Much of the information found in genealogical writings concerning Howell Brewer can be attributed instead to his son, Howell Jr. The principal reason for this is that Howell Jr. was only some twenty years younger than his father and evidently they did not live in the same area much of the time after Howell Jr. reached manhood, thus the “Jr.” was not used in most records. Proof that Howell, Jr. is son of Howell is in Isaac Brewer’s Revolutionary War Pension Application. He says Howell is his father and he has a brother, Howell (Jr.).
In researching this subject, I found that Broyhill(1) confused Howell (b. 1719) with Howell Cobb (b. 1790), and completely missed Howell’s first marriage. I also discovered that much of what I wanted to say had already been written to a friend in 1986 in a letter by the late Mrs. Janice Reddin of Findlay, Ohio. Ms Reddin was a very distinguished researcher of the Brewer family.
According to Ms Reddin, “Howell Brewer was born in the vicinity of Brunswick County, Virginia to George and Sarah (Lanier) Brewer before the year 1723.” Proof of this statement is George Brewer’s will that names Hoel (sic) as a son and we find in the records that Howell was given power of attorney by Thomas Cowman on 9 June 1740 in Surry County, Virginia. He would have been at least 21 years old at the time, which places his birth date as early as 1719. He was of age to witness a deed in Brunswick County in 1743, and he was co-executor of his father’s will with his step-mother Alice. In the area he married a woman by the name of Rebecca, but we find no clues to her surname. I have seen accounts that give her surname as Willis, but have never seen any proof.
Further quoting Ms. Reddin:
George Brewer’s will is of record in Brunswick County Court as is the detailed account of its settlement. The inventory was not filed until the 4 September 1746 Court. In 1747 there was a suit of Trespass, assault and battery against Howell by Charles Collier. Though he admitted the offense, the case was dropped later that year. At the 4 September Court there was an attachment against him for a debt and nothing was collected as ‘he was said to be privately removed and so absconded so that process could not be served on him for the 41s and 4p. Evidently, he had taken off, leaving Rebecca to face the consequences.
In noting how Howell moved around, she stated, “Howell Brewer received a grant of 200 acres in then Bladen County, NC in 1749 and 200 acres on the northeast side of Deep River in 1754.” This statement was not quite correct. His first grant is dated 27 Feb. 1754, however, he was probably in Orange Co. NC as early as Feb. 1747 when he was given leave by the court to depart.
Ms. Reddin further states:
He was in the tax list of Moore County, NC in 1755 along with Henry Brewer. While of Moore County, he sold 200 acres of the above land on both sides of Deep River to Zachariah Green on 29 August 1758. The other parcel was sold to John May 10 August 1767. Both were signed with his mark with no wife’s signature or mark.
The tax list referred to by Ms. Reddin was in Orange Co., not Moore Co. Moore County was not formed from Cumberland until 1784. This land was sold in Cumberland Co., not Moore Co. , and consisted of Howell’s second grant.
She further states:
Either this Howell Brewer had not improved with age, else his son followed in his tracks for the records of Orange County, formed in 1752 from Bladen, show the case of John Williams vs. Howell Brewer, Traverse, and of William Spruces vs him for debt, he of the south side of Haw River in the June 1759 Court. In the February Court of 1765 he was sued by Nathaniel Edwards, and in May Court of that year Charles Saxon was appointed Overseer of Road in place of Howell Brewer.
We find Howell Brewer next in the list of Orange County residents who protested the high recording fees in a petition to the Governor & Council in 1768. Also in the list were another Howell Brooer (sic) and Nickless (sic) Brewer.
She continues
In Capt. Joab Brooks’s company of the Chatham County Militia in 1772 were Howel Brewer and Howell Bruer, 14 names apart. Also, a list of signatures requesting a central location for Randolph County public buildings gave the names of Howell Brewer, Sr., Howell Brewer, Jr., Isaac Brewer and Reuben Brewer, whom we believe were father and sons. Only Howell, Sr. made his mark, so the others could write
According to Isaac’s pension, they were grandfather, father and two sons.
