B.5. Mary Berry {B.5.}
|
One source records the birth date of Samuel Nesbit as 1754, but this seems highly unlikely, since by 1770 he was the father of at least one child and owned property in Augusta County. With a birth date of 1754, Samuel would have been 12 years old when his oldest child was born in 1766, which is, to say the least, highly unlikely. It seems more logical to assume that Samuel was about the same age as Mary with a birth date in the mid to late 1740s. Based on an estimated birth date of 1745, Samuel would have been 21 years old in 1766 when his first baby was born, which is much more believable. Census and tax data narrow the range only slightly. From the 1810 census both Samuel and Mary fall under the > 45 years old category, which places their birth dates at least prior to 1765. The 1783 Rockbridge County tax listing indicates that Samuel is at least 21, placing his birth date as being sometime prior to 1762. Unfortunately, no source material has yet been uncovered that identifies the parents of Mary’s husband, Samuel Nesbit. The earliest records documenting Samuel’s existence constitute a 1770 Augusta County, Virginia land sale, and another Augusta County entry notes that he had moved to the area sometime after the death of Borden, Jr. The latter is clearly a reference to Benjamin Borden, Jr., the son of Benjamin Borden, Sr., who was the Borden for whom the Borden Grant was named. Benjamin, Sr. passed away in 1743, but Benjamin Jr. lived 10 more years, passing away in 1753. Samuel Nesbit, thus, first arrived in the Augusta County area sometime during or after 1753, and most likely before 1761. Only one other Nesbit, William Nesbit, can be found in Augusta County records, and he first appears in 1761, although he subsequently appears in the 1783 and 1787 Rockbridge County tax listings. William’s relationship to Samuel is unclear, but it is, definitely, not that of a son, although the reverse could be true, William certainly could be Samuel’s father, or even an uncle, cousin or brother. Without a doubt they were very closely related, since they are the only known Nesbits in the area. It seems logical to assume that William was older than Samuel, based mostly on Samuel’s presumed age in 1761, and the most logical conclusion is to interpret William as Samuel’s cousin, father or possibly an older brother.21,92,141,267,277,411,412,413,778 |
While there are no other Nesbits in the Augusta County area, there are a multitude of them in the Scotch-Irish enclave of south central Pennsylvania, all of whom can be traced back to Scotland. One group, in particular, consisted of seven sons of a John Nesbit (~1720 - ?) in Lancaster County, two of whom (Jeremiah and William Nesbit) can be documented as migrating to Bourbon County, Kentucky via the Ohio River by at least the early 1780s. As will be shown in the timeline analysis, Samuel and Mary (Berry) Nesbit moved with their family to Fayette County, Virginia in late 1788, eventually moving to Harrison County, Kentucky. Figure 42 shows the distribution of all Nesbits in Kentucky from 1790 through 1810 (based on their appearance in federal census records), and two particularly striking features are readily evident. First is the small number of Nesbits that lived in Kentucky during this time period. Second, is that these Nesbits lived practically next to each other, in Harrison and Bourbon Counties, which are adjacent to each other. The fact that the only Nesbits in the state lived right next to each other strongly suggests a close family relationship among these people. It, thus, seems very likely that both groups of Nesbits (Samuel & William of Augusta County, Virginia and the Bourbon County Nesbits) were related and were derived from the same Nesbit lineage in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.102,279,280 |
Through tax listings, family history information, deed, will, marriage and various court records, Mary and Samuel Nesbit can be traced from Augusta County, Virginia to Fayette County, Virginia, thence to Harrison County, Kentucky and finally to Washington County, Indiana. Samuel passed away in Harrison County in 1814, and was probably buried on the family farm on Gray’s Run in Harrison County or, possibly in a local cemetery. Mary (Berry) Nesbit remained on the family farm at least until 1820. In 1824, she moved to Washington County, Indiana to live with her daughter Mary (Mrs. Alexander Martin) until her (the elder Mary’s) death in 1828. Mary was interred in the Livonia Cemetery in Livonia, Washington County, Indiana.266,267,488,618,782,788 |
Timeline of Mary Berry and Samuel Nesbit
~ 1749781 |
DAR
Patriot Index (2003) National Society Daughters of the American Revolution,
Millennium Administration. (Baltimore: Gateway Press 2003) Vol. II p. 1956 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
~ 1748778 |
Martin-Wright Bible Record, Samuel Nesbit DAR Documentation File |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Between Aug. and |
Fayette
County, Virginia/Kentucky Tax Books, 1787 – 1804 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Augusta County,
Virginia Deed Book 16, page 336
BEGINNING at a poplar on the side of a Branch in John Berreys line then his line North seventy five Degrees West forty pole to a Black Oak North twenty two Degrees West one hundred and thirty four pole to a white Oak on the Top of a high Hill then North thirty Degrees East sixty poles south seventy five Degrees East one hundred and twenty pole south nineteen Degrees West one hundred and twenty pole to the BEGINNING but before any further Conveyance of the said discribed parcel of land
