QUAKER-ROOTS-L Archives

Archiver > QUAKER-ROOTS > 2000-04 > 0956105477


From: "Stewart Baldwin" <>
Subject: Re: [Q-R] Hannah Beals b 1729 mar Azariah Pugh b 1725
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 19:51:17 -0500


Thomas Hamm <> wrote:

>>I am looking for the parents and downline for Hannah Beals. I have
been
>>given information that she is a daughter of John Beals b1685 and
Sarah
>>Bowater and others have said she is the daughter of his brother
William and
>>his wife Rebecca Chambers. Any help would be appreciated.
>>
>>Thanks much
>>
>>Terry Daugherty
>>
>>Descendants of Hannah Beals
>>
>>
>>Generation No. 1
>>
>>1. HANNAH4 BEALS (JOHN H.3, JOHN2, THOMAS1)1,2 was born January
31,
>>1728/29 in Monocacy, Prince George, MD2, and died Abt. 18082. She
married
>>AZARIAH PUGH2 August 26, 1746 in York, PA2, son of THOMAS PUGH and
JANE
>>ROGER. He was born 1721 in Hopewell, Prince George, VI2.
>>
>>Child of HANNAH BEALS and AZARIAH PUGH is:
>>2. i. RUTH5 PUGH, b. February 26, 1745/46.
>>
>>
>
>This question has vexed a number of Beals/Bales genealogists, and
>I've gone back and forth on it. What information we have is
>fragmentary, and a case can be made on either side.
>
>The marriage date given above has an obvious problem--it's after the
>birth of the first child. I haven't seen any Friends records that
>put Hannah in York Co., Pa. The strongest case for making her a
>daughter of John and Sarah (Bowater) Beals is that she was at
>Hopewell Monthly Meeting in Virginia, where John and Sarah were also
>members.
>
>The strongest evidence against her being a daughter of John and Sarah
>is a sketch of Quaker settlement in southwestern Ohio begun about
>1850 by Gershom Perdue, a Quaker minister who lived in Warren and
>Highland counties, Ohio. Perdue was interested in primarily in
>Thomas Beals (1719-1801). He got Thomas's parents' names correct,
>and listed his siblings. (He made sister Ann Beals Mary, but got her
>husband right, and had brother John Beals marrying Esther Hunt rather
>than Margaret, but otherwise was correct.) He does not mention a
>Hannah. Since at the time there were many people living who would
>have known the children of John and Sarah (Bowater) Beals, including
>grandchildren and great-grandchildren; and since a number of
>descendants of Hannah (Beals) Pugh were also living in the area, I
>think that if Hannah was a sister of Thomas Beals, Perdue would have
>known that and recorded it.
>
>In notes on the Beals family compiled by Edna Harvey Joseph
>(1890-1973) of Jasper, Indiana, she shows that Rebecca (Chambers)
>Beals, the wife of William, died by 1722. She quotes New Garden MM,
>Pa., minutes for 9th Mo. 1722 as reporting William Beals as having
>married out of unity. If Hannah is his daughter, she must come from
>an unknown second wife.

Since I am a descendant of John and Sarah (Bowater) Beals, I decided
to take a look at this. I had not researched the problem of Hannah's
parentage before, but my notes did have a couple of relevant tidbits.

I think that the geographical case for making Hannah a daughter of
John and Sarah (Bowater) Beals evaporates upon looking more closely at
the chronology. According to "Hopewell Friends History" p. 61,
Azariah Pugh received a certificate from the Goshen Monthly Meeting in
Pennsylvania on 20 4th month 1748. Since that is AFTER the birthdate
given for the eldest child of Azariah and Hannah (Bailes) Pugh, it
would seem that Azariah was married BEFORE he joined the Hopewell
Monthly Meeting, and that Azariah and Hannah were therefore probably
married in Pennsylvania. Thus, the geographical indicators are
AGAINST Hannah being a daughter of John Beals Jr. When this is added
to the negative evidence already given above, there is a pretty strong
case that Hannah was NOT the daughter of John and Sarah (Bowater)
Beals. (Since the date of the above certificate is important here, it
should be checked against the Goshen MM minutes just to be sure,
something I have not yet done, as I don't have easy access to those
records.)

The New Garden MM minutes say the following about William "Baels".
On 10 9th month 1722, there was a complaint against William Baels for
having carnal knowledge of his wife before marriage. At the next
Monthly Meeting, on 8 10th month 1722, William Baels delivered a paper
comdemning his past actions. (These are from notes I took from a
microfilm of the original minutes on Family History Library film
number 389408.) Since this is ten years after his marriage to Rebecca
Chambers, it likely refers to a more recent, and therefore second,
marriage. This second marriage would seem to be a reasonable
candidate for the origin of Hannah, but I know of no evidence that
this is the case.

Stewart Baldwin


This thread: