff wasn't a rogue and a cad, he was an unlucky traveler on the Boatman's Trail from New Orleans.

In the early 19th century, it was common for farmers to build flatboats to take their crops to market in New Orleans. Abraham Lincoln, for example, made trips down the river in 1828 and 1831.

So if John T's trip had gone as Polly expected he would have floated the cattle (or horses, depending on the account you follow) down to New Orleans. It would have at least been himself and we'll say his slave - John T could have also sold him while there. Would someone else have come along? Maybe a Thompson cousin? (There was a Thompson family living in Springfield after all.) John T would have sold his goods, his flatboat - and if he was a bit of the faux dandy I imagine him to be, he would have bought himself a horse for the return trip. (Though it was frequently made on foot.) To head North, he would have have got on the Nashville Road - the Natchez Trace. From Nashville, The Wilderness Road would have taken him the rest of the way to Kentucky. Except we know he never made it.

Marauding gangs are common in these tales ... indeed they are the stuff of legend. The Harpes, Joseph Hare, Samuel Mason and John Murrell were among the famous. And it wasn't just robbery, there was sadistic cruelty. There are stories of disemboweling the bodies to fill them with weight and send them to the bottom of the river ... of signatures in the blood of their victims to make sure they got proper credit.

John T's bones could be resting in a watery grave - or forgotten deep along a shaded, well-worn path.

I'm sure it's the story that the family told itself to make sense of his never returning. Remember, David T McNeff's bio said that John T was "presumed dead." But Polly's divorce request still nags me. I think she knew more about the man than we'd like to remember.

Learn more about The Natchez Trace Parkway