was made the said Benjamin Bordin the Younger departed this Life having
first made his last Will and Testament in Writing Bearing Dathe the thirtieth
Day of March MDCCLIII and therein among other things did direct and order
his Executors John Lyle and Archibald Alexander together with Magdalen
then his wife Executor and Executrix of said will to sell all the lands
of his late Father then remaining unsold which in his life time he was
ordered and impowered to sell and to make sufficient conveyances in the
law to the Several persons for the same and further did direct and oder
by his said will that his said Executors and Executrix should make good
and sufficient Conveyances in the Law to the several persons who hade purchased
of his late Father or of himself in his life time any of the Lands of his
said late Fatehr as by his said will duly proved and remains among the
records of the Court of Augusta may more fully appear and whereas John
Lyle one of the Executors one of the Executors named in the said will of
the said Benjamin Bordin the Younger has refused to act as such and the
other two therein named to wit Archibald Alexander and Magdalene Bowyer
hath taken upon themselves the Execution thereof NOW THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH
that the said Archibald Alexander and Magdalene Bowyer Executor and Executrix
of the said Benjamin Bordin the Younger deceased hath for and in consideration
of the above -------?----- premises and of the further sum of one shilling
sterling to them in hand paid by the said Samuel Nusbit the Receipt
whereof is hereby acknowledged hath given granted bargained sold enfeeofed
aliened released and confirmed and by these presents and by virtue of the
two Receipted Testaments and for the above considerations doth absolutely
give grant bargain and sell aliene release and confirm unto the said Samuel
Neisbit his Heirs and Assigns forever all the aforesaid parcel of Land
Hereditaments and and appurtenances to the same more or less together with
all Houses Building Orchards Ways Waters Watercourses Profits Commodities
Hereditaments and Appurtenances whatsoever thereunto belonging or in any
wise appertaining and the Reversion and Reversions Remainder and Remainders
Rents ---?-- and profits thereof and also all the Estate right Title Interst
use trust property claim and demand whatsoever of them the said Benjamin
Bordin the Elder or Benjamin Bordin the Younger or either of them or any
time of their lives or at their Deaths either in law or equity of in and
or to the said premises and all records evidenceds or writings touching
or in any wise concerning the same TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said discribed
parcel of Land and all and singular the premises hereby granted and sold
or released or mentioned or intended to be mentioned with their and every
of their appurtenances unto the said Saml Neisbet his Heirs and
assigns forever to the only proper use and behoof of him the said Samuel
Neisbit and of his Heirs and assigns forever and they the said Archibald
Alexander and Magdalene Bowyer for themselves and each of their Heirs Executors
Admin.s and each of them do Covenant promise and Grant to an with the said
Samuel
Neisbit his Heirs and Assigns by these presents that they the said
Archibald Alexander and Magdalene Bowyer hath not nor neither of them hath
done commiteed or suffered any act or Cause or thing whatsoever whereby
the said pareal of Land Hereditaments or Appurtenances or any part or parcel
or Member thereof are or shall or may be impeached charged or incumbered
either in title Charge or Estate or otherwise whatsoever and futher that
the premises now at the time of sealing delivery these presents are free
and clearly acquited and discharged sold and sufficiently saved and kept
harmless and indemnified and from all arrearages of Quitrents and Incumbrances
whatsoever prior to the Date of these presents to the Quitrents hereafer
to grow due and payable to our sovereigh Lord the King his Heirs and Successsors
for and in respect of the premises only accepted and foreprized and lastly
that the said Archibald Alexander and Magdalene Bowyer shall and will at
any time hereafter at and upon the reasonable requst proper costs and charges
in the law of the said Sam.l Neisbit his Heirs and Assigns make
execute and acknowledge or cause to be made executed and acknowledged all
and every such further reasonable act Deed or devices in in the Law whatsoever
for the further berter conveyance and assuring of the same discribed parcel
ofland Hereditaments and appurenances hereby granted and released with
their and every of theri appurenancdes unto the said his Heis and assigns
as by him or them or his or their council learn.d in the law shall be reasonably
advised or required IN WITNESS whereof the said Archibald Alexander and
Magdalene Bowyer hath hereunto set their hands and affixed their seals
the day month and year first above written
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
28 Sept. 1770273 |
Rockbridge County,
Virginia Plat Record Book 1, pages 120
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
10 Oct 1770211 |
Augusta County,
Virginia Will Book 4, page 404
