Family talk:William Elwell and Molly Sawyer (1)

Which Molly Sawyer m. William Elwell, and which m. Jeremiah Deering? [16 March 2010]

Preface

This discussion used to be in the narrative text, but now that I am pretty sure the answer is right, I have moved this discussion to the talk page. I am at the time I am doing this, the only watcher of this page, so I am mostly arguing with myself, I guess. The notes are left in the historical sequence.

Initial Argument

Source:The history of Gorham , Maine, p. 486, says that the Molly Sawyer who m. William Elwell was the d/o John and Isabella (Martin) Sawyer. This is an error. John and Jabez Sawyer were two brothers who moved to Buxton (Narrangansett No. 1), and both brothers had a daughter named Mary, commonly called Molly. One Molly m. William Elwell (this page), and one Molly m. Jeremiah Deering. The two Molly's were therefore cousins, both grandchildren of Joseph Sawyer. It appears that:

• The Molly who was daughter of Jabez was b. 1766, m. 1790 William Elwell at age 24. Her first son was named William, the next son Jabez, the third son Joseph, the fourth son John, her last child born sometime after 1800 in her late 30's.
• The Molly who was daughter of John was b. 1772, m. 1793 Jeremiah Deering at age 21. Her first son was named John, then Jeremiah, then John again, then William, then William again, then Charles, her last child born 1814 at age 42.
• Both couples had a daughter named Mary (i.e., named after Jabez Sawyer's wife Mary, though as both cousins were also named Mary, this is not significant), but Jeremiah and Molly Deering had a daughter named Isabella (i.e., most likely named after John Sawyer's wife Isabella).

The alternative pairing would mean Molly Deering married at 27 instead of 21, was older than her husband, and had children until age 48 instead of 42. Also, that Molly Elwell married at 18 instead of 24, and stopped having children about 30 instead of about 35.

I believe, in the absence of documentary evidence to the contrary, pairing Molly, d/o Jabez, with William Elwell (and therefore Molly, d/o John, with Jeremiah Deering) is clearly to be preferred. --Jrich 23:31, 11 September 2009 (EDT)

Oops, Do We Need to Reconsider?

Additional note: Source:The Sawyer family of Elliotsville (Piscataquis Co., Maine) : descendants of James Sawyer of Gloucester, Mass., and their kinfolk, the Drakes : a genealogy pertaining, the 1945 edition, was one of the sources that I had been relying on (also other sources, notably Source:Genealogical and family history of the state of Maine, p. 1:233), in matching Molly, d/o Jabez, with William Elwell. The records of their marriages recorded in Buxton don't identify the parents of the respective Molly's, and no sources that do, as far as I have seen, give any primary evidence. This particular source, The Sawyer Family of Elliotsville, would seem to carry some weight because Jabez is marked as an "Ancestor of the Sawyer Family of Elliotsville", the focus of this book. Therefore, one would hope the author spent more time on this family than the encyclopedic family histories.

I recently found out about the revised 1979 edition of the above work, wherein the author has switched the two Molly's from the pairing he originally gave in 1945. On the surface this would seem to be significant, given the author's focus, but after analyzing the details presented, I don't think it signals any new evidence, merely the author bowing to prevailing opinion. The author does not give his grounds for doing this except "other authorities" (i.e. these secondary sources versus those secondary sources). The entries for both Mary/Molly's (family 64, p. 39 and family 75, p. 45) ask if any reader can give proof of Mary's parentage? So it appears that the switch between editions did not reflect the finding of any evidence, but is probably more an admission by the author that he simply cannot support his position with anything more than circumstantial evidence. Unfortunately, I believe he is wrong to do change his mind without evidence to support it, and should have trusted his first instincts.

Actually, the case that the author presents in the 1979 edition is weaker than the one presented above, as he says he has no information on the family of Jeremiah Deering. The naming of the Deering children is, in fact, a considerable part of the support for the pairing presented here.

Clearly, pairing the daughter of Jabez with William Elwell is "unproven". But it seems to me "likely", based on ages of the two Molly Sawyers, and the names of their children. So I believe this is the correct pairing, barring the uncovering of a contradictory will of either father, or other documentary evidence. --Jrich 11:01, 13 September 2009 (EDT)

Answer Right There All the Time

I just happened to look at this page again, and realized the proof is right there on the page Person:Jeremiah Deering (1) in the form of the 1850 US Census. That census record says Mary Deering, the wife of Jeremiah, was age 77 in 1850. That implies a birth in 1773, which given a choice between the daughter of John b. June, 1772, and the daughter of Jabez, b. 1766, is clearly the daughter of John. Since this agrees with all the circumstantial arguments above, this seems definite enough to move this argument off to the talk page. --Jrich 22:21, 16 March 2010 (EDT)