Person talk:Elizabeth Jackson (103)

Watchers

This addresses the conflicting data concerning which man married Elizabeth, the daughter of Col. John Jackson and Elizabeth Seaman.

The book "The Doty-Doten Family in America" by Ethan Allen Doty, 1897, pg 500, says "Isaac Doty, son of Isaac Doty and Elizabeth England, b Oyster Bay, NY abt 1673; m there Elizabeth Jackson, dau of Colonel John Jackson and Elizabeth Seaman. They lived Oyster Bay. . . " And many folks have used this as the source for their connection to Elizabeth and her father, Colonel John Jackson (1645-1725), s/o Robert of Hempstead, L.I.

Ethan Allen Doty also wrote an article that was published in the New York Genealogical & Biographical Society publication The Record, Vol 43, July 1912, page 282, entitled The Doughty Family of Long Island. In it he says "Charles Doughty b in Flushing, Queens Co, New York b 1667; m in Flushing, Queens County, New York, about 1690, Elizabeth Jackson, born in Flushing, Queens County, abt 1668." He does not state who Elizabeth's parents are, so supposedly this could be a different Elizabeth.

BUT Col. John Jackson's 1724 Will names as one of his heirs, his daughter Elizabeth Doughty;
and
"Long Island Genealogies" by Mary Powell Bunker 1895, pg 220 says that Elizabeth, daughter of John Jackson and Elizabeth Seaman married Charles Doughty;
and
"History of the Jackson Family of Hempstead, Long Island" by Oscar Burton Robbins, 1951, pg 5 struggles with conflicting data on the issue of who Elizabeth married. He first says that Elizabeth m Charles Doughty abt 1673, but also lists Isaac Doty and two of Isaac's children saying the info came from the above Doty-Doten book.
and
Descendants of Elias Doughty, History compiled between 1905 and 1960, transcribed by Antony Maitland, 1998, online, says Charles Doughty, b 1667 m at Flushing about 1690, Elizabeth Jackson, born at Flushing in 1666, died there in Jan 1758, daughter of Col. John and Elizabeth (Seaman) Jackson.

The children listed for Elizabeth and Charles Doughty, were born in about the same time frame as Elizabeth and Isaac's children, and are not named the same.

Studying the Doty book, the author says that only rarely have any of the Dotys used the spelling of Doughty and that one was James Doty. Both the Dotys and the Doughtys settled on Long Island, just in different locations. Isaac and his Elizabeth lived at Oyster Bay and Charles and his Elizabeth lived at Flushing.

The following 1698 Census for Flushing, contains the listing of Charles & Elizabeth and their first four children:
From: http://www.genealogy-quest.com/collections/nyflush.html
O'Callaghan, E. B., "The Documentary History of the State of New York", Vol. 1, (Albany: Weed, Parsons & Co., Public Printers, 1850) pp. 432-437.
An Exact List of all Ye Inhabitants Names within Ye Towne of fflushing and P'cincts of Old and Young ffreemen and Servants White & Blacke &c. 1698:
Charles Doughty and Elizabeth his wife
John and Charles
Sarah and Elizabeth
1 negro black boy

The resolution of this apparent conflicting data is in the book "Mayflower Families Through Five Generations, Edward Doty", Volume Eleven Part 3, Published by General Society of Mayflower Descendants 2000, page 9, ISBN 0-930270-12-6. The Mayflower books are some of the best researched records available and I consider this the final answer to this question. A quote from page 9:

"Isaac Doty (Isaac, Edward) born in Oyster Bay NY prob. ca. 1672-4, but certainly by 9 Apr. 1674 since he was of age to receive a plot of land from George Downing on 9 Apr. 1695. He was living 3 Apr. 1722, when Isaac Doty, Jr. was chosen to be a fence viewer.
"He married prob. ca. 1700, ELIZABETH ________. Her maiden name may have been Jackson as reported by Seaman, but she was not the daughter of Col. John and Elizabeth (Seaman) Jackson as stated by (Ethan Allen) Doty. That Elizabeth Jackson m Charles Doughty."