In his book, Foy E. Varner Jr(2). surmises that the different spellings of Brewer were used to distinguish between the two.
Ms Reddin further states:
Howell’s wife Rebecca’s name was not found in any of the North Carolina dealings, but we assume that she and what children they had by 1746 joined him there and that the following children were theirs:
1. Howell Jr.
2. Isaac- In his Revolutionary War pension application, Isaac swore that he served in that war with his father, Howell, and uncles, John and Bill.
3. John
4. William
5. Reuben - b. ca 1768
6. Ann - b. ca 1754. Married Joseph Moon
7. Livicy-Married William Hunsucker
I can find no evidence that Rebecca ever went to NC except that Howell Jr. was with his father at one time. Whether Rebecca went to NC, had died, or Howell had abandoned her in Virginia, one can only conjecture. Howell had another wife, Marian, in Orange Co. NC in 1757. On 3 Sept 1757 a deed of gift from John May to Howell Brewer and wife, Marian, for 100 acres was executed. Most researchers believe this was a gift by May to his daughter and son-in-law, thus making Marian’s maiden name May. On 10 June 1769, Howell and Marian sold this land to Joseph Dixon.
Of the above listed children, Isaac, Reuben and possibly Livicy belong to Howell Jr. Their ages are such that being the offspring of the elder Howell is unlikely. Ann, b. ca 1754 could be the daughter of Howell Sr. and Rebecca. According to Isaac’s deposition, he was the son of Howell Jr. and John and William were brothers of Howell Jr.
As a follow-on, in the near future, I will discuss Howell Brewer, Jr. in this forum.
(1) The Brewer Families of Colonial Virginia, 1626-1776, compiled by Marvin T. Broyhill, III (A three volume set)
(2) The Brewers of Southeast America, Foy E. Varner, Jr., ebook. (Available on line.)
Monday, February 1, 2010
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Death of My Beloved Wife
It is with deep regret that I have to tell you that my beloved Betty Lou passed from this life this morning. She had been very ill for some time and it was not unexpected.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Self-Perpetuating Errors
I have just been looking at user-submitted trees in Ancestry.com. Before I start my criticism, I must say that I cannot blame Ancestry.com for the errors in the trees submitted to them. I subscribe to their service, myself, and find it very helpful in my research, but I have to separate the “wheat from the chaff”. I find most of the user-submitted trees are submitted without sources. They are useful for providing clues, but one still needs to find the proof in order to use the information found in the trees. Unfortunately, many researchers just copy the data into their tree without sources. They have just filled in another space.
I found a particular tree that contained the line of John Brewer of Isle of Wight, Virginia, his son, John II, and grandson, John III. John III has always been the candidate for father of George Brewer (m. Sarah Lanier) and in a large percentage of family trees, is listed as such. Marvin Broyhill in his The Brewer Families of Colonial Virginia, 1626-1776, states that there is no proof that “John III was the father of George or that he was ever married”. About ten years ago when I was publishing the newsletter, Brewer Researcher, I offered a $100 reward for anyone able to prove George’s parentage. The offer still stands and to this day I have had no takers.
The first thing of note in this tree was that John (III) had a wife, Elizabeth Rice. He lived in Virginia all of his life, but she was born in Sudberry, MA on 4 Aug 1648. They were married about 1658 in Isle of Wight,VA. She was all of 10 years old and about a thousand miles away from her home. Of course, she could have moved to Virginia, but I doubt it, since she died 25 Feb 1739 in Framingham, MA. They also had seven children, beginning in 1658 with Peter Brewer. Remember, she was just ten years old then, a real miracle in those days. Their fifth child was the George mentioned earlier. Thus, this researcher filled in two generations of his tree without any effort or proof. He did, however, place the following note in the tree: “According to Ben R. Brewer who wrote "The Long Brewer Line" published in 1993 there has not been any documentation found listing a wife or children of John Brewer, III.” Obviously, the owner of the tree did not believe this or he would not have posted such errors. I am sure that many other researchers have copied this information into their trees without ever seeing the note.
