<=^ _ ^.ss ^^-UNIVERS?^ Genealogical Obstacles r on 3 194, i A Paper submitted (or consideration by JOHN F. LEWIS at the Annual Meeting of the Genealogical Society of Pennsylvania. LIBRARY f PHILADELPHIA, 1906. SOME GENEALOGICAL OBSTACLES CONSIDERED.1 There are certain obstacles the genealogist encounters sooner or later as he climbs the family tree, which stop all farther progress and seem insurmountable. What lies be yond appears impossible to reach, and after futile effort to proceed, he descends to a lower level, and climbs a more promising branch. Exactly what the obstacles are cannot always be discovered. Nevertheless, they are of the same general character, an outgrowth of the rudeness of the times producing them, and worthy of intelligent study because pointing out the way to improve contemporaneous records and leave posterity a surer genealogical footing than our ancestors left us. THE NATIONALITY OF THE ORIGINAL EMIGRANT. When an American genealogy has been carried back to the original emigrant, the most frequent obstacle to farther progress, is the inability to tell where he came from. Of course, his name will often designate his nationality with reasonable certainty, and that the O'Briens came from France, the Fitzgeralds from Germany, or the Spielbergers from England, will hardly be likely, though such things do happen in genealogy, and yet the name will not satisfy the desire for the actual fact. Additional clues may point out his country to a certainty, and yet want of knowledge of his particular village, or town, or city, seems to make farther progress a hopeless task. If the genealogist does succeed in passing beyond, his ability to trace the original emigrant across the water will be due to some unusual in- 1 A paper submitted for consideration by John F. Lewis at the Annual Meeting of the Genealogical Society of Pennsylvania, 1905. 2 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. cident which enables the lost ancestor to be located among the countless thousands who crowded the old world until setting out for the new. The emigrant may be mentioned among Rupp's Thirty Thousand Names of Immigrants in Penn sylvania; in some "Register of Redemptioners," which records that he agreed to serve five years to pay for his passage to America ; or among more distinguished compan ions for the voyage, but here the genealogist usually rests from his labors and yearns for additional facts. From this bar to farther progress, we should be reminded that immigration has not ceased. The thousands and tens of thousands who are now leaving every country in Europe for this, will be the ancestors of the American of the future, and if the usual law of human development be followed, to them must be looked for the antecedents of the country's great men, as well as to the older American stock, upon which the new shoots are being grafted. Immigration statistics should show the full name of the emigrant, the dates of birth, marriage, etc., his occupation, parents' names, and exact place from which he came, and the blank recording this information should be signed by the emigrant himself, if able to write. Such records would be invaluable, not only to the genealogist, but also to the sociologist who is endeavoring with broad-minded patriot ism to advance civilization by disseminating virtue and eradicating vice.1 Americans should not disguise the fact that much of the criminality which permeates the country, is brought here by immigration, and that the law should examine the ap plicant for admission to our shores, not so much about his poverty or wealth, as his physical and moral character. Let us look at the statistics of New York City as exemplify ing general municipal conditions. In 1903 there were about 170,000 persons placed under arrest, of whom about 1 See Act of Congress, March 3, 1893, 27 Stat. L. , 569. Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 3 85,000, one-half, were foreigners, though less than 28 per cent, of the city's population is foreign born, and though the city contains 350,000 Jews, among whom lawlessness is comparatively rare. So large a part of the population of Philadelphia is native American, that we are prone to overlook the fact, that in the country at large, there are over 10,000,000 persons of foreign birth, nearly fifteen per cent, of the entire popula tion, as compared with less than ten per cent, in 1850. Between 1820 and 1900, nearly 20,000,000 persons of alien race came to this country to stay. To this amazing extent has there been an infusion of foreign blood into American veins, and that to this lowly source the genealogist of the future must ultimately turn, is as sure as that history is constantly repeating itself. The older families tend to lose their identity by the ex haustion of the male line when brought into competition with the superior vitality of the new element. The exhaus tion is not due, as has been suggested, to the fact that the chances are against the perpetuation of a family name because the probability of male and female issue being equal every daughter eliminates a chance of such perpe tuity. The fallacy of this suggestion is apparent from the fact that it necessarily presupposes a lower birth rate for males than for females, and is even more apparent when it is remembered, that at any given stage of the world's his tory, there are about as many males as females, and that every female marrying takes the name of her husband and therefore perpetuates a family name, no matter where it comes from, even though her own does lose its identity. There are a number of reasons for this exhaustion, but the most effective is the enervating influence of the culture and luxury which often, if not usually, sap the strength of the older stock. This reason is especially operative in cities, which are genealogical maelstroms, in the way they swallow up and extinguish family names. The more 4 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. crowded