Person:Mary Atwood (17)

Watchers
  • F.  Thomas Atwood (add)
  • M.  Sarah Maxfield (add)
m. Bef 1820
  1. Susan Colby Atwood1820 - 1905
  2. Lucinda Atwood1822 -
  3. Benjamin Evans Atwood1824 -
  4. George W. Atwood1827 - 1902
  5. Ira AtwoodCal 1829 - 1896
  6. Sevilla AtwoodAbt 1831 -
  7. Palmer C. AtwoodAbt 1835 - Aft 1855
  8. Mary Atwood1837 - 1905
  9. Myra AtwoodAbt 1839 - Bet 1880 & 1886
m. 18 Dec 1858
Facts and Events
Name Mary Atwood
Alt Name[2] Maria Atwood
Gender Female
Birth[1] 24 Apr 1837 North Wilmot, Merrimack, New Hampshire, United States
Marriage 18 Dec 1858 New Hampshire, United Statesto Charles M Stuart
Death[1] 24 Nov 1905 Franklin, Merrimack, New Hampshire, United States
References
  1. 1.0 1.1 New Hampshire, United States. New Hampshire Death Records, 1654-1947. (New Hampshire Division of Vital Records Administration)
    [1].

    Name: Mary Atwood Stuart
    Place of Death: Franklin N. H. / 32 Depot Street / Ward 1, Franklin Village
    How long a resident: 2 years
    Previous residence: Danbury N H
    Date of Death: 1905 Nov 24
    Age: 68 y. 7 m. 21 d.
    Place of Birth: North Wilmot N. H.
    Date of Birth: 1837 April 24
    Sex: Female Color: White Condition: Widowed
    Occupation: Housekeeper
    Cause: Dementia Duration: 3 months
    Name of Father: Thomas Atwood
    Maiden Name of Mother: Sally maxfield
    Birthplace of Father: [blank]
    Birthplace of Mother: Bradford N H
    Occupation of Father: Farmer
    Widow of: Charles Stuart
    Place of Interment: Franklin N. H.
    Date of Interment: Nov 26 1905

  2. Even though she is not a particularly good match age-wise, this must be Maria from the family listing in the 1850 census, shown age 17. All subsequent records seem to indicate a birth in 1837, so she should have been listed as 13. Myra, a better match age-wise, is shown living next door to Mary in the 1870 census, married to John Shirley and two years younger, ruling her out. Seems unlikely a family would have both a Maria and Mary; or if they did, that one would be listed in the family and not the other. Presumably some kind of error communicating info to the census taker.