NHNational Heritageand Research Institute

The work of genealogy

Records become
family stories.

Explore selected examples from the Institute founder’s personally researched and confirmed family collection. Each example shows how records, photographs, citations, comparison, and careful reasoning can produce meaningful genealogy.

Cumberland County record page containing Joe Royster’s 1884 will and a plat labeled Matilda Gamble
Will and plat • open full page ↗
Continuation of the Matilda Gamble survey, with land description and 1887 court record
Survey continuation • open full page ↗
WILL AND PLAT • CUMBERLAND COUNTY, VIRGINIA • 1884–1887

Joe Royster names his daughter Matilda and leaves her land east of the creek.

Two record entries show the bequest and a later survey for Matilda Gamble.

In a will dated 24 January 1884, Joe Royster gives his daughter Matilda Gamble the land on the east side of a creek, along with his cart, steer, household furnishings, and other personal property. He directs that the remaining land west of the creek be divided equally among his other children. A plat and survey on the same supplied record pages identify a parcel for Matilda Gamble.

Relationship statedJoe Royster calls Matilda Gamble “my Daughter.”Will dated24 January 1884; proved and ordered recorded 22 August 1887.SurveyDated 19 July 1886; describes six acres and 105 poles east of the creek.Survey recordedPlat admitted to record 22 August 1887.
Read the will and survey together

The will uses the creek as the division between Matilda’s land and the land for Joe’s other children. The survey continuation describes the plotted parcel as embracing all the land east of the creek in that tract and gives its measured area as six acres and 105 poles. The will’s extent and the surveyed area should be checked against the complete land chain; neither page alone identifies every later owner or establishes present title.

The record spells the daughter’s surname Gamble. A separate record on the second image begins the will of James M. Armistead; that text is not part of Joe Royster’s will or Matilda’s survey.

Working citation: Cumberland County, Virginia, will of Joe Royster, dated 24 January 1884 and proved 22 August 1887, p. 24; plat and survey for Matilda Gamble dated 19 July 1886 and admitted to record 22 August 1887; images supplied by the researcher. Will-book number, complete adjoining pages, repository, and image provenance to be verified.
Next evidence targets

Locate the complete probate file and original will-book entry, Joe Royster’s acquisition deed, the survey and adjoining deed descriptions, land taxes, and any later conveyance or estate proceeding involving Matilda Gamble. These records can test the parcel’s boundaries and its ownership after the 1887 recording.

Page 17 of Matilda Gamble’s typed will dated 21 January 1908 with Cumberland County probate certificate dated 2 November 1944Open the full will and probate certificate ↗
WILL • CUMBERLAND COUNTY, VIRGINIA • 1908; PROBATE 1944

Matilda Gamble’s will names five children and divides the dwelling and land.

A later record in the Royster–Gamble property trail

Matilda Gamble signed a will dated 21 January 1908. It names daughters Eliza, Hattie, Sallie, and Anna Gamble and son Jasper Gamble. It assigns rooms in her dwelling and portions of her land to three daughters, with the remainder of the land shared by Jasper and Anna. The Cumberland County clerk admitted the will to probate on 2 November 1944.

Eliza GambleTwo south-side rooms and two acres; a lifetime interest, then to her children if any.Hattie GambleOne downstairs north-side room and one adjoining acre; a lifetime interest, then to her children.Sallie GambleUpstairs north-side room and one acre, with access through Hattie’s acre; a lifetime interest, then to her children.Jasper and Anna GambleEqual lifetime shares in the remainder of the land, then to their children if any.
What this record establishes and what remains open

The will directly names the five people as Matilda’s children and records her intended distribution. The probate certificate says she had died before 2 November 1944, but gives no death date. It also reports that she had a mansion-house and known place of residence in Cumberland County at death. That statement should be compared with the researcher’s separate evidence of a move to Syracuse, New York, and an independently reported 1941 death; neither question is settled by this page alone.

Joe Royster’s 1884 will names daughter Matilda Gamble and leaves her land east of a creek. This later will shows Matilda making a disposition of her own dwelling and land. Its page does not provide a metes-and-bounds description tying that land conclusively to Joe’s surveyed parcel. The deed chain and land-tax records can test whether these are the same property.