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nov. 1774622 |
The Missouri Whig, Vol. X, Palmyra (MO), Thursday,
February 22, 1849, No. 23 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
~1776276 |
Harrison County, Kentucky, Will Book A, page 244 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1778158 |
Rockbridge County,
Virginia Tithable Lists 1778 - 1779
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Martin-Wright Bible Record, Samuel Nesbit DAR Documentation File |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
~1780276 |
Harrison County, Kentucky, Will Book A, page 244 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nesbitology, Newsletters 6-9, Otis B. Nesbit, Nesbitt/Nisbet Society, United
Kingdom, Publication No. 10, Cambridge, 1995 |
6 May 178121 |
Augusta County, Virginia
Will Book 6, page 173
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1783159 |
Rockbridge County,
Virginia Tax Listing
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 July 1785754 |
Fayette County, Virginia Survey Number 8608,
Virginia Patent #8608, Original Virginia Surveys: Vol. 76, Patent Numbers:
8585-8673 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nesbitology, Newsletters 6-9, Otis B. Nesbit, Nesbitt/Nisbet Society, United
Kingdom, Publication No. 10, Cambridge, 1995 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
~1787487 |
1810 Federal Census Harrison County, Kentucky |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1787102 |
Rockbridge County
Tax Listing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Marriages Licenses
in Augusta County, page 306
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
19 Sept. 1787124 |
Rockbridge County,
Virginia Deed Book A, page 696
WITNESSETH that the said Samuel Nesbit for and in Consideration of the sum of one hundred & sixty pounds in hand paid by the ---?-- John Nelson the Receipt whereof the s.d Samuel Nisbet and Mary his Wife doth hereby acknowledge and of every part and pa---?- thereof doth clearly acquit Exonerate & discharge the s.d John Nelson hath granted bargained and Sold aliened & Confirmed & by these presents doth grant bargain sell alien & Confirm unto John Nealson & his Heirs one certain Tract or parcel of Land containing One hundred acres be the same more or less lying in the County of Rockbridge and bounded as follow. Viz Beginning at a poplar on the side of a Branch in John Robinson Line thence with his line North twenty five Degrees west forty poles to a Black Oak North twenty two Degrees West one hundred and thirty four poles to a White oak on the top of a high hill thence North ---?--- ---?-- East Sixty poles South seventy five Degrees East one hundred and twenty poles South Nineteen Degrees West one hundred and Twenty Poles to the Beginning and now in possession of the said
John Nealson with all houses ways Easements or Appurtenanies and advantages
whatsoever to the said Land and premises belonging or appurtening and also all
the Estate rights Title Interest Claim and Demand of him the said Samuel
Nisbet and Mary his wife of in and to the same. To have and to hold
the said land and premises with the Appurtenances unto the s.d John Nealson his
heirs & Assigns forever. And the said Samuel Nisbet and Mary his
Wife and his Heirs the Land and premises above mentioned with the appurtenances
to the said John Nelson his Heirs and assigns against him the said Samuel
Nesbit and Mary his wife and his heirs and all other persons
whatsoever will warrant and for ever Defend by these presents. In Witnesss
whereof the s.d Samuel Nisbit and mary his Wife hath hereunto set
their hands & Seals the day and year first above Written. S INDENTURE made this 19th Day of September in the Year of our Lord
One thousand seven hundrend & Eight Seven between Samuel Nisbit
and Mary his Wife of the County of Rockbridge and State of Virginia
of the one part & John Nealson of the County and State aforesaid of
the other part - WITNESSETH that the said Samuel Nesbit for and
in Consideration of the sum of one hundred & sixty pounds in hand paid
by the ---?-- John Nelson the Receipt whereof the s.d Samuel Nisbet
and Mary his Wife doth hereby acknowledge and of every part and
pa---?- thereof doth clearly acquit Exonerate & discharge the s.d John
Nelson hath granted bargained and Sold aliened & Confirmed & by
these presents doth grant bargain sell alien & Confirm unto John Nealson
& his Heirs one certain Tract or parcel of Land containing One hundred
acres be the same more or less lying in the County of Rockbridge and bounded
as follow. Viz Beginning at a poplar on the side of a Branch in John Robinson
Line thence with his line North twenty five Degrees west forty poles to
a Black Oak North twenty two Degrees West one hundred and thirty four poles
to a White oak on the top of a high hill thence North ---?--- ---?-- East
Sixty poles South seventy five Degrees East one hundred and twenty poles
South Nineteen Degrees West one hundred and Twenty Poles to the Beginning
and now in possession of the said John Nealson with all houses ways Easements
or Appurtenanies and advantages whatsoever to the said Land and premises
belonging or appurtening and also all the Estate rights Title Interest
Claim and Demand of him the said Samuel Nisbet and Mary his wife of in
and to the same. To have and to hold the said land and premises with the
Appurtenances unto the s.d John Nealson his heirs & Assigns forever.
