CHAPTER 8 JAMES AND JOHN FINNEY: SETTLING WOODFORD

January 1786 Good news made its way to Kentucky from the more populated, and civilized, east. The Kentucky citizens were informed that the process of separation from Virginia and becoming a state of its own was being realized. If the proper terms and conditions that the mother state of Virginia ordered were met, statehood would occur near the end of 1787. The reason this was such good news: statehood meant that Kentucky may soon be able to organize aid to their people much more quickly, rather than submit to Virginia so far away.

January 1786 The news at the beginning of this year was not all good. The latest word being spread around the countryside was that the Indians were planning a war in the spring. The Finney families had to be cautious with every step they took. When the fields needed work, they had their guns and were constantly alert. They worked together and possibly with others not only just to help each other but for protection as well. The children could not go out to play without protection. Water could not even be obtained without fear of an attack. When Indians were reportedly in their area, the families would load up and go to Blackburn’s Station for protection. With about 400 to 500 suffering violent deaths on the frontier each year, the Finneys had to be constantly alert.

Blackburn’s Station, like other stations and forts, was probably surrounded by a tall fence and was defended by at least one blockhouse

March 1786 George Rogers Clark was urged by Kentucky citizens to present the western colonist’s dire situation to the government and propose a petition to Congress for relief. The executive representatives of Virginia, getting no response from Congress and wanting to aid Kentucky, instructed two expeditions to be carried on against the Indians. At the same time, the Wabash Indian nation had declared war against the Kentucky people and they were preparing for a season of ferocious raiding and desecration. Congress had already signed treaties with the Indians to the north and given all lands north of the Ohio River and west of the Miami River to them. Additionally, the United States government had promised these Indians protection within these areas. It seemed to the Finneys and all of Kentucky that Congress was more concerned about the rights of the Indians and would not and could not properly defend American lands from the almost constant destruction at the hands of the Indians.

1 March 1786 James and John Finney visited a land office in Kentucky.[i] Land was granted to individuals by the state of Virginia after a treasury warrant was bought, an entry made on a specific tract of land, and a survey was negotiated. James Finney had obtained ownership of 800 acres on the Main Licking Creek in 1783. About four months earlier in October 1785, James Finney had arranged a survey for the land but the survey was made in the original owners’ names.[ii] To have the grant issued to James Finney by Virginia, the Finneys traveled to the land office and on 1 March 1786, James Finney held the treasury warrants and surveys and added to them a statement of reassignment that was attested by John Finney with his signature.

11 April 1786 The busy tasks involved with settling his family into their new home kept James Finnie from arranging a survey for his 5,740-acre warrant on the waters of the Main Licking River, entered in December 1783. While in Maysville, James and John Finney must have journeyed just a few miles south to Lewis Station for a meeting with George Lewis, another Deputy Surveyor of Fayette County. At Lewis Station, George Lewis agreed to survey Finney’s land on Triplett’s Creek about 30 miles to the south. A month later on 11 April 1786, Lewis surveyed the Finney land.

9 June 1786 The Finney’s had many friends here in Kentucky, including those acquaintances from service in the War, westward ventures at various times over the years, and neighbors from Culpeper County and surrounding regions. On this day John appeared at court in Fayette County with Cyrus McCracken. They came and undertook bail for a neighbor of the Finneys, Bartlett Searcy, who was a defendant in a trial with George Shortridge. McCracken and Searcy were neighbors of the Finneys who lived on Glen’s Creek about ten miles to the southwest.

The location of several neighbors in relation to the Finney land, local waterways, and popular pathways

August 1786 George Rogers Clark began to organize one of the expeditions as had been instructed by Virginia; a march against the Wabash nation tribes north and west of the Ohio River. An army of about 1,500 Kentucky men, mostly inexperienced, undisciplined and opinionated, met at Louisville on 13 September 1786. James and John Finney may have been a part of this army but there exists no list of soldiers. Indian threats had a great impact on their family and farm and they were already seasoned veterans of Indian fighting. At Louisville, many of the troops argued about the route taken, the amount of food to be had, and the way the expedition should carried out. Even the officers were in disagreement. On September 20, the troops departed Louisville, one detachment left in boats and the rest marched through the wilderness with Clark. The troops marched long, fast and on short rations, and by the fifth day, many were hungry, tired and wanted to go home. On the sixth day, nearly the entire army deserted for home, even as Clark ran among them, shouting and swearing at them for their disservice.

