VA-ROOTS Archives

August 2005

VA-ROOTS@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Scott Simpson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Sun, 7 Aug 2005 04:46:09 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (52 lines)
Hi, folks.  I'd appreciate some thoughts on a couple of questions regarding the following personal property tax entries from Rockingham County.  These are the only McDaniel/McDonald entries for these years:

1799    McDonnal John    0 white males over 16

1800    McDonnal John    0 white males over 16

1801    McDonald John    0 white males over 16

1802    McDanniel John   0 white males over 16

1803    No McDaniel/McDonald

1804    McDaniel John    1 white male over 16

1805, 1806    No McDaniel/McDonald

1807    McDaniel John    1 white male over 16

1809    No McDaniel/McDonald

1810    McDaniel Widow    0 white males over 16

1811    No McDaniel/McDonald

1812    Mcdaniel Joseph    1 white male over 16

On the other list for 1812:  Mcdaniel Betsy (Wd)    1 white male over 16

1813    Mcdaniel Betsy (Wd)    1 white male over 16

Other evidence indicates that John McDaniel's wife was Elizabeth (Betsy), and that he died about 1811 (based on these entries, it was more like 1809).  Also, they are known to have had a son, Zachariah, who was born about 1794 (thus, he would have turned 16 in about 1810.

Two questions:

First, I'm very puzzled by the fact that the early entries say there are no white males over age 16.  My recollection from looking at PP tax lists from other counties is that they usually say at least "1" (for the head of household).  Why would it say "0" in that column when John was living?

Second, do these entries constitute evidence that John and Betsy had a son who was older than my Zachariah -- perhaps the Joseph who is listed in 1812?  Since the entries before 1804 say "0" white males over age 16, and they start saying "1" male over 16 in 1804, I would usually take this as evidence that they had a son who turned 16 about 1804.  Then, when a "new" male with the same surname appears a few years later (should be 5 years later, when he turns 21, but sometimes it's a few years more, as here), I usually take that as evidence that that the new person is the son.  But here the evidence is a little equivocal, especially since Joseph is on an entirely different list from the widow.

Thanks for any thoughts based on experience with PP tax lists!

Scott





---------------------------------
 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2