There were four sources quoted on this tree. First, another World Family Tree. Second, was a personal web site on Yahoo Geocities which has closed. Third, a web site that had no direct connection to genealogy and made no sense whatever as a source document. Fourth, was another web site that had been removed
Out of thiry-four family trees for John III, six carried through the same errors. A seventh was really far out, though. In it, his name was John R. Brewer, Sr. ,his wife’s name was Elizabeth Johnson, b. 1640, Somerset, England. Married 1655 in Somerset, England with one child, George Brewer, b. 1670 also in Somerset, but she died 1718 in Northampton, VA.
I would like to have your comments. Please include them on the blog rather than emailing direct to me. A blog doesn’t work unless the blogger can get comments from his followers.
I found a particular tree that contained the line of John Brewer of Isle of Wight, Virginia, his son, John II, and grandson, John III. John III has always been the candidate for father of George Brewer (m. Sarah Lanier) and in a large percentage of family trees, is listed as such. Marvin Broyhill in his The Brewer Families of Colonial Virginia, 1626-1776, states that there is no proof that “John III was the father of George or that he was ever married”. About ten years ago when I was publishing the newsletter, Brewer Researcher, I offered a $100 reward for anyone able to prove George’s parentage. The offer still stands and to this day I have had no takers.
The first thing of note in this tree was that John (III) had a wife, Elizabeth Rice. He lived in Virginia all of his life, but she was born in Sudberry, MA on 4 Aug 1648. They were married about 1658 in Isle of Wight,VA. She was all of 10 years old and about a thousand miles away from her home. Of course, she could have moved to Virginia, but I doubt it, since she died 25 Feb 1739 in Framingham, MA. They also had seven children, beginning in 1658 with Peter Brewer. Remember, she was just ten years old then, a real miracle in those days. Their fifth child was the George mentioned earlier. Thus, this researcher filled in two generations of his tree without any effort or proof. He did, however, place the following note in the tree: “According to Ben R. Brewer who wrote "The Long Brewer Line" published in 1993 there has not been any documentation found listing a wife or children of John Brewer, III.” Obviously, the owner of the tree did not believe this or he would not have posted such errors. I am sure that many other researchers have copied this information into their trees without ever seeing the note.
There were four sources quoted on this tree. First, another World Family Tree. Second, was a personal web site on Yahoo Geocities which has closed. Third, a web site that had no direct connection to genealogy and made no sense whatever as a source document. Fourth, was another web site that had been removed
Out of thiry-four family trees for John III, six carried through the same errors. A seventh was really far out, though. In it, his name was John R. Brewer, Sr. ,his wife’s name was Elizabeth Johnson, b. 1640, Somerset, England. Married 1655 in Somerset, England with one child, George Brewer, b. 1670 also in Somerset, but she died 1718 in Northampton, VA.
I would like to have your comments. Please include them on the blog rather than emailing direct to me. A blog doesn’t work unless the blogger can get comments from his followers.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Problem with my Web Site
I had some problems upgrading my web site. It is all squared away now. Take a look at it. It has quite a bit of new information on the "Arrivals and Settlement" section plus some new links to other sites.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Correction to my First Posting
I should not have limited the purpose of this blog to just correcting errors in family trees. Although, that will be one of the main objectives, I will discuss other items concerned with Brewer genealogy. However, I do not expect this forum to be for queries. Use Roots Web for that purpose.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Incorrect Data is the Result of Lazy Research
My readers, if you are not into genealogy, you are not going to know what I am running on about.