With the remaining men, he marched on to Vincennes. Again, James and John Finney may have been part of the troops that stayed with Clark. They were not part of the inexperienced and undisciplined, but they probably had their own ideas about how the expedition should be carried out. The French citizens at Vincennes welcomed what was left of the tired and hungry army, about 150 Americans. Clark, after finding that the villagers had no food to offer because their crops had been burnt by the Indians, confiscated corn and beef from three Spanish merchants then distributed it to his troops and the villagers. He sent messages to the Wabash Indian chiefs, warning that if they did not meet for a treaty, they would have war. After four weeks of treating with the chiefs, which represented most of the Wabash Nation, the army returned to Louisville, convinced that the Indians would keep their promise to cease the raids through the winter. Virginia was not happy with the way Clark handled the excursion and called him back east for reprimand. Secretary War Knox thought that these Indian problems, which to him and the rest of Congress were simply the cause of pesky Kentucky frontiersmen, challenged the authority of the United States and would prevent their nation’s advantages in the western territory. Congress thought that if the Kentucky citizens would stop harassing the Indians, the depredations by the Indians would stop. Politicians sitting on the peaceful east coast obviously had not experienced their families and neighbors being terrorized and threatened constantly with no help from their country’s leaders!

November 1786 Word spread through Fayette County that Captain William Steele had called for a muster of his Kentucky militia company. They met on 20 November, probably at the home of William Steele near Steele’s Ferry, located to the southwest of the Finneys on the Kentucky River just north of Clifton, or some place in between. This company was called Captain Steele’s Militia Unit of Central Kentucky and consisted of about 55 men, including James and John Finney. Captain Steele’s officers were Lieutenant Laban Shipp, lieutenant George Blackburn, ensign Benjamin Hayden, sergeant Joseph Duprey, and sergeant Leonard Young. The men of this company met and reviewed news of Indian occurrences and prepared and trained for Indian attacks. They also talked of separating this company as new families were arriving constantly and there would be enough new militia members to form one or more new companies in this area of Fayette County.

The Finneys would have traveled south to Versailles and then west to avoid crossing

Who was William Steele?

There is actually not much known of William Steele’s history before Kentucky. He was deeply involved with both the state and county government during the early days of Kentucky settlement. In addition to being a member of both Kentucky Constitutional Conventions in 1792 and 1799, he was constantly active during county court as judge, clerk, and many other duties. He was active in the militia and built his home on the Kentucky River where he operated a Ferry for some time. Many men along the eastern Kentucky River bank depended on salt Steele sold from his salt making business.

Fall 1786 Though treaties had been made with one Indian nation, the problem was that most of the Indians were not parts of the same tribe or nation. Treaties did not totally prevent Indian attacks; they just made them a little less frequent. Indian acts of violence continued nearly unabated through the end of 1786. In October, a company consisting of a number of families was traveling on the Wilderness Trail when they were attacked by a party of Indians. They were totally routed with 21 killed and the rest taken prisoners. In December in Lincoln County, Christopher Irvine, the assistant county surveyor James Finney had surveyed with two years before, was killed by an Indian raid. Again, these actions only represented a small portion of the actual Indian attacks.

Indian attacks and murders were common on the Wilderness Trail

Late 1786 James and John Finney received some good news in October or November 1786. Their grants for the land on Tate’s Creek in Lincoln County had been issued on October 2 and they would have received them soon afterwards. If the Finneys had made the trip to Vincennes with Clark, they would have arrived home to find their grants waiting for them. Receiving the grant was an exciting occasion. Since surveys were sometimes inaccurate and several people might claim the same land, a potential land owner was never sure until the grant arrived. When the Finneys received their grants, they knew the land was theirs. James Finney received a grant for his 805 acres on Tate’s Creek and John received two grants on Tate’s Creek, one for 500 acres and the other for 100 acres. These were the first grants they received for Kentucky lands.[iii]

January 1787 The persistent violence caused by the Indians forced Kentucky to delay meeting the terms and conditions set by Virginia in order for them to become a state. The Kentucky convention that was to be held the August before finally began. Many of the Kentucky delegates had been away on expeditions against the Indians. The Virginia government at this time alerted them of an act to again delay the separation. During this convention, they scheduled a yet another convention for September. This caused extreme disappointment to all Kentucky people. The results of the convention were again publically posted across the region. Kentucky people were convinced that the existence of their home was dependent upon separation.