the community, the more inevitable is the enerva tion, and besides, in such a community more often recurs the marriage of cousins, in which barrenness is three times more frequent than in ordinary marriages.1 Turning from the abstract to the concrete, it is found that an analysis of the genealogy of England's peerage, probably the most carefully guarded genealogy in the world, affords convincing proof of these conclusions. There are not twenty-five English peers, whose peerage dates farther back than the reign of Henry VIII, and not one of them who can prove himself a lineal male descendant of an an cestor who came to England with William the Conqueror. In 1837, the year of Queen Victoria's accession, there were about 400 peers, and more than half of them had been cre ated since the accession of George III. Between 1830 and 1885, over 250 new peerages were created, so necessary has it been to ennoble the blood of Commoners in order to pre serve the House of Lords of a numerical strength befitting the dignity of England's greatness.2 It has been said, and probably with truth, that there is no legitimate known male descendant of any King of Eng land who sat on the throne before the reign of George I, and according to the London Academy, of the twenty -five Barons who set their hands to the Magna Charta, if they could write, and their seals, if they could not, not a single male descendant remains. There are only 300 noble or gentle families in all England that hold the same land in male succession which their male ancestors held, even so recently as the reign of Henry VIII. There is not a single Barony by Writ, now held by a male of the family in which it was originally created. From these facts, we are reminded of what Sir Egerton Brydges says (Desultoria, p. 61) : " Genealogy is of little value, unless it discloses matter 1 Mulhall's Dictionary"/}/ Statistics (1884), p. 118. 2 The Kinship of Men, by Henry Kendall, p. 184. Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 5 which teaches the causes of the decay or prosperity of fam ilies, and furnishes a lesson of moral wisdom for the direc tion of those who succeed. When we reflect how soon the fortunes of a house are ruined, not only by vice or folly, but by the least deficience in that cold prudence with which highly endowed minds are so seldom gifted, the long con tinuance of any race of nobility or gentry, seems to take place almost in defiance of probabilities." THE EMIGRANT'S CHANGE OP NAME. Long before the genealogist reaches the original emigrant, he is not unlikely to run foul of a change in the surname of the lineage which he is endeavoring to trace, and prob ably will not know what obstacle has stopped him. This difficulty is doubtless more common than is generally sup posed, and when it happens, seldom leaves any clue by which it may be recognized. In fact, in tracing genealogies involving lines other than English ones, a change in the surname should be assumed as possible, and when an an cestor, short of the original emigrant is reached, whose ante cedents are past finding out, should be regarded as prob able. This conclusion ' will be the more readily admitted, if the origin and nature of surnames be kept in mind. They are not sire names, but are called surnames, because added to the Christian name. A few generations ago, they were not regarded with anything like the respect in which they were more recently held. They were practically un known in England until the thirteenth century, and though of probably earlier use in Germany and other continental countries, were largely confined to the higher nobility until about the fifteenth century. The Christian name was usually the only mark of personal identity, and the sur name was added, when necessary, to distinguish between two persons in neighboring localities, who might otherwise be confounded. One was called John the Smith to distin guish him from John the Tailor ; another Adam White, of 6 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. white complexion, as apart from Adam Black, his swarthy neighbor ; a third, James Hill, as against James Field, and a fourth, Andrew Jamison, to indicate he was the son of James, as against Andrew Johnson, the son of John.1 It is an undoubted fact, that the vast majority of the surnames shown by a city directory, are purely local, and originated in efforts at marking personal identity.' This is probably more particularly true of the Germans, but it is also true of the English, as may almost be assumed from the existence of the old rhyme quoted by Camden : In"- ford," in "ham," in " ley" and "ton" The most of English surnames run. From these facts, it is natural to expect, that when the early emigrants came to America, not only changing their places of residence but also leaving behind them forever an old world for a new with associations usually sad and painful, they should not hesitate to change their surnames, if they were so minded, either from motives of policy, to escape pursuit and identification, or from mere whim or caprice. Besides, the emigrants often left scenes they wanted to forget, and political or religious persecutions they rejoiced to escape, and in seeking a new home for themselves and their descendants, longed to identify themselves therewith and shake from their feet the dust of the old. The continental emigrant usually changed his surname. He did not always do this at once, but the longer his Am erican residence, the more likely was the change to come. The wretched spelling of early recording clerks or scriveners, or their ears unaccustomed to foreign pronunciation, often worked a change without the emigrant's knowledge or con sent, and a deed for land with the name changed at the start, was sure to repeat the change when the land was con- 1 Teutonic Name-System applied to the Family Names of France, England and Germany, by Robert Ferguson. ' Romance of the London Directory, by Charles W. Bardsly. Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 7 veyed away at the finish, or the will signed which passed the title to his devisees. With the German emigrant, the name was usually angli cized — the Schwartzes became Black ; the Weisses, White ; the Peiffers, Peppers ; the Bachers, Schmidts and Schnei ders, Bakers, Smiths and Tailors, but these and those of like nature, are too common to be worth more than passing men tion. They were mere translations. Other changes occurred, however, which worked so radi cal an alteration in the surname, that it is often hard to recognize. Such changes are indeed distressing to the genealogist. Let us take an example. One of the families of the old German Reformed Church at Frankford, now a Presbyterian congregation, was Sirach Tschudi, a scion of an old Swiss family of distinguished parentage. His name is recorded in the Register of the Church, as copied by the Genealogical Society of Pennsylvania, as among the original contributors to the erection of the building in 1750. His surname was first changed by dropping the useless " T." It was then " Schudi " — a rather baffling alteration for any one searching records for his movements. One of his friends doubtless suggested, that the next letter of his surname was as useless as the former, so Sirach became "Chudi," and incidentally changed the final "i"toa"y." Even this name " Chudy," was evidently too much for his American friends, who in that day, when punch was always in evi dence at convivial gatherings, naturally called him " Judy." But the changes that Sirach's surname underwent, did not even rest here. His death is recorded in the Register as " Cerick Judy." May he rest in peace where neither change nor decay have any entrance. English surnames were also sometimes changed and this not only in the spelling, which in fact frequently happened, and was doubtless sometimes forced upon the emigrant by scriveners who prepared deeds for execution upon expensive parchment and insisted that the name should be written 8 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. just as it was spelled or considerable expense would be in curred in recopying the deed, but also sometimes changed so radically, that an ancestor of one surname had descend ants of entirely different designation. English surnames were sometimes changed without the excuse of emigration to account for it. One of the most remarkable is an instance given by Camden, and quoted by Bigland in his Observations on Marriages, Baptisms and ParochialBurials as preserved in Registers, London, 1744. William Belward, of Malpasse, had two sons, one named David de Malpasse, and the other Richard de Belward, William had three sons, William de Malpasse, Philip Eger- ton and David Golborne ; while Richard also had three, Thomas de Cotgrave, William de Overton and Richard Little. Here from one surname there became seven en tirely different ones in the brief span of two generations. From facts such as these the genealogist should certainly conclude, that laws ought to be passed making inherited sur names inviolate, and prohibiting their change, except for cause shown upon petition to a court of record, and that when a change of surname was permitted, it should be re corded in a register in the county-seat, together with the reasons for the change. ABSENCE OP EARLY VITAL STATISTICS. Of course, the most frequent obstacle to genealogical re search, is the utter absence in colonial times of any town or county record of vital statistics. With the exception of some of the New England States, this absence is fairly gen eral throughout the original thirteen — and Pennsylvania in this respect is one of the most derelict. The Quakers were self-centered enough to abide in the knowledge that their own meeting records were intact, and to care nothing about the records of those not members of meeting. At any rate, a Pennsylvania family tree which has no drab in its sap, is about as hard to dig out, as any rooted in American soil. Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 9 Every State should provide by law for the preservation of its vital statistics.1 Births, marriages, divorces and deaths should be recorded in appropriate registers devoted to nothing else, and deposited in fire-proof buildings in county seats. ABSENCE OP EARLY CHURCH RECORDS. Then too, there is often an entire absence of early church records, or the distressing paucity of the entries when any are found. In those countries which maintain a State church, the genealogist has a right ' to expect the faithful preservation of ecclesiastical registers. Births, baptisms, marriages and deaths, ought to be found carefully recorded by the parish priest. In a country like England, which has been free from the tread of a foreign foe since the Con quest, the parish registers are usually complete for many years back. In 1538, Thomas Cromwell, then Vicar-Gen eral, afterwards Earl of Essex, ordered the clergy of Eng land to keep a Public Register in which to record marriages, burials, baptisms and deaths, and this order was continued in the injunctions of Edward VI, Queen Elizabeth and James I, and has been adhered to with reasonable fidelity since. During the reign of Queen Elizabeth, who certainly was not personally very much interested in marriage, the Minister was required at his institution to subscribe to this protestation : " I shall keep the register books according to the Queen's Majestie's injunction." The canon of James I provided : " The register shall be kept in the Church, in a coffer with three keys, for the minister, and each of the wardens, and that on the Sunday the minister, in the presence of the wardens, shall make the entries of the week before, to every page when filled they shall all subscribe their names, and 1 The Act of Assembly of April 27, 1905, P. L., 312, approved by Gover nor Pennypacker, has followed this suggestion. 