And the said Samuel Nisbet and Mary his Wife and his Heirs
the Land and premises above mentioned with the appurtenances to the said
John Nelson his Heirs and assigns against him the said Samuel Nesbit
and
Mary
his wife and his heirs and all other persons whatsoever will warrant and
for ever Defend by these presents. In Witnesss whereof the s.d Samuel
Nisbit and Mary his Wife hath hereunto set their hands &
Seals the day and year first above Written.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
13 Dec. 1787475 |
Fayette County, Virginia Tax Records Robert Johnson’s District |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
~1788779 |
Inscription of Lewis/Nesbit Tombstones, Mt. Pleasant Cemetery,Smith Township,
Posey County, Indiana in Samuel Nesbit DAR Documentation File |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Apr. 1788124 |
Rockbridge County,
Virginia Deed Book A, page 697
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1789475 |
Fayette County, Virginia Tax Records Thomas Lewis’ District |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1789 - 179321 |
Books marked "Records
from September 1789 to April 1793" Augusta County District Court, p. 113
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1789 - 179321 |
Books marked "Records
from September 1789 to April 1793" Augusta County District Court, p. 119.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
13 Dec. 1789268 |
Federal Census,
Fayette County, Virginia (Kentucky)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1790475 |
Fayette County, Virginia
Tax Records 10 horses |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
~1791484 |
1850
Federal Census, Harrison County, Kentucky |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1791475 |
Fayette County, Virginia
Tax Records |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1794282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
6 horses 27 cattle |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1795282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
7 horses 20 cattle 264 acres
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1795269 |
The 1795 Census
of Kentucky
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
26 Feb. 1796405 |
Deed Book 1, Harrison
County, Kentucky, page 198
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1796282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1797282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
[unreadable acres] on Grays Run
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
16 Nov. 1798405 |
Deed Book 1, Harrison
County, Kentucky, page 406
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
10 Aug. 1799273 |
Rockbridge County,
Virginia Plat Record Book 1, pages 120 - 123
In the County Court of Rockbridge
before the Justices of said Court in Chancery Sitting, on the (blank) day of
August in this year 1799. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1799282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
200 acres Gray's Run
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nesbitology, Newsletters 6-9, Otis B. Nesbit, Nesbitt/Nisbet Society, United
Kingdom, Publication No. 10, Cambridge, 1995 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1801282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
Gray's Run
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1802282 |
Harrison County, Kentucky
Tax Listing
200 acres Gray's Run
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
21 Jan. 1805283 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Deed Book 2, page 71
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
17 Mar. 1808780 |
Office of
the Historian, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington DC, HR 81: 'A Bill
Concerning Invalid Pensioners |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
06 June 1809282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
1 white male > 21 Samuel 9 horses 180 acres on Gray's Run In Whose Name Entered,/Surveyed/Granted: Sam.l Haws |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
30 June 1810282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
1 white male over 21 Samuel 9 horses In Whose Name Entered,/Surveyed/Granted: Sam.l Haws |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1810487 |
Federal Census Harrison
County, Kentucky
2 males 16 - 26
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
30 August 1811282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
1 male > 21 Samuel 10 horses 180 acres on Gray's Run In Whose Name Entered,/Surveyed/Granted: Sam.l Haws |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1812282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
2 males > 21 Samuel, William (21) 9 horses
180 acres on Gray's Run,
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1813282 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Tax Listing
2 males > 21 Samuel, William (22) 7 horses 180 acres on Gray's
Run
Captain Gray's Company
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7 Mar. 1814276 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky, Will Book A, page 244
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
July 1814276 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky, Will Book A, page 244
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nov. 1814284 |
Harrison County,
Kentucky Will Book A
Mary Nesbit |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1817618 |
Harrison
County, Kentucky Tax Books |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1820488 |
Federal Census, Harrison County, Kentucky
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24 Aug. 1828782 |
Sessional & Other Records, Livonia Presbyterian
Church, Samuel Nesbit, DAR Documentation File |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Martin-Wright Bible Record, Samuel Nesbit DAR
Documentation File |
Analysis of the Timeline
Based on family bible records, Mary Berry’s 1748 birth date is satisfactorily documented. As noted above her birth place is not known with any such certainty, although, based on circumstantial evidence, it appears that she may have been born in the Scotch-Irish enclave thriving in south central Pennsylvania. The birth date of her husband, Samuel Nesbit, has been documented in DAR records as being 1749, and, although these records indicate he was born in Virginia, that seems highly unlikely. Although no definitive evidence can be found one way or another, he was probably connected in some way to the Scotch-Irish community of south central Pennsylvania. Both Mary and Samuel migrated to Augusta County, Virginia when they were young, and grew up in the Shenandoah Valley. Although no marriage records have been located for them, based on the birth date of their first child in 1766, they most likely got married about 1765 in Augusta County, Virginia, since that was where both of them lived. At the time of their marriage, both Mary and Samuel would have been in their late teens, probably requiring parental approval for them to wed.617,761,778,781 |