To make matters again worse, all of Kentucky, including Fayette County was in a gloomy state. Indian attacks were constantly being reported and there was an endless need for arms and ammunition. To the south of the Kentucky River in Lincoln County, Indians killed John Luttrell at his house on Fishing Creek. Colonel Benjamin Logan, an early resident and famed Kentucky militiaman, followed the Indians trail south and defeated the party, killing several of the Indian hunters. Stolen furs and horses were found in possession of these attacking Indians, now identified as Cherokee. The Cherokee were the same Indian tribe that had made a peace treaty with Congress less than two years before.

10 March 1787 In the midst of the danger seemingly lurking around every corner, James and Elizabeth Finney welcomed their fourth child to the world. The second child born in Kentucky, their new daughter joined her older siblings Nancy, Elijah, and John, all of which were under eight years of age. The name selected for this child, Elizabeth Finney, was apparently adopted in honor her mother Elizabeth Gibbs Finney.[iv]

James Finney home

Spring 1787 Kentucky was described as “infested with Indians and the whole country seemed to be overrun.” Great depredations were committed in almost every quarter. Congress had raised over 2,000 troops in the past half a year that were meant to protect Kentucky, but they were disbanded at this time, lowering even more the hopes of the Kentucky people. James and John Finney had their doubts whether or not they had made a good decision about the move west. But, they had hardly ever known any other way to live. Indians had been a constant threat to their family since before they were born.

April 1787 Colonel Robert Todd led an excursion to the Scioto River, north of the Ohio River. This was done in retaliation to killings by Indians on Paint Creek and in Bourbon County. In one Bourbon County incident, a house was attacked by Indians, three young girls and their brother were tomahawked, and their mother shot. Colonel Todd’s excursion was comprised of volunteers from Bourbon and Fayette Counties. James and John Finney may have been volunteers marching with this excursion. Once north of the Ohio River, only three Indians were killed and seven taken prisoner before returning to Kentucky.

Who was Robert Todd?

Robert Todd was born in 1754 in Pennsylvania and came to Kentucky in 1776. He was involved in many battles in the western lands and was an officer in all of George Rogers Clark’s campaigns. He was a surveyor in Fayette County and settled in Lexington with his brother Levi. Together, the Todds were involved in the early government of Kentucky.

29 May 1787 The state of Virginia issued two land grants to James Finney in late May 1787 (Appendix 47). He would receive these grants later in the year.[v] The land was located on the Ohio River in Greenbrier County, Virginia. One grant consisted of 2000 acres and the other 4350 acres.[vi] There was only a small part of Greenbrier that actually bordered the Ohio River and the land bordered John West. It is unknown what became of this land.[vii]

It is likely that the Finney families were spending much of their time with other families at Blackburn’s Fort now for protection. James and John were extremely over worked and busy. They were on constant call to avenge all Indian attacks and to participate in planned expeditions whenever Indians were spotted, on top of working their land and keeping their families fed. They, and most other Kentucky people, were feeling that they were going to have to bypass the government as they could not exert their strengths, as a state should. Virginia was just not providing the protection they so desperately needed. In order to save themselves, Kentucky people were tending more toward action for themselves and erecting an independent government. They could not rely on Virginia or Congress for quick and swift aid in crisis situations.

10 July 1787 The Fayette County militia officers met on this day. In the past year, many new immigrants had come to Fayette County. Most wanted their land and families protected and joined the militia, which led to an increased number of militia companies. Several new captains were made from militia subordinates and privates that were already there. New commissions for command were issued to soldiers who had performed most bravely against the Indians and also to those who had the most experience in battling the savages. John Finney was made a captain to lead a company of his neighbors in the Fayette County militia for his bravery and experience. After this meeting, the Fayette militia reported to Congress that they would be more than willing to assist in offensive movements if they agreed. Though they had reported this to Congress, all of the Kentucky officers had met the month before and decided to stop all offensive operations against the Indians to aid in the swiftness in becoming a state. They began to try to conceive some measures of defense against their Indian foes.

Defense was on the minds of Congress as well. Finally, they resolved to raise troops to send to Kentucky to protect the frontier inhabitants, as they called the Kentucky people, from Indian intrusion onto federal lands on the northern border. Secretary of War Knox reported to Congress that “…the whole western territory is liable to be wrested out of the hands of the Union by savages…” Kentucky people thought that a defensive stance was an insult. There was no way that one regiment could protect 700 miles of frontier infested with Indians along the whole length. To make matters worse, the border was far from the populated settlements rendering those locales too far away to offer any immediate help. The Indians would strike in small numbers, then retreat quickly, leaving no time for a request for assistance and for troops to march to that area.