10 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. the church wardens shall every year transmit a copy thereof to the bishop's register." And by the Statute of William III, it was provided : " The minister neglecting to make the proper entries in the parochial register shall forfeit the sum of One hundred pounds." * In America, the absence of a State Church, or of any such law, makes it remarkable indeed that early church records exist as often as they do. Many of the clergymen of early colonial times, had a number of parishes to serve, and even to-day, in some parts of Pennsylvania, a single clergyman has four, or even five, different congregations under his charge. The records the clergyman kept, were, therefore, more a register of his personal ministrations than of his official services to a congregation in one locality. Many of these personal registers still exist, but as compared with the number that ought to remain, they are relatively scarcer than early congregational records. The destruction of houses and of churches by fire, the temptation presented by the high price which old paper often brought, and a gen eral want of respect which primitive conditions seemed to countenance for past events, may account for the present scarcity of complete ecclesiastical records of early colonial times, and this assumes, and the assumption is by no means to be taken for granted, that records were made at all. Even in the City of Philadelphia, which is presumed to have unusual respect for the past, I know of no church, existing prior to the year 1800, whose records approach at all to that completeness which any carefully preserved church record should attain. Probably those of Christ Church, which the Genealogical Society of Pennsylvania is now copying and indexing from beginning to end, are as complete as any, and yet the first Minute Book is lost, and the burial records aggravatingly incomplete. While births, 1 Bigland, (supra.) p. 7. Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 11 baptisms, marriages and attendance at communion are re corded, the one inevitable event in every man's life, and to properly prepare him for which is the chief aim of the church, has been frequently relegated, as far as making proper entry of it, to the sexton or grave-digger, who usually satisfied himself by noting receipts of his fees for breaking ground. Burial registers seem to be rare in other churches, and if the sexton made any record at all, he usually said something like: "James Smith's wife," or "Brother of Andrew Somebody, who paid me the fee." In fact, even in England, church records are woefully de fective when it comes to the registration of deaths. Much depends, of course, on the care of the person making the entry, but, " Dr. Johnson's Lady," " Dorothy Gifford's daughter," " old Father Beadle," " an apprentice of Mr. Sliford " are real examples from Church Registers. THE BREVITY OP EARLY RECORDS. Besides the entire absence of early church records and their paucity of obituary notice when any notice is given at all, the genealogist is annoyed beyond measure, by the want of fullness which the entries often exhibit. The baptismal record sometimes gives simply the fact that the child of " so and so " was baptized, without giving sex or name, the offi ciating clergyman having doubtless forgotten both when he came to make the entry some days or weeks after he had performed the sacrament. Again, the usual baptismal record of the colonial period, gives the date of the baptism, but no date of birth, and seldom indeed records the maiden name of the mother, or the names of the God-parents. With marriage registers the case is usually worse. If the full name of the husband and the full name of the wife be given, together with the date, the genealogist is indeed for tunate. Here, however, is a real entry, taken from a regis ter made in the time of Thomas Cromwell, Vicar-General, and which is refreshing for completeness : 12 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. " Memorandum : That the intended marriage between Richard Mallett of Sutton Mallett, in the countie of Somer- sett, gentleman, (now an officer of the standing army) the sonne of Francis Mallett, some tyme of Sutton Mallett, in the countie of Somersett aforesaid, gentleman, deceased, and of Elizabeth his relict, now living in the parish and countie aforesaid, of the one part, and Susanna Newbery, spinster, daughter of Henry Newbery, Esquire, and of Frances his wife, both now living in the town of and countie of of the other part, was published on three several Lord's days in the parish church ; that is to say, on the 3d, 10th, and 17th of December. No exception was made against the same." T Here is another example which is taken from the parish register of St. Botolph, Aldgate : " Thomas Speller, a dumb person, by trade a smith, of Hatfield Broadoak, in the county of Essex, and Sarah Earle, daughter to one John Earle of Great Paringdon, in the same county yeoman, were married by license granted by Doctor Edwards, Chancellor of the dioces of London, the seaventh day of November Anno Dni 1618, which license aforesaid was granted at the request of Sir Francis Barrington, Knight and others of the same place above named, who by letters certified Mr. Chancellor that the parents of either of them had given their consents to the said marriage, and the said Thomas Speller, the dumb partie's willingness to have the same performed, appeared by taking the book of common prayer and his lycence in one hand and his bride in the other, and coming to Mr. John Briggs, our minister and preacher, and made the best signs he could, to shew that he was willing to be married which was then performed accord- inglie ; and also the said Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench, as Mr. Briggs was informed, was made acquainted with the said marriage before it was solemnized and allowed it to be lawful." 