The oldest verifiable primary source documenting the existence of Mary Berry and Samuel Nesbit comes from the spring of 1770 in Augusta County, Virginia, when Samuel purchased 100 acres of land in the Borden Grant. In the fall of that year, Mary’s father, the elder John Berry, passed away, and both her and her oldest child, and only child at that time, were mentioned in his will. For some reason, the final settlement for John Berry’s will was not completed for another 11 years, and both Mary and Samuel received monetary distributions, totaling to just under £2 from the estate. The Borden property that Samuel purchased in 1770 for £17 can be identified on the Borden Grant Map (Figure 8/Table II, Figure 10), and the land description notes that Samuel’s land was adjacent to that of a John Berry, although it is apparent from the segment of the report dealing with the elder John Berry (section B) that Samuel’s land does not appear to be located correctly on the Borden Grant map (Figures 8 and 43). Based on an analysis of the surveyor’s notes, the adjacent property owners and the topographic expression of the area, the actual location of this property is more likely farther downstream on Moffet Creek as shown in Figures 10 and 13. The purchase date for Samuel Nesbit’s land was March 1770, but the land wasn’t delivered to Samuel until May 1787. This 17 year lag between initial purchase and delivery is somewhat mysterious, but can be explained if it is assumed that Samuel Nesbit financed the purchase with a loan and took a long time to make all the payments. Augusta County records from the period of 1789 through 1793 note that Samuel Nesbit had raised cash for a land purchase by hiring out as a pack horseman on an Indian Expedition, and, since he cannot be definitively tied to the purchase of any other property in the area, this explanation certainly could be referring to his Borden land purchase.124,399 |
|
Shortly after it was formed in 1778, Rockbridge County imposed a tax upon its citizens, and, on Joseph Moore’s List of Tithables, Samuel Nesbit was listed as the only taxable male (i.e. over the age of 21) in his household. Since the incorrect location of Samuel Nesbit’s property on Figure 8 places it in Augusta County after Rockbridge was split off from it, and the revised location places his property in Rockbridge County, the accuracy of the revised property location seems to be validated by the Rockbridge County tax records. About half of the Rockbridge landowners on this tithable list could be identified as original Borden Grant purchasers, and the locations of these properties are shown in Figure 43. It should be noted that, although this is the incorrect location for Samuel Nesbit’s property, it is close enough to the actual location to have no adverse bearing on this analysis. Of the unidentified landowners, many, undoubtedly, purchased property from original Borden landowners, while others could be sons of original purchasers. This map also broadly defines Joseph Moore’s area of tax collection responsibility. No other Augusta County properties owned by Mary and Samuel are known, and since their only known property appears fairly close to the main clusters of known properties on this list, the Borden tract they purchased in 1770 was probably the site of their residence.21,158,159 |
|
Several lines of evidence indicate that Samuel Nesbit participated in and was seriously wounded at the Battle of Cowpens in South Carolina on 17 January 1781 as a member of the Virginia militia. The following analysis reviews the evidence for Samuel’s involvement, the events leading up to the battle and a detailed account of the battle itself. The US Congress didn’t pass any legislation to provide assistance to Revolutionary War veterans until 1818, but many had passed away by that time, including Samuel Nesbit. They did, however, pass a bill in 1808 that would provide financial aid to veterans in serious need, and a Samuel Nesbit was listed as being eligible to receive a pension. |
Virginians served in three military capacities during the Cowpens battle. There were long term regulars, typically referred to as Continentals, shorter term state troops, who typically served between six and 18 month enlistment terms, short term militia units, who served temporarily to meet a crisis. During October of 1780 two militia drafts were organized in Augusta County in order to counter the menacing and expanding British presence in the southern piedmont and coastal plain of South Carolina and Georgia. Capt. James Tate commanded one the resulting companies, while Capt. Patrick Buchanan commanded the other. Capt. James Gilmore also led a militia group from Rockbridge County, the Rockbridge Rifles, consisting of 42 enlisted men recruited from the Lexington, Virginia area, as well as from adjacent Botetourt County. All of these units were drafted to serve a three month enlistment, beginning in October of 1780, but, since the threat was not yet passed by the end of their enlistment term, most of them were extended by a month by the time of the Battle of Cowpens. While some of the Virginia militia units that participated in the Battle of Cowpens were long-standing militia units from Augusta, Fauquier and Rockbridge Counties that had served in many campaigns throughout the war, many members of the Virginia militia did not have any prior service. Militia companies typically consisted of anywhere from 10 to 40 men, which were half the size of regular army companies. Consequently, especially when they served alongside regular army units, it was not uncommon for several militia companies to be merged together. For example, three militia companies from Fauquier County were merged into one company for the Cowpens Campaign.786,787,788,789 |
Samuel Nesbit’s connection to the Cowpens Battle is documented by the DAR Patriot Index and a family oral tradition, as well as from a congressional invalid pension bill. From these sources it can be gleaned that Samuel Nesbit was a member of Capt. Alexander Stewart’s militia company, but, from the available data, it is not known whether he was a member of the local Augusta County militia or the state militia. Capt. Stewart is not mentioned as being one of the company commanders from the October 1780 Augusta County militia draft, but membership rolls for militia units were not commonly preserved and quite difficult to find, so the question cannot be settled adequately at this time. A Nesbit family oral tradition, one of which originated from Samuel Nesbit’s daughter, Margaret, who stated that her father had his chin cut off during the Revolutionary War at the Battle of Cowpens. Another source from the same DAR application, a granddaughter of Samuel Nesbit’s son, Samuel Nesbit, Jr., noted that her great grandfather’s chin had been cut off with a saber, and that he replaced the piece, bound it with a handkerchief, and laid down to sleep on a log that night. In the morning he made his way to the home of a local resident where he remained – too injured to rejoin the retreating army. An 1808 congressional bill to provide monetary assistance to destitute and seriously wounded Revolutionary War veterans lists a Samuel Nesbit as a valid pensionee, and while it is not clear if that this Samuel Nesbit is the same Samuel Nesbit who was wounded at Cowpens, it does seem highly likely that it is, based on the serious nature of the wound. Both militia and Virginia state troops experienced upper body saber wounds during different parts of this battle, so a saber wound does narrow down where Samuel was actually located on the battlefield, but does not provide enough information on the military unit under which he served. With a saber wound to his chin, he clearly suffered an attack by British cavalry, and there, there are only two places on the battlefield where such wounds were common to militia soldiers – in the British breakthrough on the American left flank early in the battle and in the late phases of the battle when British cavalry defended the attack against their artillery. Militia units were involved in the left flank cavalry attack and state militia troops were involved in the later artillery defense.281,780,781,790,791 |
After an initial unsuccessful attempt by the British to take the southern American colonies in 1776, they withdrew, temporarily abandoning the campaign. In February of 1780, however, they returned, capturing Charleston, South Carolina and quickly expanding inland to occupy the backcountry of South Carolina and Georgia, capturing the towns of Camden, Ninety Six and Augusta by the end of June 1780 (Figure 62). In the middle of August, a Patriot army made up of militia and regular continentals was soundly defeated at Camden (partially because the militia turned and ran when confronted), making it appear that the British now had firm control of the south. Patriots who surrendered at Camden were shot/executed by the British/Loyalist army, generating a great deal of bad feelings on the part of the Americans, and probably providing a great motivating force for subsequent atrocities. In a series of battles that followed, the tide of the southern campaign, and the course of the war, itself, was completely reversed. First, Patriot militia soundly defeated the British-run Loyalist militia at the Battle of King's Mountain in early October 1780 (Figure 62). After that, General Nathaniel Greene took command of Patriot forces in the southern colonies. The American forces were not strong enough to directly face the British, nor was there enough food and supplies to concentrate them, so he divided his outnumbered army, sending half with Brigadier General Daniel Morgan, and dispersing them into small units operating throughout the South Carolina back country, quite often terrorizing and plundering Loyalists in the process of supplying themselves in their foraging activities. The militia forces acted as a protective layer between the main British and American forces, while hampering communications and supply lines. Supplies could easily reach the Americans by being floated downstream, but British supplies had to move upriver or along roads, both, of which, were easily subject to guerilla actions. As the Patriot military threat grew, General Cornwallis, the overall British commander, feared an attack against his supply outpost at the town of Ninety Six, so he sent his fast-moving light troops under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton in search of Morgan.786,787,788,789 |
|
To do battle against Tarleton's eleven hundred troops, Morgan had around 1600 experienced Continentals and militia men, including over a thousand militia troops from Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. The battle plan called for the militia, well known for their marksmanship, as well as their tendency to panic and run when directly attacked, to fire several well-aimed volleys into the attacking British force, then fall back through the lines of the regular soldiers behind them to take new positions. This reinforced the line, and combined with the appearance of a panicky route, would give the false appearance to the British forces that they were in the process of trouncing the American militia again, just as they had at Camden. Tarleton's plan was to overwhelm the overstressed militia with a rapid infantry attack, then a cavalry charge, followed by an envelopment of the Americans on both of their flanks by his cavalry. With a deep creek valley to their right and a creek along the left side, however, Morgan's forces were protected on both flanks by ground unsuitable to cavalry actions, the strong suit of the British forces. The real story of this battle is the fact that an American general was able to fuse regular troops and undisciplined back country militia into an effective fighting force that defeated a British army, using classical European tactics with a uniquely American twist (Figure 62).786,787,788,789 |
|
The first line of American defense was a skirmish line of Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina militia, posted about 150 yards in front of the second line. The militia line, in turn, sat 150 yards in front of the line of well seasoned Delaware, Maryland and Virginia Continentals. The battle initiated at early dawn as British cavalry was sent forward to chase off the skirmishers and gather intelligence on the American positions, which were mostly hidden from view beyond the crest of a ridge. Mounted British troopers swept to their right, the American left, taking fire from the skirmishers, who were well covered behind trees. Failing in this attempt, , the aggressive British commander determined that his best course of action was to have his infantry close in, so they formed up, centering on the Green River Road and began advancing with fixed bayonets, confidently pushed uphill against the retreating skirmishers. The skirmishers, primarily southern country boys, provided a continuous, well aimed and heavy fire. They would typically fire their rifle, withdraw to another tree, reload and fire again, with the general movement being back. Their retreat was also directed up a ridge, now referred to as militia ridge, where the second line of defense, the militia line, lay hidden, just beyond the crest. As the skirmishers withdrew, they took their places in this line, thus greatly reinforcing I (Figure 62).786,787,788,789 |
When the British infantry passed over the crest of the ridge, they were surprised by the second line of defense, but grimly pressed on, bayonets facing forward. The militia line held its fire until the quickly advancing infantry approached within 40 yards, then cut loose with several volleys, one after another, with deadly and devastating effect. Responding instinctively to their training, the British infantry charged in the face of fire. Several charges were made, each met with a volley of deadly, close range rifle fire, inflicting heavy losses and stopping the charge. Soon, however, the militia were out of ammunition, and, without a chance to reload and in the face of yet another charge, they withdrew, passing through the last line of defense, the regular army Continentals, as they headed to the rear to reorganize. Despite their heavy losses, the British infantry at this point, after having routed the skirmishers and the militia line, felt that the battle was all but won, and vigorously pressed on in utter confidence, soon encountering the main line of waiting regulars.786,787,788,789 |
In the midst of mass confusion in the American rear, as the militia was reloading and trying to reorganize, British cavalry swept down the American left flank in hot pursuit of the militia. Their flashing sabers quickly hacked down many fleeing militia, causing numerous head and shoulder wounds. American cavalry, up to now held in reserve, were quickly brought into action against the outnumbered British cavalry, and their effort, combined with the now reorganized militia, succeeded in driving off the attackers with heavy losses. The militia soldiers returned to the lines, reinforcing them, others mounted up and participated in the cavalry pursuit, and still others remained behind, becoming long range snipers into a target rich environment.786,787,788,789 |
As this was happening on the American left flank, their right flank became hotly engaged with the advancing British infantry as they encountered the waiting Continentals of the main line. The crack and flash of rifle volleys filled the battlespace with bullets that zipped through the air, ripping into trees and impacting human flesh and bones, quickly followed by the agonized groans and screams of the wounded. Most casualties in this 10 minute firefight were belly and extremity wounds. On the far right flank on the American side were North Carolina militia, who then began retreating around the right side of the Continental firing line. The Continentals were supposed to merely turn to the right to allow the militia to pass. Battlefield orders, however, were misunderstood and the Continental troops instead, began an organized retreat, reloading as they headed back. Observing the retreat, the British assumed that they were routing the enemy on this flank, as well, and, once again sensing victory to be within their grasp, vigorously charged. The battle now became a race to safety, hinging on the Americans reaching the safety of some nearby woods before the British ran them down. As they reached their rallying point in the woods, they were then ordered to abruptly turn and fire at close range upon their pursuers. The deadly close-range volley, immediately followed by a wild bayonet charge, completely stunned the British infantry. Compounding their problems was a simultaneous attack by American cavalry that had circled around the American right flank and began attacking the British left flank from their left and rear. The combined effect of this envelopment with the sudden, completely unexpected and stunningly effective volley and vicious bayonet attack completely overwhelmed the disorganized British troops, causing them to completely collapse in utter panic, either surrendering or retreating. The Continentals surged forward and quickly captured the cannons, but in an effort to save them, the British commander ordered his cavalry to counterattack. The brief engagement that followed resulted in a number of saber wounds to Virginia State militia troopers, but the British were soon driven off.786,787,788,789 |
After the battle ended, the Americans were faced with a delicate and thorny situation. British troops would soon return to continue their pursuit, but, in the meantime, there were numerous casualties that needed attention. The walking wounded moved north with General Morgan, along with the prisoners, while the more seriously wounded were left in the care of local residents. The types of injuries also reveals a great deal about where on the battlefield a participant was, and in what phase they were wounded. Bayonet wounds typically came from the close infantry encounters, whereas saber wounds occurred during the British cavalry breakthrough on the American left flank, as well as in the final phases of the battle. Gunshot wounds typified the infantry encounters along the middle of the line. Morgan soon headed northward, and Cornwallis quickly continued his pursuit, consequently, activities soon became part of the next engagement which took place in the middle of March at Guilford Courthouse in North Carolina (Figure 62).786,787,788,789 |
Back to the Timeline Analysis
The Borden property purchased by Samuel and Mary in spring of 1770 was “delivered” to them in May of 1787, which probably means they finally received clear title to the land at that time. The following September they sold this parcel of land. The next land entry for Samuel Nesbit is a tax listing from Fayette County, Virginia several months later in December of 1787, so, clearly, they sold their land and moved to western Virginia during the fall of 1787. (Figure 21) Presumably, Samuel and Mary traveled along the Great Wagon Road, through the great valley lying between the Allegheny Mountains to the west and the Blue Ridge Mountains just to the east, to Washington County, Virginia. Many other Berry families already resided there, so it is easy to imagine the Nesbits stopping there for a short time. Probably after resting and visiting with relatives, they continued westward along the Wilderness Road through the Cumberland Gap to Fayette County, Virginia into what would eventually be referred to as the Bluegrass Region of Kentucky. (Figure 31 and Figure 44) They appear in Fayette County tax records from 1787 through 1791, then reappear in the newly formed Harrison County in that county’s first tax assessment. The location of Samuel and Mary is quite difficult to pinpoint during this time period because of rapidly changing county boundaries, missing tax records and the fact that Samuel and Mary appear to have made several physical moves. In order to accurately determine their movements, the county boundary changes need to be closely examined and all county tax records need to be evaluated. As of this writing, the county boundaries have been mapped, but not all tax records have been examined, so the following analysis may change somewhat after Woodford and Scott County tax data files are examined.34,124,137,190,282,475 |