Since taking up the hobby of genealogy, I have found so much incorrect information in the literature and now on the internet. When I see it, I feel that it is the result of laziness. A person should never record something for posterity unless he/she can prove it. That does not preclude your making a conjecture on data that you have if you state that this is only your opinion and without proof. The written word or the tongue can carry information that is not true. Just because someone tells you a story or you find information in a book does not mean it is fact. I believe that most family history books propagate more myth than truth. When you look on the internet at some of the family trees, they are filled with atrocious errors that are apparent just by looking at them. Family trees tend to be copied by researchers and used as an easy way to fill out their own tree. They think nothing of having no proof. In fact, I find very few of the thousands of family trees in Ancestry.com that have proof.
You can probably tell that one of my pet peeves is finding data with no proof and in error being used in family histories and other genealogical work. I published a quarterly newsletter, The Brewer Researcher, for ten years. In it, I printed submitted articles and they were always sourced. I did not claim they were true, but at least one knew where they came from and could check them out. If they were authored by me, you can bet they were proven. I normally wrote an editorial each issue promoting the necessity of having proof of the data for your family histories. One of the worst errors is in my own lineage. It is published in hundreds of books, family histories, family trees and other media. It is that George Brewer (m. Sarah Lanier) was the son of John Brewer III. I offered a $100 reward several years ago for proof of this parentage. To this date, I have had no takers. I had been taken in by this misinformation myself until I published Marvin Broyhill’s The Brewer Families of Colonial Virginia, 1626-1776, in there he stated that not only there was no proof that George was the son of John III and, furthermore, there was no proof that John III even had children. This opened my eyes to the fact that I could be mislead just like everyone else.
The reason I have established this blog is to point out these errors as they occur in print or on the web and ask the persons who publish them to defend them on this blog. I don’t know if many will. We shall see.
This blog will not be daily, weekly or monthly. I will post on it when I think something needs to be said. I hope you will respond. That will make it much more fun and of more beneficial to all of us.
Since taking up the hobby of genealogy, I have found so much incorrect information in the literature and now on the internet. When I see it, I feel that it is the result of laziness. A person should never record something for posterity unless he/she can prove it. That does not preclude your making a conjecture on data that you have if you state that this is only your opinion and without proof. The written word or the tongue can carry information that is not true. Just because someone tells you a story or you find information in a book does not mean it is fact. I believe that most family history books propagate more myth than truth. When you look on the internet at some of the family trees, they are filled with atrocious errors that are apparent just by looking at them. Family trees tend to be copied by researchers and used as an easy way to fill out their own tree. They think nothing of having no proof. In fact, I find very few of the thousands of family trees in Ancestry.com that have proof.
You can probably tell that one of my pet peeves is finding data with no proof and in error being used in family histories and other genealogical work. I published a quarterly newsletter, The Brewer Researcher, for ten years. In it, I printed submitted articles and they were always sourced. I did not claim they were true, but at least one knew where they came from and could check them out. If they were authored by me, you can bet they were proven. I normally wrote an editorial each issue promoting the necessity of having proof of the data for your family histories. One of the worst errors is in my own lineage. It is published in hundreds of books, family histories, family trees and other media. It is that George Brewer (m. Sarah Lanier) was the son of John Brewer III. I offered a $100 reward several years ago for proof of this parentage. To this date, I have had no takers. I had been taken in by this misinformation myself until I published Marvin Broyhill’s The Brewer Families of Colonial Virginia, 1626-1776, in there he stated that not only there was no proof that George was the son of John III and, furthermore, there was no proof that John III even had children. This opened my eyes to the fact that I could be mislead just like everyone else.
The reason I have established this blog is to point out these errors as they occur in print or on the web and ask the persons who publish them to defend them on this blog. I don’t know if many will. We shall see.
This blog will not be daily, weekly or monthly. I will post on it when I think something needs to be said. I hope you will respond. That will make it much more fun and of more beneficial to all of us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