1 Bigland (supra), p. 2, Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 13 And the clerk has naively added to this entry, which consists of but one sentence : " This marriage is set down at large because we never had the like before." For a Baptismal Record, here is an example worthy of emulation : " Upon Monday 26 October 1663, the only son of Sir John Clopton, of Clopton in the County of Warwick, knt, by his wife Barbara, daughter and heir of Sir Edward Walker, Knt. Garter principal king of Arms, was baptized Edward, by Dr. John Earles, Bishop of Salisbury, in Garter's lodg ings in the herald's office, situate in the parish of St. Benet Paul's wharf, London." This entry is also comprised in a single sentence. These examples of exactness and fulness, suggest that State laws should be passed requiring clergymen, and pos sibly requiring every religious organization, to keep a regis ter with such fulness and particularity as the Act should set forth, and imposing a penalty for any failure to conform thereto. THE DESTRUCTION OP OLD GRAVEYARDS. Another obstacle- which the genealogist encounters is the destruction or abandonment of old graveyards. The growth of American cities has been so rapid in the past half-cen tury, that many of the old graveyards, which were situated at a convenient distance from the centre of the old town, have been pierced by streets and cut up into building lots, with the consequent destruction of their graves and grave stones, except in those rare instances where descendants have had enough respect for their ancestors to spend a few dollars to remove them to some other locality. While this destruction has not been as effective against graveyards actually adjacent to churches, it has been overwhelming in the case of public cemeteries, wherein the right of interment was sold, and in many of these public cemeteries, the right of interment has often been sold over and over again for the 14 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. same plot of ground, because what the cemetery sells is not a piece of real estate, six feet long, but the mere right of interment, probably not inconsistent with the re-sale of the right after the expiration of a reasonable time. Perhaps in no city in America has there been more whole sale desecration of old cemeteries than in the City of Phila delphia. In fact, with the exception of the insignificant graveyards adjacent to city churches, there are few old cemeteries left. " Woodlands " cemetery of Philadelphia was laid out as recently as 1840, " Monument " cemetery in 1836, and " Laurel Hill " in 1835, so that they are still in their infancj"-, but where are the public graveyards in which the former citizens of Philadelphia were buried? The late Charles R. Hildeburn, the gifted Antiquarian and Librarian, once suggested as a valuable and profitable topic for an essay, " The ancient graveyards of Philadelphia now abandoned to other use," and a paper upon this subject would be one of the greatest boons to the Philadelphia genealogist that can well be imagined. Without enumerating the abandoned ones, it may be said in brief, that the three most important were probably " Southeast " or " Washington Square," the " Lombard Street Burying Grounds," the " Vineyard Cemetery," and the " Lower Burying Ground " on the west side of the Schuyl kill. In Southeast or Washington Square, there were probably as many interments as in any other public cemetery of the City. Thomas Jefferson records that the old grave-digger in charge of it told him that 2,000 soldiers of the Revolu tionary War were there interred, and during the Yellow Fever epidemic of 1793, there were so many burials in the Square, that there was no more room, without disturbing previous interments. The Lombard Street Burying Grounds were used for a period of over 50 years, and the Vineyard Cemetery which was at 20th and Parish Streets, probably as long. Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 15 The Lower Burying Ground on the west side of the Schuylkill was taken about 1850 by the Pennsylvania Rail road for depots and tracks. A Committee of the Legislature appointed as early as 1809, to pass upon the validity of the title of the Quakers who then claimed possession of it, re ported that the graveyard had been in use up to that time for a period of 120 years. The case of the burying ground formerly in Franklin Square deserves special notice. This square was one of those intended by the proprietors as an open space for the citizens of Philadelphia, but it was so far distant from the built-up portions of the old town, that it does not seem to have been laid out, or actually entered upon by the citizens prior to the year 1741, when Thomas Penn issued a war rant to his Surveyor General, reciting that : " Whereas Philip Boehm and Jacob Seigel have requested that we would be pleased to grant them to take up in trust' to and for the use of the German congregation in the city of Philadelphia, a vacant lot or piece of ground within our said City, situated between Sixth and Seventh Streets, bounded northward by Vine Street, eastward and westward by vacancies, and southward by the ends of the Sassafras Street lots, containing in length north and South 306 feet and in breadth east and west 150 feet, for which they agree to pay for our use — £50 &c." The German congregation referred to was that of the old German Reformed Church, of which Boehm was then pas tor, and subsequently located on the south side of Race Street in the building now occupied by Lucas' Paint fac tory. The congregation at once took possession of this ground under Penn's warrant and used it as a place of interment. Twenty-two years later John Penn was paid £189 in full for the lot, and a Patent was issued therefor to the congregation, dated December 14th, 1763. The grave yard was in the middle of the square and fronted on Vine Street. Its exact location is given in the records of the 16 