August 1787 To speed up the transmission of information to the people of Kentucky, a newspaper had been needed and called for by Kentucky people and county officers for many years. Word had normally been spread by word of mouth and by letters, made into posters hung on trees and poles in public places, written to the people of Kentucky as a whole. John Bradford was put in charge of acquiring a printing press and formed the “Kentucke Gazette” in which the Kentucky people could more easily be alerted to statehood conventions, Indian problems, and other areas of interest. The first “Kentucke Gazette” appeared to the people of Kentucky in August 1787 and would be issued thereafter weekly. Mr. Bradford was a neighbor of the Finneys. He was in Steele’s militia company with them the past few years and early settler in the district. The Finneys, as educated men, became avid readers of the ‘Kentucke Gazette” and, like all those who depended upon information, looked forward to it every week. Now they would not have to read the modicum of posted letters but could read recent information in the Gazette every week.

The Kentucke Gazette delivered news to citizens who spent vast time cut off from civilization

Some of the first news that appeared in the “Kentucke Gazette” alerted the Kentucky people that Virginia still prohibited any excursions into Indian territory. Kentucky people also read that the militias were ordered to be in a constant state of readiness to join with the predominantly defensive-minded army sent from Congress guarding the north borders. Surely, James and John Finney, along with the rest of Kentucky, laughed at the idea. There would be no time to join a force of Kentucky militia with the troops sent by Congress. Another convention was held in September and proposed December 1788 as the new separation date from Virginia.

1787 John Finney had lost his first wife at some time during the first part of this year or maybe even the year before. No information exists to tell us specifically who she was or how she died.[viii] Common causes of death may have been childbirth or just sickness. Due to the number of inhabitants, including women, killed by Indians, a tragic death cannot be ruled out. John had at least two small daughters from his first wife that were in great need of a mother; Mary B. T. Finney, about two years of age, and an infant Nancy T. Finney.[ix] Though John Finney’s first wife was unknown, one clue may help to lead to her identification; his children’s middle initials.

While not uncommon, assigning middle names to children was a relatively new phenomenon, and this was doubly true for families living in western Virginia. The Finneys had never used middle names, including John’s brother James Finney. So John Finney could have assumed this naming approach from his first wife’s family. Even more unusual was the assignment of two middle names, as in the case of Mary B. T. Finney.[x] During research, close attention was given to those families John Finney was known to have associated with, while at the same time considering the initials “B. T.” and just “T.” The Taylor family was in Botetourt County during the 1770s, the same time John Finney is presumed to have lived in that same location. The Taylor clan, specifically the Jonathan Gibson Taylor family, regularly used middle names, nearly always representing family surnames. And the most popular of these surnames; surnames that are most predominant in that family, are Taylor, Gibson, and Berry. For example, a son of Jonathan Gibson Taylor named his first child Ann Berry Gibson Taylor. And so, if John Finney had married a Taylor, Gibson, or Berry girl, Mary B. T. Finney becomes Mary Berry Taylor Finney and Nancy T. is Nancy Taylor Finney. Therefore, a daughter of Jonathan Gibson Taylor, another Taylor, or a Berry or Gibson seems the most potential candidate for John Finney’s first wife.[xi]

On 18 September 1787 John Finney, at approximately 37 years of age, married Rachel Taylor in Botetourt County, Virginia.[xii] Rachel, herself only about 17 years old, was the daughter of Jonathan Gibson Taylor and his wife Nancy Ann Berry. The bondsman for Rachel was her 19-year-old brother William Berry Taylor and consent for her hand was given by her father Jonathan Taylor. They were married by Edward Crawford, a Presbyterian minister who had come to the Spreading Springs Church and Fincastle Church on the upper branches of the Buffalo Creek, Mill Creek, and Catawba River in 1778 as a recent Princeton graduate. Rachel Taylor would have likely been the sister (certainly younger) of John Finney’s first wife, either Mary Berry Taylor or a Nancy Taylor. She was also the niece of Prudence Berry-Blackburn, who was herself the wife of George Blackburn, a close acquaintance of John Finney. John brought his new wife to Kentucky to be the mother of his two small daughters and to maintain the household duties in the Finney home. Though she came from western Virginia counties, she became quickly aware of the new dangers that awaited her in the far west.

Who was Jonathan Taylor?