Working citation: Cumberland County, Virginia, will of Matilda Gamble, dated 21 January 1908, p. 17, admitted to probate by the clerk of the Circuit Court on 2 November 1944; image supplied by the researcher. Will-book number, repository, preceding and following pages, and image provenance to be verified.
Next evidence targets

Obtain the complete probate packet and property descriptions, trace Matilda’s deed and tax entries, identify any later partition or conveyance, and compare her death and residence records. Trace each named child and their children before drawing conclusions about the later ownership of any parcel.

1865 New York State census page containing Samuel Freeman and his household in Union Vale, Dutchess CountyOpen the full census page ↗
NEW YORK STATE CENSUS • UNION VALE, DUTCHESS COUNTY • 1865

A census joins Samuel Freeman’s household to landownership.

Samuel Freeman, the researcher’s fourth-great-grandfather

On this population schedule, Samuel Freeman appears as the head of a nine-person household in Union Vale. The page records Samuel as age 63, Black, born in Dutchess County, married, and working as a farmer. It names Julia Freeman, age 53, as his wife and records the other household members as their children. The researcher identifies Samuel and Julia Denny Freeman as his fourth-great-grandparents.

HouseholdSamuel Freeman, Julia Freeman, and seven people recorded as childrenPlace and dateUnion Vale, Dutchess County, New York; census day 1 June 1865Race and taxation columnThe schedule uses “B” in the color column and marks Samuel under “Colored persons not taxed”Land evidenceSamuel is also marked in the schedule’s “Owner of land” column
What the census directly supports

The schedule directly places the Freeman household in Union Vale, identifies Julia as Samuel’s wife, supplies ages, sex, color, birthplace, relationship-to-head entries, occupations, and marks Samuel as a landowner. The household includes James, William, Augustus, Perry C., and George H. Freeman. The researcher identifies the two youngest children as Emily Freeman and Eliza Freeman. Their names remain linked to the researcher’s identification where the handwriting is faint in this image.

“Colored persons not taxed” is the historical wording printed on the census form. Its presence documents how New York officials classified Samuel for this schedule. It should not be interpreted as a complete statement of the family’s identity, community, or ancestry. The landowner mark strengthens the map evidence, but the deed and tax chain are still needed to identify the parcel and legal title.

Working citation: New York State Census, 1865, Dutchess County, town of Union Vale, population schedule, p. 6, dwelling 228, family 269, Samuel Freeman household; census day 1 June 1865, enumeration completed 20 June 1865; image supplied from the researcher’s confirmed family collection. Database provider, digital image number, and archival series details pending.
Next evidence targets

Obtain the highest-resolution archival image, complete a literal household transcription, correlate each person with the 1860 and 1870 federal censuses and 1875 state census, and connect Samuel’s landowner mark to Dutchess County deeds, mortgages, tax assessments, and the “S. Freeman” parcels shown on Union Vale maps.

Left half of Samuel Freeman's 1887 Union Vale death-register entry
Samuel Freeman • entry 71 • left half
Right half of Samuel Freeman's 1887 Union Vale death-register entry
Samuel Freeman • entry 71 • right half
Left page containing Julia Freeman's 1901 Union Vale death-register entry
Julia Freeman • entry 340 • left page
Right page containing Julia Freeman's 1901 Union Vale death-register entry
Julia Freeman • entry 340 • right page
DEATH REGISTERS • UNION VALE, DUTCHESS COUNTY • 1887 & 1901

Two death entries deepen—and complicate—the Freeman family evidence.

Samuel Freeman and Julia Denny Freeman

The researcher identifies Samuel and Julia as his fourth-great-grandparents. Their Union Vale death entries provide dates, ages, parents as recorded, causes of death, and a shared burial place. Julia’s entry also creates a surname conflict that NHRI preserves instead of silently “correcting.”

Samuel FreemanDied 15 January 1887, age 87; laborer; father Philip Freeman; mother Jane Ann FreemanSamuel’s final detailsDied in Union Vale from cardiac asthenia; buried in Clover CemeteryJulia FreemanDied 14 February 1901, age 86 years, 4 months, 10 days; widowed; father recorded as William DennisJulia’s final detailsMother appears as Louisa Vandoran; died in Union Vale from pneumonia and exhaustion; buried in Clover Cemetery
Denny or Dennis? Preserve the conflict before resolving it

Julia’s death entry records her father as William Dennis. The Union Vale military register entries for Augustus, Perry C., and John F. Freeman repeatedly name their married parents as Samuel Freeman and Julia Denny. The researcher’s prior family research also identifies Denny as Julia’s maiden name.

These spellings may represent a phonetic or clerical variant, an informant error, or distinct family information. The death register records what was reported; it does not identify the informant on the photographed entry. Until earlier and independent evidence is found, NHRI keeps “Denny” and “Dennis” as an explicit conflict rather than choosing one spelling solely because it appears in a later record.

Louisa Denny and Eliza Vandoran: a testable household hypothesis

Julia’s mother appears in this death register as Louisa Vandoran. The researcher has also found an older Louisa Denny with the Freeman household in the 1875 census and an older Eliza Vandoran with the family in 1880. Those clues may describe one woman under different given names, surnames, or household labels—but they may also describe two different relatives. They should not be merged yet.

The decisive comparison should align ages, birthplaces, marital status, relationship or household position, neighbors, and residence, then test the result with death, burial, probate, church, deed, and earlier census evidence for Louisa, Eliza, Denny, Dennis, and Vandoran spelling variants.

Working citation: Union Vale, Dutchess County, New York, Register of Deaths, entry 71, Samuel Freeman, 15 January 1887, and entry 340, Julia Freeman, 14 February 1901; photographed register images supplied by the researcher. Volume title, repository, and archival call number pending.
Evidence status

The register directly supports the information written in these two entries. It does not independently prove Julia’s maiden name, the identity of either parent, or that Louisa Denny and Eliza Vandoran were the same person. Those remain correlation questions for the Freeman research project.

1901 New York City death certificate for Nancy Mosely, born in Fishkill, New York, naming Philip and Jane Freeman as her parentsOpen the full certificate ↗
DEATH CERTIFICATE • QUEENS, NEW YORK CITY • 1901

Nancy Mosely may provide collateral evidence for Samuel Freeman’s parents.

A possible sister born in Fishkill, Dutchess County

Nancy Mosely’s death certificate records the same Freeman parent names found in Samuel Freeman’s Union Vale death entry. This is meaningful corroborating evidence, but the certificate does not identify Nancy as Samuel’s sister. NHRI therefore preserves the relationship as a research hypothesis rather than a confirmed family-tree connection.

Nancy MoselyDied 20 October 1901; age recorded as 84; widowedBirthplace and residenceBorn in Fishkill, New York; recorded as a New York City resident for 50 yearsParents as recordedPhilip Freeman and Jane Freeman, both born in New YorkOther detailsThe certificate uses the historical racial label “Colored” and records burial in Evergreen Cemetery
Why this supports—but does not prove—a sibling relationship

Samuel Freeman’s 1887 Union Vale death register names his parents as Philip Freeman and Jane Ann Freeman. Nancy’s certificate names Philip Freeman and Jane Freeman. “Jane” is compatible with “Jane Ann,” and Nancy’s Fishkill birthplace places her in Dutchess County, where the Freeman family is being reconstructed.

The ages are chronologically possible for siblings: Samuel’s recorded age implies a birth around 1799–1800, while Nancy’s recorded age implies a birth around 1816–1817. Yet shared parent names on two death records can still reflect informant error, copied family knowledge, or different people with the same names. Neither supplied image names the vital-information informant, and the two records are not by themselves proof of a sibling bond.

Evidence needed to test the hypothesis

Search Fishkill, Beekman, and Union Vale records for one Philip and Jane or Jane Ann Freeman household containing children compatible with Samuel and Nancy. Priority sources include 1820–1840 census households, church baptisms and memberships, deeds, tax lists, probate and guardianship files, cemetery records, poor records, and any freedom, manumission, or status records relevant to the family. Nancy’s marriage record and later census households may also name relatives or connect her to the Union Vale Freeman network.

Working citation: New York City, Queens, certificate and record of death no. 2357, Nancy Mosely, 20 October 1901; stamped Borough of Queens Bureau of Records, 21 October 1901; image supplied by the researcher. Original repository, collection, and digital-image details pending.
Current conclusion: probable research lead, not proven sister

The matching Philip Freeman and Jane/Jane Ann Freeman parent names, New York origins, Dutchess County connection, and plausible ages justify focused sibling research. Nancy Mosely should not yet be attached to Samuel as a confirmed sister in the family tree.

