Given that I’ve paid my findmypast subscription (and that money’s not coming back any time soon), I thought it might be interesting to look at the records it holds for Thomas Beale Jr‘s mother Chloe Delancy / Delancey. We know a fair bit about Thomas Beale Sr, so why not find out more about his mother?
Chloe Delancy / Delancey
As far as I can see, “Cloe Delancy” only appears in Botetourt County in the 1810 and 1820 US census records. This would seem to imply that she married, moved, or died before the 1830 census – given that there are plenty of holes in the census records, it’s sensible to be at least a bit defensive.
In the 1810 census records, she is apparently living alone (“Number of free white females age 26-44” = 1) – every other column is blank. (Hence it would seem that Thomas Beale Jr may not have been living with her then.) Other than being in Botetourt County VA, no location is given.
In the 1820 census records, there is one “free white female age 45 and up” (presumably her), one “free white female age 10-16”, and one “free white female under age 10”. The location is noted in the margin as “Fin.”, which is without any doubt Fincastle.
There’s no obvious sign of her in the 1830 Census, yet that was the year that the case Delancey vs Beale was in the Supreme Court in Louisiana, so she was presumably still alive then (unless you know better?).
(Note that there is an online genealogy mentioning a Chloe Emaline Delancy b. 1834 Rockingham NC to William D. Delancey (1785-1860) and Catherine [nee Roach] (1799-1860): but this person seems entirely unconnected.)
Virginia Cloes / Chloes?
The 1830 Census has a Chloe Switcher living in Botentourt County, but she is a F 30-40 living with a M 15-20. Similarly, the 1840 Census has a Cloe Switzer, but she is a F 40-50 living with a M 20-30: I think it’s a pretty safe bet that the two entries refer to the same person, and that this probably isn’t Chloe Delancy.
Broadening the search a little, there are eight women called Cloe in Virginia listed in the 1830 Census: Cooper, Masters, Myho, Powelson, Simmons, Whichard, and Withers (though note that these are all the head of their household).
- Cloe Cooper: 1 x F under 5, 1 x F 20-30, 1 x F 50-60
- Cloe Masters: 1 x M under 5, 1 x M 5-10, 2 x M 15-20, 1 x M 20-30, 1 x F 2-30, 3 x F 30-40, 1 x F 60-70
- Cloe Myho (actually Mayho): no details of household supplied
- Cloe Powelson: 1 x M 10-15, 1 x M 15-20, 1 x M 20-30, 1 x F 10-15, 1 x F 15-20, 1 x F 40-50 [also in 1840 and 1850 censuses]
- Cloe Simmons: 1 x F 5-10, 1 x F 50-60
- Cloe Whichard: 1 x M 30-40, 1 x F 20-30, 1x F 50-60
- Cloe Withers: 1 x M 30-40, 1 x F 15-20, 1 x F 70-80
Similarly, there are sixteen women called Chloe in Virginia listed in the 1830 Census: Atkins, Buske, Cheshire, Coleman, Ellison, Gaskins, Goodrich, James, Lunsford, Mifflin, Mills, Pitman, Powell, Sitcher, Thomas, and Vanlandingham.