Taylor was born in Orange County, Virginia in 1742, the son of George Taylor and Rachel Gibson. He grew up a few miles east of the town of Orange and married Ann “Nancy” Berry in 1766, likely in the same place. He was a Lieutenant in the Revolutionary War, one of seven Taylor brothers, mostly officers, who fought in the Revolution. Jonathan and Ann raised a large family and settled in Clark County, Kentucky before 1793. Jonathan Taylor died in Clark County in 1809.

1787 At some time during the year Fayette County issued its first taxation* upon their inhabitants. James Finney paid personal property tax and listed his tithables as one white male over 21, no white males 16 to 21, one black over 16, and two under 16. He also listed himself as the owner of nine horses and 16 head of cattle. John Finney paid personal property tax and listed his tithables as one white male over 21, no white males 16 to 21, two blacks over 16, and two under 16. John also listed himself the owner of five horses and ten head of cattle.[xiii]

PICTURE OF THE BROYLES LAND

Late 1787 James Finney received two more land grants from Virginia. These two grants were for 800 total acres of land on the Main Licking River (more accurately Three Mile Creek in what would later be Fleming County) which he had bought the previous year on May 1 from the Broyles brothers. The grants were issued to James Finney by state of Virginia in September 1787 but, as was normal, they took time to travel all the way to Kentucky. James may have never even seen this land, but owning more land increased his level of social standing. Every grant he received he became a more important man and held a greater inheritance to leave his children. Another use for this land may have been as a hunting area. Laws in Kentucky were getting stricter against hunting, especially in the inner Bluegrass Region. To take away the possibility of being caught trespassing, the Finneys certainly went to the Licking, a less populated region, to hunt peacefully. James was expecting his grant for 5,740 acres on Triplett’s Creek, a branch of Licking (also in what would become Fleming County, Kentucky). These grants were not what was considered the most valuable land. According to the rating system of the day, made official in 1793, it was third-rate land, out of a rating from one to three (first being rich soiled land and third being not well fit for planting). These grants helped the owner feel safe but the truth was that survey lines had been and would continue to be a major problem dealt with by Supreme Court trials over the next 15 years. Daniel Boone would leave his beloved Kentucky in late 1790s because of constant haggling through court cases about land he owned and surveyed.

22 November 1787 James Finney and John Burton held the survey chains for Fayette County Deputy Surveyor John Williams as he surveyed 162 acres for Humphrey Marshall. James neighbor, bordering the Finney land to the north, Richard Cole was the survey marker with the group. The men were surveying on Lee’s Branch of the South Elkhorn Creek, just east of Cole’s Branch. This land would be assigned by Marshall to Elijah Craig shortly after.

Winter 1787 Indian attacks in Kentucky continued, often occurring very close to the Finneys home in Fayette County. In December, three Indians stole horses near Great Crossings, about 10 miles from the Finneys. A party of men under Jacob Stucker immediately pursued the Indians. They overtook the Indians at their camp on the following night, fired on them, killed two and wounded the third who then made an escape. All the horses were recovered. The next month in January, Indians stole 25 horses again from Big Crossings, a town north across the South Elkhorn River. The horses this time belonged to Colonel Robert Johnson and the Indians made a full successful escape.

Three Indians watching the Finney farm

Hunting continued to be an integral part of life in the Finney neighborhood. Though firing guns was dangerous and alerted nearby Indians to their location, the necessity for food persisted. As buffalo herds dwindled, hunters had to ride miles after dark to find them. This was hard and dangerous work. Approaching the dead beast, they split it lengthwise and cracked the spine to drape it over and then balance on horseback for the ride home. Back at their home or the fort, the men stripped the meat, sheared the wool, boiled the cores out of the horns and tanned the hides to shoe leather. Hunting limits were attempted in the early years mainly because some hunters would leave rotting buffalo corpses to spoil, creating a horrible stench. Game drives were another common way to hunt, bringing men and boys together from miles around. They distributed themselves in a very wide circle in a densely forested area and moved slowly toward the center. When the game became concentrated in a small area, they were methodically slaughtered, reportedly killing over 1000 animals at times; game big and small, including panthers, bears, wolves, wildcats, deer, elk and buffalo. This and other hunts were responsible for the future absence of game. In some estimates, most of the buffalo, which numbered in herds of 500 to 1000 just 10 years prior, were already gone by this time in 1787.

James and John Finney did not have to stray far to locate wild game

[i] Where the treasury warrants and surveys were held, likely Lexington.

