ARIZARD-L Archives

Archiver > ARIZARD > 2001-11 > 1005104055


From: Kathryn Y Langston <>
Subject: Re: [ARIZARD-L] 1880 Hively, Thomas Robert -
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 21:34:15 -0600


On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 11:27:43 -0800 "Wilma (Younger) Norton"
<> writes:
> Frank died early 1880 (before census was taken) I expect. Just a
> guess,
> don't have his death date.

I would assume that as well, since the baby is only 10 months
old, of course he could have died during Polly's pregnancy. And
that could take it back into 1879. I don't know if there are any
Mortality lists for Ca in 1880 or not, there are other states that
have them I know. If it is important enough to someone they
might check the Mortality list out.

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kathryn Y Langston <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 10:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARIZARD-L] 1880 Hively, Thomas Robert -
>
>
> > Notes below.
> >
> >
> > Interesting. 1874 plus 7 tallies up to 1881, the 1880 census
> > indicates Polly was already a widow.
>
> Not if you count 1874 as one year, 1875, 1876, 1877, 1888, 1889, and
> part of
> 1880 equals approx. 7 years. At least close enough.

That's true. Although I generally think in terms of 1 yr anniversaries
as in it wouldn't be the first year until 1875. But either way, the
census doesn't confirm that they were in Ca that early, as only
little Modena "Denia" (sp) Dorcas was the only one shown to have
been bn in Ca at age 10 months, Samantha was bn 1877 Ar
(according to the census Bernie found)
> >
> > I can't agree with the second wife being the niece. We know
> > gives Mary Polly being a sister of his grandmother Margaret
> > "Peggy". Fern, could you ask your dad if he knows whether
> > Polly and Peggy were sisters for sure?
>
> I'm open to any proof (or just educated guess) just would like to
> get these Langston girls with correct parents. :)

The only way it works for Polly to be Jane' niece is that we have
the John's that was bn in 1820 as son's of the wrong brothers
(Nathan or Absolom) John with wife Rebecca Potts is said to have
been a son of Absolom. But it could be that we should have him
as the son of Nathan and John who married Mildred/Maldred
Livingston should be the son of Absolom, for Polly to be the niece
that is where the problem is. I think I saw Barbara Allen's name
on the credits of the article that said Polly was a niece, so maybe
someone who is aquainted with her might send her a email, Jean?
Do you think it would be ok to question her this soon? I wouldn't
want to add to her hurt.

I think we have the girls with their correct parents its their fathers
that I'm giving some thought to that may be confused at this point.

> >
> >
> > > Jane Hively was borned the 16th of November 1844.
> >
> > That's a 10 yr descrepancy from the census records. Its closer
> > to the year Polly was born than Jane.
> SORRY - SHOULD NOT NOT INCLUDED THIS JANE HIVELY AS SHE IS NOT THE
> JANE WHO
> MARRIED REV. HIVELY. HIVELY IS THIS JANE'S MAIDEN NAME.
> >
I should have thought about her. However, I don't study the Hively name
all that much. But I did know about Thomas' sister Jane.

Kathryn
>
> ==== ARIZARD Mailing List ====
> For the threaded Archives for go to:
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/ARIZARD-L/
>

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

This thread: