Re: Cooley/Bearden

From: Michael Cooley <michael_at_newsummer.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 18:54:41 -0700

BTW, Jim, at this point I would consider the matched marker with Scott
-very- telling, while keeping in mind that the matched mutation could have
been a coincidence. Undoubtedly, there's a lot more to be learned about
WMC's family.

Yes, it would be great finding a descendant of E C's. (I never had luck
tracking down Nancy Cooley and her son Robert. I'm guessing she remarried.
Considering that she may have been Nancy Nippen might be a worthy lead.)

-Michael

> Jim,
>
> Great point about Mary. I hadn't picked up in it!
>
> Also a great point about Nancy Nippen. You're on a roll! Nancy Cooley's
> son Robert was born c1858. Do the dates work out?
>
> I'm certainly open to any discussion about how John may have come from WMC
> (another good one!) I've wondered if he might have really been a Jonathan,
> a name found among William's descendants. We really need to get a firmer
> idea on John's birth year, I think, to go further on it.
>
> -Michael
>
>
>
>> I meant to note that Polly/Mary, listed as 10 in the 1850 Dickson, was
>> likely not yet born so I left her off.
>> Her being 18 in the 1860 adds weight to the idea. Still doesn't explain
>> a number of other brain teasers,
>> though, like who in the world James of 1794 might be and why is he in
>> Dickson Co?
>>
>> Is it too reckless to suggest he could be an unaccounted for son of
>> WMC? I know, he's not mentioned
>> in his will (or anywhere else for that matter) but perhaps there was a
>> falling out, which could explain his
>> exile from Stewart Co. Another "lone wolf"? Let's label it an
>> unsubstantiated hypothesis.
>>
>> It IS possible that Nancy of 1860 could be E.C.'s first wife of 1855,
>> Nancy A. Nippen. I haven't pursued
>> this idea since Milo came into the picture. I think finding a Y-heir to
>> E.C. would yield more fruit.
>>
>> Well, now that my mutant gene may be sorting itself out, I'll be all the
>> happier (and saner) when my mutant
>> genealogy does the same ;-)
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/25/2011 11:03 AM, Michael Cooley wrote:
>>> Very interesting. On the face of it Julia Ann Cooley looks like it's a
>>> match. It's possible that she didn't change her name back to Cooley in
>>> the
>>> next census but that the census-taker made a mistake, knowing they were
>>> mother and daughter.
>>>
>>> In your suggestions for 1840, you dropped Mary Ann.
>>>
>>> And there's the issue with this woman, quoting from my notes:
>>>
>>> --quote--
>>> 1860> TENNESSEE> DICKSON> DANIELSVILLE P O
>>> Series: M653 Roll: 1247 Page: 241
>>>
>>> Nancy Cooley with two young children. She living in the same town near
>>> EC
>>> and his presumed mother Martha.
>>> --endquote--
>>>
>>> Finally, Willow. Since the spelling of Milo's name was always so fluid,
>>> we
>>> had considered that they could be the same person, especially since
>>> Milo
>>> is not found in 1850.
>>>
>>> 1850> TENNESSEE> DICKSON> MIDDLE DIST
>>>
>>> Series: M432 Roll: 876 Page: 142
>>>
>>> James Cooley 56 m NC
>>> Martha Cooley 49 f VA
>>> Willows Cooley 13 m MO
>>> Polly Cooley 10 f MO
>>>
>>> Of course, the above is really weird. Is it Milo, not Willows? Is it
>>> John,
>>> not James? Is Polly the future Mary Ann Story? Was Martha born in GA,
>>> not
>>> VA?
>>>
>>> This once curious reading, as you know, has been sorted out. We now
>>> know
>>> for a fact that Milo C Cooley had sons William and Robert:
>>>
>>> 1860> TENNESSEE> DICKSON> DANIELSVILLE P O
>>> Series: M653 Roll: 1247 Page: 203
>>>
>>> Oat Storey 24 m TN farm hand
>>> Mary A Storey 18 f MO
>>> Martha Cooley 53 f GA domestic lady
>>> M C Cooley 21 m MO farm hand
>>> Wm E Cooley 2 m TN
>>> R W Cooley 9/12 TN
>>>
>>> I'm still unable to find the Storeys anywhere.
>>>
>>> But, back to my earler question, can we be sure that the 1840 Randolph
>>> co
>>> census is for your John or could it be another one? I haven't found
>>> another close match to it, but I could be missing someone. Do any of
>>> you
>>> have that entry attributed to someone else? We could be barking up the
>>> wrong tree.
>>>
>>> Your, Jim, is about the most distorted Cooley line I've seen! :)
>>>
>>> -Michael
>>>
>>>> The 1835 marriage is problematic. Though E.C.'s death record states
>>>> his
>>>> birth as 4 Oct 1834
>>>> his 1900 census record states Oct 1835, and most of his other census
>>>> records state his age
>>>> more consistently for an 1835 birth. Which is still over a month
>>>> before
>>>> the marriage. But there
>>>> could have been a shotgun or two in attendance. With Elizabeth born
>>>> in
>>>> 1833 that gets a bit
>>>> more dicey.
>>>>
>>>> Something else I recently came across:
>>>>
>>>> 1870 Hamby, Christian Co. KY Census July 18th
>>>>
>>>> 47 Julian Ann Martin 55 VA
>>>>
>>>> 48 William A. Martin 32 KY
>>>>
>>>> 49 Irvin (E.C.) Cooley 34 MO
>>>>
>>>> and towards the end of the census
>>>>
>>>> 253 Melor (Milo) Cooley 30 TN
>>>> Polly (Martha) 65 TN
>>>> Robert 10 TN
>>>>
>>>> The above is nothing new, but compare to:
>>>>
>>>> 1880 Hamby, Christian Co. Census June 11th
>>>>
>>>> 142 WJ Martin 42 KY
>>>>
>>>> 143 Martha Cooley 75 GA
>>>> Julia Ann 59 VA
>>>>
>>>> The implication is that with E.C. and family now in Muhlenberg Co. and
>>>> Milo and 2nd wife not found,
>>>> Martha is now in E.C.'s old neighborhood, living next to William
>>>> Martin, the presumed son of Julia
>>>> Ann, who is not found as Julia Ann Martin: Is Julia Ann really
>>>> Martha's
>>>> daughter, as stated, or are
>>>> these just two widows living in E.C.'s former home?
>>>>
>>>> With that in mind, I suggest the following for the 1840 Randolph Co.
>>>> Census:
>>>>
>>>> 2 males under 5 (Milo& Willow)
>>>> 1 male 5-9 (E.C.)
>>>> 1 male 30-39 (John)
>>>>
>>>> 1 female 5-9 (Elizabeth)
>>>> 1 female 15-19 (Julia Ann?)
>>>> 1 female 30-39 (Martha)
>>>> 1 female 50-59 (? ? ? )
>>>>
>>>> Elizabeth and Julia Ann COULD have been the product of an earlier
>>>> marriage for Martha. I will
>>>> continue to search for such an event. And I will hope to find a male
>>>> descendant of E.C. to take
>>>> the test. Once he is in the clan for sure, some of these loose ends
>>>> should tighten up.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/24/2011 7:41 PM, Michael Cooley wrote:
>>>>> I don't know. If this is, in fact, a census reading for John Cooley
>>>>> and
>>>>> Martha Bearden she doesn't -appear- to be enumerated. But there can
>>>>> be
>>>>> several problems with this. First, this may not be the correct John
>>>>> Cooley, or the census taker might well have made an error.
>>>>>
>>>>> The first question is, I think, is this John and Martha? But we also
>>>>> have
>>>>> a problem with dates because the couple married in 1835. If Elizabeth
>>>>> and
>>>>> E C were their children, they were born before the marriage.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael - where does Elizabeth fit into all of this - she was born
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> 1833 in MO, and we believe that she is EC's and Mary Polly's sister.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Michael Cooley<michael_at_newsummer.com>
>>>>>> To: John Cooley Mailing List<undisclosed.recipients_at_johncooley.net>
>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 3:42 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Cooley/Bearden
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jim, Here are some of my musings in my notes at
>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/Notes/index.cgi?1276662005+/ahnentafel/256/lineages/Cooley-Bearden-desc.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone concur that this could be John and Martha?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --quote--
>>>>>> 1840 census
>>>>>> John Cooley 210001 01100101 (Randolph county p283)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had assumed that this John was the John who shows in Macon co in
>>>>>> 1850
>>>>>> and 1860 but no children are attributed to him. It now seems more
>>>>>> likely
>>>>>> that this is John and Martha. Considering that possibility:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2 males under 5 (EC and Marlo?)
>>>>>> 1 male 5-9 (husband of Nancy in Decatur TN 1860?)
>>>>>> 1 male 30-39 (John)
>>>>>> 1 female 5-9 (Mary Ann Storey)
>>>>>> 1 female 15-19 (Julia Ann?)
>>>>>> 1 female 30-39 (Martha)
>>>>>> 1 female 50-59 ( !!!! )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then who was the older woman? John's mother? Martha's mother?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And if they married in 1835, how are the older children explained?
>>>>>> Was
>>>>>> John married twice? Is he the John who married Eliza Locke? Was EC
>>>>>> born
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> 1834 or 1835? There could be one or more half-siblings....perhaps
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> an
>>>>>> earlier marriage of Martha's? If that's Julia Ann, she was born even
>>>>>> before John and Eliza married. And if that's true, then Martha may
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> been -Mrs- Martha Bearden.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --endquote--
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, at this writing we did not know that Jim would find a
>>>>>> 37/37
>>>>>> match with a descendant of the Stewart county Cooleys.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Though there are a number of stars that need to align in this
>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>> constellation, I'm still
>>>>>>> clinging to the following Big Bang theory: *E.C. Cooley's death
>>>>>>> record
>>>>>>> states his parents as
>>>>>>> John Cooley of Missouri and Martha Bearden of Virginia **John and
>>>>>>> Martha
>>>>>>> are married in
>>>>>>> Monroe Co. MO 23Nov1835***Elizabeth and E.C. are both born in the
>>>>>>> mid
>>>>>>> 1830s in MO****
>>>>>>> Elizabeth is married to John Calvin Bailey in Dickson Co. in
>>>>>>> 1850*****
>>>>>>> E.C. is married in
>>>>>>> Dickson Co. with John's brother, Matthew Patrick Henry Bailey, as
>>>>>>> bondsman******E.C.&
>>>>>>> Elizabeth are living with their respective families in 1860 Dickson
>>>>>>> Co.
>>>>>>> where potential brother
>>>>>>> Milo Cooley, who, along with his young sons, is living with his
>>>>>>> mother,
>>>>>>> Martha, and presumed
>>>>>>> sister, Mary, under the roof of Mary's new husband, Oat Story.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I realize it's all star gazing, but if you stare long enough there
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> something there, faint as it
>>>>>>> may be. And now with WMC's line in neighboring Stewart Co. I think
>>>>>>> those stars just got a
>>>>>>> bit brighter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/23/2011 10:31 AM, Michael Cooley wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Gloria,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As you know, Jim and I thought that your Elizabeth could have been
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> sister of E C Cooley. I'd be interested in his thoughts but it
>>>>>>>> seems
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>> that we may have been heading down the wrong road.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are a number of loose hanging Cooleys in MO. Jim's John is
>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>> one, although DNA appears to be sorting it out. Mathias Cooley
>>>>>>>> (Cornelius,
>>>>>>>> James, John) is said to have had two or three brothers who, like
>>>>>>>> Mathias,
>>>>>>>> were adopted out or lived with relatives. They've never been
>>>>>>>> identified.
>>>>>>>> Isaac N Cooley (James, John) died young. I've only recently
>>>>>>>> learned
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> he had children. Two sons are likely ID'd but we don't know about
>>>>>>>> others.
>>>>>>>> John's son. Perrin, had a large family. We can only guess as to
>>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>>> sons were. And a DNA tester who as a Stokes county match to Perrin
>>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>>> Cooley is hanging out on a limb. We're guessing Perrin C
>>>>>>>> grandfather
>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>> Perrin, but we have no strong evidence.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's still a lot of work to do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gloria, email the list what you know about Elizabeth. Perhaps
>>>>>>>> someone
>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>> some additional thoughts.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Has anyone made any progress in finding out the parents of
>>>>>>>>> Elizabeth
>>>>>>>>> Cooley of Missouri who married John Calvin Bailey?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>>> From: Michael Cooley<michael_at_newsummer.com>
>>>>>>>>> To: John Cooley Mailing
>>>>>>>>> List<undisclosed.recipients_at_johncooley.net>
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 5:17 PM
>>>>>>>>> Subject: DNA for William Matthews Cooley
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just spent an hour and an half writing an email. Just moments
>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>> sending it, I caused it to disappear! This one is going to be
>>>>>>>>> short
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> the point!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Jeanette Pollard, Scott Cooley, as descendant of
>>>>>>>>> William
>>>>>>>>> Matthews Cooley, has tested and is a match to the Stokes county
>>>>>>>>> Cooleys!
>>>>>>>>> He matches 37/37 markers with Jim Cooley of Las Vegas. The
>>>>>>>>> ramifications
>>>>>>>>> of the match are fascinating--but not cut and dry. (I talked at
>>>>>>>>> length
>>>>>>>>> about it in my lost email!)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here are some links that will bring you up to date:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The archive for this resurrected John Cooley Mailing List:
>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Timeline showing the paper trail of William Cooley from Stokes
>>>>>>>>> county
>>>>>>>>> NC
>>>>>>>>> to Steward county TN:
>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/StewartCoTN.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> DNA results:
>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/ydna.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jim Cooley's lineage:
>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/lineages/Cooley-Bearden-desc.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since we now know that William was of the clan, I've merged his
>>>>>>>>> line
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> John's. However, as good as it appears, we can't yet be certain
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> he
>>>>>>>>> was John's son:
>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/lineages/johncooley-desc.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> John Cooley page:
>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you don't want to be part of these mailings, respond and
>>>>>>>>> replace
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> Subject with UNSUBSCRIBE -- spell it correctly, else it will go
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> list!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let's talk! Do you think William was John's son? Any ideas on
>>>>>>>>> Jim's
>>>>>>>>> line
>>>>>>>>> and how he might fit? Any good information about Abraham Cooley
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> Surry
>>>>>>>>> co NC? Any new research that the list should be aware of? Just
>>>>>>>>> respond
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> this posting or send a new email to list_at_johncooley.net . I'll
>>>>>>>>> post
>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>> about this and other subjects over the next couple of days.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>>> information.
>>>>> --
>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>> information.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>> information.
>>>>
>>> --
>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>> information.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>> information.
>>
>
>
Received on Sun Sep 25 2011 - 19:54:41 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Sep 25 2011 - 19:54:41 MDT