[ii] A theory for this to have occurred would have been that when James Finney arranged for the survey to be made in October 1785, he did not have the receipt that proved his ownership of the land. Therefore he had to take it in and have the information added to the treasury warrant and survey

[iii] From survey records, it appears that another man had received a survey that encroached into both James and John’s land. No known court action was taken and later, the Finneys sold all of their land. Therefore it seems that if there had been an issue, the Finneys were triumphant in keeping their land in Lincoln County.

[iv] James and Elizabeth Finney were following no normal naming pattern for their children. It may be possible that this child was named after James brother John Finney’s wife died. John would remarry soon. Could it be that John Finney was married to a woman named Elizabeth?

[v] Surveys dated 1 and 2 June 1784 in Greenbrier County

[vi] From treasury warrant 9437, and grant record (VA Land Office Grants No 11 1787 p 120 reel 77)

[vii] By 1788, this part of Greenbrier County became Kanawha County until 1802. At that time it became Mason County and would of course later be Mason County, West Virginia.

[viii] No information whatsoever has been found to even remotely make a guess as to the name of John Finney’s first wife. I have often thought that he may have taken a bride in western Virginia, maybe in Greenbrier or August County. His association with the Lockhart family could be a clue here. I have many times even thought that John may have married a Jacob Lockhart child, maybe Elizabeth Lockhart who many think died in her early years. Also, maybe an Abraham Haptenstall daughter. Another possibility is that the first wife’s last name began with a “T.” Both of his children by his first wife had a middle name that started with a “T;” Mary B. T. Finney and Nancy T. Finney. Which to me, could mean that John first married another Taylor. Rachel Taylor, his second wife, did not appear to have any female siblings old enough to fit this possibility. Her parents were married in 1766 and even if they had a daughter in 1767 and John Finney married her in 1784, it is still a reach. Rachel’s parents

[ix] Strange that James named his first daughter Nancy and John named his second daughter Nancy, or maybe first since we are not completely sure of the birth dates. This is strange because there is no known Nancy in the Finney family or any families related. Reasoning would lead one to insinuate that John’s wife may have been named Nancy but since John’s only two children were so young and no other children are known to have been born previously, it would be hard to imagine that John had married his first wife before 1779. Maybe John had been married previously and something happened to his family. If John had two small children in 1787 and one would imagine that he had been married shortly before in say 1783, he would have been 33 years of age when he married. Had John Finney been married previously? It seems possibly.

[x] Numerous records give her name as Mar B. T. Finney, as well as after her marriage to Francis Graham, she was known as Mary, or Polly, B. T. Graham.

[xi] It is my belief that John Finney’s first marriage was to a daughter of Jonathan Gibson Taylor. Many of the birth dates reported on the internet are purely estimates. I believe that John Finney married the first Taylor child born after their marriage in January 1766. A daughter born in late 1766, possibly named Nancy Taylor, would have married John at the earliest, in 1781 or 1782. This Nancy Taylor would have been named after her mother Nancy Ann Berry-Taylor. And then John Finney would have named his child after his wife and her mother. The daughter Mary Berry Taylor Finney was named after Nancy Taylor’s sister Mary Berry Taylor who died relatively young. Records show that Jonathan Gibson Taylor had another daughter Mary Berry Taylor who was an early child. It would be possibly also that this was John Finney’s first wife and they had Mary B. T. and Nancy T. Some genealogies have her dying young and other have her marrying her first cousin George Gibson Taylor. Another strong possibility could be a daughter of William Berry and Mary Pryor, whose two known daughters married Jonathan Gibson Taylor (John’s father-in-law by his second wife) and George Blackburn (John’s close acquaintance from Culpeper County and Woodford County). But the strongest likelihood, in my opinion is a Taylor as both of John Finney’s children had a middle name of “T” which in my opinion was for Taylor.

[xii] (Botetourt County, Virginia marriages) It is unknown why they married in Botetourt County as family was said to have been in Clark County KY by 1787 and that Rachel was living in Clark County (Union Co KY book) Clark County, Virginia was not even formed from Frederick County until 1836 and it was where the Rachel may have lived earlier in her life. John Finney is said to have owned land in Augusta County which was on the northwest border of Botetourt County at this time.

[xiii] So, James had fewer slaves than John but he did have more horses and cattle. This information may begin to show that James was more reliant on farming and John was more of a business man, participating in endeavors outside of his farm. While it is not evident now, future records make this even more evident

Blog Archive