10:59, 25 June 2012 Janiejac (Talk | contribs) (create talk pg)


I had encountered this controversy in trying to decipher the Robbins book, and it directed me to the Doty-Doten book. So to summarize the problem, apparently:

  1. there is no marriage record known for either Isaac Doty or Charles Doughty
  2. both apparently had wives named Elizabeth (I would like to confirm this for Isaac, since his father was Isaac, and his mother was Elizabeth and so there is room for confusion there as well)
  3. John Jackson named a daughter Elizabeth Doughty in his will
  4. they are contemporaries, so to quote Highlander: "There can be only one".

On reading the excellent summary above, I add this observation: John Jackson's will, it is good to remember, was not written by Mr. Doughty. So the spelling of Doughty is how Col. Jackson or his lawyer thought the name was spelled, not how Mr. Doughty spelled it, and it would be very easy to read way too much into the way Doughty is spelled. Col. Jackson does not name the son-in-law, any grandchildren, nor is the son-in-law a witness or executor. So all we know from this will is that his daughter married a Doty/Doughty.

Given that statement, on reading the conclusion, I find it unconvincing. MF5G is a good source in exactly those times when it presents primary evidence, and it may have here, but if so, that evidence was not abstracted into this summary. However, some MF5G's are not so good, and indeed, some have gone through 2nd editions because there were so many errors and new findings to be presented. Eventually, I would hope to get to a library and read MF5G myself, but it would be nice if it was explained why this MF5G says so authoritatively that "that Elizabeth Jackson m. Charles Doughty". If it is based on the spelling in the will, then I think it could be right, but it is a risky assumption, such is far from clear. Unless there is more evidence somewhere, the above statement looks to be merely opinion, and this still looks like an open question. --Jrich 17:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)


Following up on the above, I looked up the MF5G (Vol. 11, Part 3, p. 9). The exact quote is "That Elizabeth Jackson m. Charles Doughty [6, 7].", The sources are: #6) NYGBR 43:282, and #7) Seam. Fam. p. 22.

The NYGBR article has already been mentioned. It covers Charles, but not Isaac. There Ethan Doty says Charles marries Elizabeth Jackson without naming her parents. How that can be used to make the point in MF5G is beyond me as it could be any Elizabeth Jackson being referred to. In the Descendants of Edward Doty, which includes Isaac, but not Charles, the same author says Isaac m. Elizabeth Jackson and she is there explicitly identified as the daughter of Col. John Jackson and his wife Elizabeth Seaman.

The Seaman Family, p. 22, gives the children of Colonel John Jackson and Elizabeth Seaman, and it says, "Elizabeth Jackson, married Charles Doughty". The will of Col. John Jackson is not mentioned, no dates are given, and no other details about Elizabeth Jackson and her alleged husband.

That is the sum total of evidence mustered by MF5G. Pretty poor genealogy.

Given that there is evidence that Elizabeth Jackson married a Mr. Doughty, a person looking at either Isaac or Charles would immediately assume it was their Mr. Doughty that is referred to because then they have an answer and they are done. Few people cover both because they are not descended from the same immigrant ancestors. But in fact, not a single shred of evidence has been given to tell which one might have married Elizabeth Jackson (I am unaware of a third candidate).

  • Isaac b. abt. 1672, m. abt 1700, named children Isaac 1704 and Mary 1710.
  • Charles b. abt 1667, m. by 1691, named children John 1691 through Phebe 1707, and besides John, child names that appear to come from the Jackson family include Samuel, Hannah, and Martha (ignoring Sarah which is Charles' mother's name too).
  • Elizabeth b. abt. 1668.

It is difficult dealing with estimated ages, but to the extent they are reasonable, they make it unlikely that Elizabeth married Isaac since he was younger, and the ages of their children would be at the end of her child-bearing years. The pattern of dates for Charles and Elizabeth are more consistent with a 1668 birth. --Jrich 23:00, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Fundraiser
Help fund new features!