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. German Reformed Church, as copied by the Genealogical Society. The cemetery would probably have been there still, if the congregation had not, in 1782, petitioned the General Assembly of Pennsylvania, for leave to bring in a bill, reciting that the graveyard had been used as such for fifty years, and that owing to the increase of the congregation, encroachment had been made on the vacant lots adjoining the cemetery for the purpose of burying the dead, and to vest a part thereof in the congregation as a place of inter ment. Not only was the petition refused, but also the in quiry to which it led, prompted City Councils in 1797, to resolve that suit should be begun for the recovery of the ground, because the deed from Thomas Penn to the Church was illegal. Though the suit was pressed, Councils agreed in 1801, to discontinue it, if the congregation would yield possession of all of the square in which interments had not been made ; would accept a lease from the City of the part in which interments had been made but for which no patent had been issued ; and would agree that length of possession should in no event be a bar to the City's right. A lease was executed for fifteen years, and upon its expiration, the congregation asked for a renewal for 99 years, but this was refused, and in 1821 after various efforts to adjust the mat ter, a peremptory order was issued by Councils that the congregation should vacate the square altogether. No ma terial change, however, occurred in the situation until about 1835, when various efforts were made to get the City to pur chase the congregation's title, but these efforts failed. Suit was prosecuted for the recovery of the ground and finally decided in favor of the City one hundred years after the con gregation had begun interments in the plot as their own. The old graveyard was sadly relinquished by those whose dear ones it contained. Some of the bodies were removed, but they were few. The grassy mounds were broken down, the tombstones laid flat, earth piled on top of them, walks were laid out, grass sown, and a large central fountain construe- Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 17 ted. Many thousand interments had been made in the plot, as well from the congregation as from the City at large. In Harbaugh's Life of Schlatter, it is said : " Directly east of the sparkling jets, a few feet from the edges of the circular gravel walk under the green sod, lie the Revs. Steiner and Winkhaus, and Drs. Weyberg and Hendel, the aged. Directly north of this spot, about mid way between it and Vine Street, lies Rev. Michael Schlatter; and around these leaders of the Lord's Host far and near — a silent congregation sleep now ! — sleep thousands of those to whom they once ministered the holy ordinances of the church, and the precious instructions and consolations of the Gospel." Few of us indeed there are who have no ancestor in that sacred spot — the largest graveyard in the old City, and the only moral we can draw from its abandonment is to strive for the inviolate preservation of the few ancient cemeteries still left. Let the City take them if she must as public breathing spots, but let their old tenants rest undisturbed and their tombs be kept from desecration. They may still be rendered beautiful and attractive and their ancient asso ciation and peaceful atmosphere made to conduce to that quietness which urban life often needs most. THE ILLEGIBILITY OP OLD TOMBSTONES. Next to the entire disappearance of ancient graveyards, the genealogist's greatest difficulty is in deciphering the inscriptions on existing old tombs. This difficulty is not so bad in the case of tomb or grave-stones in rural or sub urban cemeteries, as with those in city cemeteries, where the gas and smoke play havoc with rock-cut inscriptions. Most of the tombs and grave-stones in the old churchyards of Philadelphia are built of marble. Its pure white seems singularly appropriate for such use, but the sulphuric acid in the coal gas is collected by falling rain, and rapidly eats away the lettering, so that inscriptions less than fifty years 18 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. old are sometimes entirely obliterated. This disintegration can be seen in any of the graveyards attached to churches in the built-up portion of the old City, such as St. Peter's Episcopal Church at Third and Pine Streets, and St. John's Lutheran Church on Race Street below Sixth. Published books of inscriptions are vastly more perma nent as record-preservers than the tomb or grave-stones themselves, and it is not unusual when inscriptions in St. Peter's require recutting, to have recourse to Mr. Hilde- burn's published book upon the subject, instead of endeavor ing to read the legend from the tomb or grave-stone itself. Slate is far superior to marble in ability to withstand the disintegrating action of time, and probably better than granite itself, though with respect to granite, there has probably not been sufficient opportunity to test its powers of endurance. The old slate tombstones in city church yards, if not broken by physical force, are usually deciph ered with ease, and the capacity of slate to resist wear, is well shown in some of the New England graveyards, such, for instance, as that upon Burial Hill at Plymouth. There are various ways, however, by which an appar ently obliterated inscription can be. in part, if not wholly, rescued. Taking a rubbing of it, in much the same man ner as a boy rubs a penny under a paper with the stub of a leadpencil, is often effective. Photographing the tomb, and then reducing the photograph to a smaller size, seems to make the inscription legible by bringing out and joining together lights and shadows which the eye alone seems un able to detect. The importance of preserving graveyards and their tombs, as far as the genealogist is concerned, is no insigni ficant matter. The tombstone inscriptions