- Chloe Atkins: 1 x M 20-30, 1 x F 15-20, 2 x F 50-60 [also in the 1840 census]
- Chloe Buske: 1 x M 20-30, 3 x F 20-30, 1 x F 50-60
- Chloe Cheshire: 1 x M under 5, 1 x M 15-20, 1 x F under 5, 1 x F 10-15, 1 x F 20-30, 1 x F 50-60 [also in the 1810 census]
- Chloe Coleman: 1 x M under 5, 1 x M 20-30, 2 x F 5-10, 2 x F 30-40, 1 x F 60-70
- Chloe Ellison: 1 x F 50-60 [also in the 1810, 1820 and 1840 censuses]
- Chloe Gaskins: 1 x M under 5, 1 x M 5-10, 1 x M 10-15, 1 x F 30-40 [also in the 1850 census]
- Chloe Goodrich: 1 x F 60-70
- Chloe James: 1 x F 20-30, 1 x F 70-80
- Chloe Lunsford: 2 x F 15-20, 1 x F 50-60
- Chloe Mifflin: no details given
- Chloe Mills: 1 x M 10-15, 1 x M 15-20, 1 x M 20-30, 2 x F 5-10, 1 x F 15-20, 1 x F 20-30
- Chloe Pitman: 1 x F 50-60 [also in the 1840 census]
- Chloe Powell: 1 x M 5-10, 1 x F 5-10, 1 x F 30-40
- Chloe Sitcher/Switcher/Switzer: 1 x M 15-20, 1 x F 30-40
- Chloe Thomas: 1 x F 20-30, 1 x F 60-70 [also in the 1820 census]
- Chloe Vanlandingham: 1 x M 10-15, 1 x F under 5, 1 x F 10-15, 1 x F 15-20, 1 x F 40-50
Note that Cloe Cooper is also in the 1840 Census, but listed as F 80-90.
Any Other Mentions?
There is one possible mention I found, which is in the Annals of Southwest Virginia 1769-1800 (Lewis Preston Summers, 1929), p.465. There, the entry for 10th February 1796 in the minutes of the County Court mentions that the grand jury presented “Isaac Dawson and Chloe Delaney for living in an unlawful way”.
Thoughts on the US Census
I have to say I was expecting to find a little more than I did. It may be that we now have a weak indication that Chloe Delancey had two younger daughters we were (or, at the very least, I was) previously unaware of: but the limitations of the census data mean that we have (I think) no obvious paths to go down to find their names.
Has anyone got any better information on Chloe Delancey and/or her possible two daughters than this?
Looking back over Beale, I’m increasingly thinking the person behind it is Ward (or perhaps less likely Moriss).
I did briefly consider (given Senior’s position yet lack of will coupled with the simulated sale (which for me shows a propensity for scams) that it could have been some sort of an elaborate way to avoid inheritance tax (or equivalent) – that was possibly marred by Junior’s death, but re-reading the pamphlet I think there’s too many problems that would have occured if Beale had returned – not least of which that he would have had to identify 30 other people who were suddenly flashed with cash as much as he was (I’m not suggesting he would have set up a whole bunch of treasure to avoid income tax, but rather that it would be an explanation for why he is suddenly rolling in $$). As I say, there’s too many things you’d have to explain away for that to be terribly plausible.
I also have a bit of n issue with Beale the publican being Beale the adventurer (although perhaps it explains why he would so readily trust another publican). And I also don’t really like some of the timings….
If Morris was born in 1778…
– Beale gave him the box when he was 44
– He opened it when he was 67
– He shared it with Ward when he was 84
– Ward releases it another 20 years later (after 60 years, any other confidant of Moriss should conveniently be uncontactable – so they need never have existed – to me this really points to Ward was making up a ‘plausible’ story for which it was important that any witnesses had conveniently been consumed by the passage of time).
But…
I wonder whether there’s some numerical analysis (similar to forensic accounting) that could be applied to the pamphlet (not the DoI itself (and the numberings) nor the ciphers) but the other numbers (and potentially dates) if there’s enough of them. Actually, I wonder whether a similar trick on the ciphers would be meangingful too…
I’m not sure forensic accounting itself (which deals with large volumes of numbers), but some sort of numerical techniques that would point us toward the legitimacy (?) of the pamphlet itself….
Anywho (as I said at the start), I’m increaingly convinced Ward is the most likely source, and that TJB may never have existed (so any Thomas Beales we find are fairly irrelevant).
2c
milongal: personally, I don’t think any Beale had anything to do with this. But I’d paid for the findmypast subscription, and I found two possible daughters, so it was worth a look, right? 🙂