LINKS:
BACK TO BOOK INTRODUCTION
BACK TO CHAPTER 1
BACK TO CHAPTER 2
BACK TO CHAPTER 3
BACK TO CHAPTER 4
BACK TO CHAPTER 5
BACK TO CHAPTER 6
BACK TO CHAPTER 7
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?
[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 Mason County
[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
[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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)