often contain information which is difficult, if not impossible, to find elsewhere, and in a young country like ours, where growth is occurring upon every side, and where respect for the past is not sufficiently cultivated, such preservation is doubly Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 19 important. Few of us there are who cannot tell where our parents are buried, but there are some who cannot tell where their four grandparents are buried, and I am quite sure there are few of us indeed, who can point out the graves of our eight great grandparents, with tombstones marking their identity. THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE ANCESTOR. Another obstacle to genealogical inquiry is the difficulty often encountered in identifying a particular ancestor' where there are two of the same name and same surname, especially if they are both found in the same general local ity. This is by no means an unusual difficulty, and pre sents the temptation to build the pedigree along desirable lines, rather than along humbler and truer ones. Genealogy should always be the hand-maid of truth, and not tempted by glittering rewards to enter the service of fiction, but when two names present themselves to the ancestor-hunter, either of which will answer, the temptation is great to build the pedigree in the method which Life recently character ized, as that of carrying a probe in one hand and an extin guisher in the other. The sarcasm of Voltaire, Walpole and Chesterfield, was properly directed against the geneal ogists of their time, who utterly lacked the skill and accur acy of the modern genealogical critic, who never accepts the mere dictum of a family representative however unim peachable as a verity, without investigating and confirming it, and who requires proof for every conclusion he reaches. It was said of Lord Thurlow, for whom some so-called gen ealogist was endeavoring to prove a descent from the Thur low who was the Secretary of Oliver Cromwell, that he rebuked such attempt by declaring, that there were two Thurlows in Cromwell's time, one his Secretary and the other a hod-carrier, and that his own descent was from the latter. When this difficulty in identifying one of two ancestors 20 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. of the same name and locality occurs, sidelights often per mit the problem to be solved. If not, a comparison of their handwriting, if any exists, with papers which may remain in the family, is often conclusive, but practically the only original handwriting preserved by county or state records of to-day is the signature to a will if the decedent left one. When a man who has attained no special prominence dies, he leaves little more impress upon the community than a small pebble leaves upon the ocean into which it is dropped. " Foot-prints upon the sands of time," as far as genealogy is concerned, occur only in poetry, and the suggestion there fore naturally occurs, that signatures should be preserved to some other legal document than wills only. Certainly, for instance, church registers should be signed by the con tracting parties to a marriage, or both parties should sign some marriage contract, to be filed for record. The Statute of Frauds requires parties to sign a contract for the convey ance of land, no matter how small in value and surely the contract of marriage which works a transfer to each party of a real estate in the land of the other, should be signed also. THE NUMERICAL IMMENSITY OF ANCESTORS. Another obstacle to genealogical progress is the very im mensity of the task which presents itself as soon as the tree is climbed to any considerable extent. Few of us realize how vast our ancestry becomes as we count them for a few generations back. While we start with but two parents, the increase is by geometrical ratio, by a preceding number being doubled, so that we have 4 grandparents, 8 great- grandparents, 16 great-great-grandparents, and the simplest calculation will show, that by the eighth generation back, all of us have 256 ancestors. For this reason, as well as for any other, it has been well said, that a complete genealogy capable of proof for eight generations upon all lines, has never been written. Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 21 If a genealogy be carried still farther back, the number of ancestors at each degree, though increased at the same ratio, assumes extraordinary proportions. From 256 direct ancestors in the eighth generation, there are found to be 1024 in the tenth, and 1,048,576 in the twentieth. These figures presuppose, of course, an absence among these an cestors of the marriage of cousins, but such marriages would simply repeat certain ancestors rather than eliminate them from the totals. The immensity of these figures is a commentary upon those pedigree-builders who rest satisfied with the comple tion of lineage upon the paternal sides only and in the family of the immediate paternal surname. Every man has in his veins but half his father's blood, one-quarter of his grandfather's, and one-eighth of his great-grandfather's, the strain being necessarily enriched each generation by the blood of the wife and mother. A son or daughter of the Revolution, partakes of the fighting ancestor's blood, as suming this ancestor to have been but four generations back, namely, the great-great-grandfather of such son or daughter, of only a one-sixteenth, the same having been diluted by the intervening maternal lines. In fact, dilution is not quite complete enough in its meaning as a word, to signify the actual fact, because children partake more of the nature and blood of the maternal line than of the paternal. Much force, therefore, is seen in the suggestion which some times has been made, that children should take the name of their mother, or take a joint name, in each case made up of the surnames of the father and mother. Such a custom would be of immense