Figures 57, 58, 59, 60 and 61 show the development of the Kentucky counties of Virginia east of the Kentucky River from 1780 through 1793, which covers the time period where Samuel was first taxed in Fayette County records and when he finally appeared in Harrison County, Kentucky, where he remained (and was taxed) for the rest of his life. As shown in these maps, the entire area east of the Kentucky River that eventually became part of the state of Kentucky in 1792 comprised Fayette County, Virginia in 1780. That county was reduced in extent by 1786 with the formation of Bourbon County, which is where many of the Pennsylvania Nesbits settled. Not long after Mary and Samuel moved to Fayette County in late 1787, Fayette’s areal extent was reduced further with the formation of Woodford County in 1788, and since Samuel and Mary can be traced through Fayette County tax records until 1791, it stands to reason that they must have been living in the portion of Fayette County that had not been split off to form Woodford County. Their abrupt disappearance from Fayette County tax records after 1791 strongly suggests that the family changed the location of their household. Since they next appear in tax records in Harrison County, which is in the general vicinity, they probably did not move far away, and it seems quite likely that they moved either to Bourbon, Woodford or Scott County.784,785 |
Bourbon County was formed from Fayette County in 1786, and Bourbon County tax records extend back to that date. Samuel and Mary cannot be found in Bourbon County tax records, so, clearly, they did not ever live there. In 1788 Woodford County was formed from Fayette County, and Woodford tax records extend back to that date, At this time, however, these tax records have not yet been reviewed. In 1792 Scott County was formed from Woodford County, but there are no tax records until 1794, either because they were lost or because the county legal apparatus was not fully prepared for conducting business. If the latter is the case, then it would seem likely that anyone living in the area of Woodford County that was split off to form Scott County, would have been taxed in Woodford until the Scott offices were ready. Quite obviously, the next direction of Nesbit research in this area must be directed toward examining the tax records of Woodford and Scott Counties. |
As noted above, in 1794, Samuel and Mary were taxed in the newly formed Harrison County, which was formed from parts of Bourbon and Scott Counties in late 1793, however, they were not yet landowners, so may have been “squatting” on open land, or on land they intended to buy. By the following year, 1795, they were taxed on property they owned along Grays Run. Since a deed record from early 1796 documents their purchase of Grays Run land from Samuel Haws, it appears very likely that they were already living on that land by late 1795, and possibly as early as 1794. If they moved to the Grays Run land after Scott County was formed in 1792, but before Scott County collected taxes in 1794, then one would expect them to be taxed in the parent county that was split to form Scott County, which would be Bourbon County. As noted above, however, they are not found in Bourbon County tax records, which seems to nullify this theory. This means that, when they left Fayette County in late 1791, they must have moved to a part of Woodford County that was not used to form Scott County, then moved again in late 1793, to the newly forming Harrison County. On the other hand, if the Scott County tax records from 1792 through 1794 were actually recorded but subsequently lost, they could have moved to the Grays Run location when they left Fayette County and “squatted” there until they actually bought the land after it had become part of Harrison County. |
|
|
|
|
Samuel Nesbit wrote his will in the spring of 1814 in Harrison County, Kentucky, and by July it was proved in court, which means he must have passed away sometime between 7 March 1814 and July 1814. He probably died on his farm, and in all likelihood, was buried there, as well. In his will he identified his wife Mary, five sons and, while he did not identify any of his daughters by name, he noted that he had three daughters that were married, and three that were still single. He mentioned that his wife, Mary, should remain on the farm in her widowhood, and that Robert and James had already received their share of the inheritance. Samuel was to receive 20 acres of land adjacent to Robert’s land, and William was to inherit the land on which the family farm was situated. He further noted that William, Samuel and each of the daughters living at home would get a horse and mare, and that his three married daughters would receive $10 each. He also noted that his three unmarried daughters could live at home until they got married.276 |
After his death, Samuel’s personal estate was appraised, as directed by the court. The appraisal information in the timeline has double dollar value entries, the meaning, of which, is unclear, so only the first value was used in the analysis below. Using the descriptions and dollar figures from the estate appraisal, Samuel Nesbit’s personal estate calculates to a value of $1680.95, and, when adjusted for inflation, this correlates to $14,061.90 in 1999 dollars.285 It should be noted that there is no real estate or crops in the ground included in this appraisal, presumably, because the land had already been divvied up among his children (as noted in the will) and the crops harvested and sold. The Harrison County tax listing for 1814 shows Samuel’s son, William, apparently owning the land that Samuel had owned up to 1813. The actual property items from the appraisal were grouped, as shown below in Table VI into three categories with a fourth category for loans due to Samuel. The bulk of his estate consisted of outstanding loans with the next most valuable item being livestock. Other than the large amount of livestock noted in Samuel Nesbit’s estate, there are several other interesting items. There’s a fairly large number of blankets, quilts, rugs and coverlets listed (a total of 32), indicating that there was a lot of sewing going on, and with a family comprising six daughters, this should not appear too surprising. There is also a loom and the associated equipment, so cloth was clearly being manufactured at home. The 20 sheep itemized in the estate probably indicates the type of cloth and cloth products being made. There is also 21 pounds of pewter, which may suggest that Samuel did some metalworking when he wasn’t busy raising all the livestock.284,285 |
Table VI
Summary of the Appraisal of Samuel Nesbit's Personal Estate
Item |
Total |
Percentage |
Livestock |
$457 |
27% |
Furniture |
$199 |
12% |
Household Items |
$290.45 |
17% |
Loans |
$734.50 |
44% |
Total |
$1680.95 |
|
|
These electronic pages may NOT be reproduced in any format for profit or presentation by any other organization or persons. Persons or organizations desiring to use this material must obtain the written consent of the contributors, or the legal representative of the submitters |
Last Revised: 10/14/2006