assistance to the genealogist, because it would avoid effectually the difficulty of discovering not only the maiden name of the wife, but also the actual par entage of the children, where the father or mother had married again. The conclusion to be deduced from these facts is the im portance of the maternal side in every genealogy which aims 22 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. at all to be as thorough as available records permit. An investigation of the maternal side, usually throws lights upon the mental, moral and physical qualities which go to make up the character of the descendants, and bring to the sur face the origin of virtue and vice as well as talent or genius. The immensity of the number of ancestors which all of us possess, suggests the wisdom and importance from a genealogical standpoint, of efforts to discover a more com plete knowledge of immediate ancestors, especially grand parents, who are too often neglected in the mistaken belief that a family pedigree is not worth construction, unless it leads to some important connection. This more complete knowledge should especially be sought, concerning the ma ternal lines, instead of indefinitely, and often questionably, prolonging a paternal line, in an effort to reach William the Conqueror, who was a bastard, or the Barons of Runny- meade, some of whom should have been put in jail, or a dissolute monarch, to whom kinship is established through a bend-sinister. Besides, it is clear, that if we allow thirty years for a generation, by the time the year 1215 is reached, when King John was forced to sign Magna Charta, 23 generations have passed, and each of us is entitled to over 4,000,000 ancestors, and that as the entire population of England in 1650 when a census was first taken, was but six and a half million, the chances are overwhelmingly in our favor, if of English descent, that some of King John's Knights have transmitted us their blood. If we go still further back, it is clear that by the time we reach the year 1066, the Battle of Hastings and William the Conqueror, say 850 years ago, over 134,000,000 men and women are on our family tree, and as this number is certainly more than twenty times the entire population of England in that age, we are not unlikely, to say the least, if of English de scent, to be more or less intimately related to some Kings and Queens, unless royalty was carefully excluded from our ancestral set. Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. 23 We may, of course, reason conversely, and regarding our- s, as ancestors, estimate the number of our posterity as they will have increased, after the expiration of a few genera tions. If the average number of children who grow up to be parents be two for every household, we are compelled to admit that every man who leaves permanent posterity, has the number of his descendants doubled at each generation, just as we have seen that the number of his ancestors is necessarily doubled, and upon this moderate basis of calcula tion his two children would have multiplied to 256 descend ants at the eighth generation ; 1,024 in the tenth, and 1,- 048,576 in the twentieth. If the average is more than two grown-up child-bearing descendants for each household, then the total number of descendants will, of course, be largely increased. These calculations are hard to realize, but they are true neverthe less, and are demonstrated by the daily experiences of life. Remarkable instances of large families are exceptions to these conclusions and are not needed to prove them, though every student of genealogy is struck, at the commencement of his work, by the fact that large families are encountered upon almost every pedigree constructed. Madame Frescobaldi of Florence, Italy, is recorded as having had 52 children ; David Nelson of Indiana had 47 ; and Rev. Dr. Erskine of Scotland had 33. Fedor Vassileff of Moscow, had 69 children by his first wife at 27 births, and 18 more by his second at 8 births, and in 1782, when the Czar made the mistake of pensioning him instead of erecting a monument to his first wife and pensioning his second, had 83 children living. A more recent instance is that of Lucas Saez, who returned to Spain from the United States in 1883, with 37 children, 79 grandchildren, and 81 great-grandchildren — 107 males and 90 females.1 Reference is made more particularly in stating these con- 1Mulhail's Dictionary of Statistics (1884), p. 187. 24 Some Genealogical Obstacles Considered. elusions, to the figures shown by almost any of the com plete modern genealogies to be found in the Society's library, and which purport to record all the descendants of an emigrant of the Colonial period. The figures they give are fully as startling as any we may obtain by arithmetical calculations, and cannot fail to convince, that through our issue we will, in generations to come, be an ancestor to all mankind, or, as Henry Kendall puts it " Everybody is everybody's child looking to a certain period in the past. Everybody is everybody's parent look ing to a time which is coming. Every man is of all and to all humanity ; of all that once was, and to all that some time shall be. A world went to his making, and lo ! he shall help to make the whole world that is to be." * The infinite number of our ancestors and descendants, is not a real obstacle to genealogy, but is the strongest plea for its study, and especially for the study of American gene alogy, mixed as it is with blood from an hundred climes. It is a plea for simple lives, for those natural conditions of existence which enable men and women to work with greater ease and with less friction. It is a plea for nobler aims and higher aspirations, and a convincing proof of the universal brotherhood of man. It makes that word " brother," though one of the closest and sweetest, yet one of the most comprehensive designations in human language. 1 The Kinship of Men, by Henry Kendall, p. 36. /