First original page of the 1865 Coweta County labor contract naming Andrew and Adline
Original • page 1
Second original page of the 1865 Coweta County labor contract with Andrew's mark
Original • page 2
First page of the supplied transcription of the Bohannon labor contract
Transcription • page 1
Second page of the supplied transcription of the Bohannon labor contract
Transcription • page 2
FREEDPEOPLE'S LABOR CONTRACT • COWETA COUNTY, GEORGIA • 1865

Freedom on paper. Plantation control in the terms.

Andrew and Adline Bohannon, the researcher’s fourth-great-grandparents

This contract between Elizabeth Bohannon and people described as formerly enslaved by her and by the estate of Joseph Bohannon records a family at the threshold of emancipation. Andrew is named as a laborer and signed by mark. Adline is named in the labor list—apparently with a child—but does not appear among the marks on the surviving transcription. Their identification as the researcher’s fourth-great-grandparents is family-lineage context supplied by the researcher.

Documented place and dateCoweta County, Georgia; 10 August 1865Andrew’s participationNamed in the labor list and recorded as “Andrew X his mark”Adline’s appearanceNamed in the labor list; no mark for her appears in the supplied transcriptionCompensation statedAndrew was among the men promised $32 plus food and clothing while supporting their own families
Institute deep dive: employer, master, employee, enslaved person

Emancipation changed the legal status of formerly enslaved people, but this document shows how plantation authority could persist inside a labor agreement. The workers were instructed to continue labor “as heretofore,” obey the proprietor’s family, avoid language deemed “impudent,” and risk forfeiting all earned interest for alleged failure. Those terms do not make the contract legally identical to enslavement; they reveal how unequal power, dependency, surveillance, and coercion crossed into early free-labor arrangements.

The list is also a community record. Each named adult, spouse, child, witness, employer, and estate connection can be traced through the 1870 census, Freedmen’s Bureau material, probate files, tax lists, land records, church registers, and neighboring households. Studying the entire group—not only one ancestor—may expose kinship and plantation networks hidden by the record’s sparse wording.

Working citation: Coweta County, Georgia, labor contract between Elizabeth Bohannon and named freedpeople, 10 August 1865; original images and transcription supplied from the researcher’s confirmed family collection. Repository, collection, film, and page are pending.
Evidence boundary

The contract directly supports Andrew’s name and mark and Adline’s inclusion in the labor list. It does not state that Andrew and Adline were spouses or the researcher’s ancestors. Those conclusions must be linked through later family records. The reading of the line containing Adline and a child should also be checked against the best available original.

Union Vale record of soldiers and officers listing Augustus, Perry C., and John F. Freeman and their parents, the married couple Samuel Freeman and Julia DennyOpen the full military register image ↗
MILITARY REGISTER • UNION VALE, DUTCHESS COUNTY, NEW YORK • CIVIL WAR ERA

Three Freeman soldiers reveal their mother’s maiden name.

Augustus Freeman and his Freeman siblings

The researcher identifies Augustus Freeman as his third-great-grandfather. In this town military register, Augustus Freeman, Perry C. Freeman, and John F. Freeman each appear with the same parents: the married couple Samuel Freeman and Julia Denny. Denny is Julia’s maiden name. Their entries connect the Freeman family of Union Vale to Civil War military service and provide unusually valuable parentage evidence.

Married parents recordedSamuel Freeman and Julia DennyFreeman soldiersAugustus Freeman, Perry C. Freeman, and John F. FreemanCommunityUnion Vale, Dutchess County, New YorkResearcher lineageAugustus is identified as the researcher’s third-great-grandfather
What the register proves—and what still needs checking

The repeated parent entry strongly supports a sibling relationship among Augustus, Perry C., and John F. Freeman. The researcher identifies Samuel Freeman and Julia Denny as husband and wife and confirms Denny as Julia’s maiden name. The record also supplies military fields such as rank, regiment, enlistment or muster dates, place of enlistment, bounty, and post-service remarks, though each handwritten field should be transcribed against a higher-resolution archival copy before use in a final service summary.

The other surnames on the page are Ferguson and Fitzgerald. They should not be merged with the Freeman family merely because the handwriting and row placement are close. The three Freeman entries are Augustus, Perry C., and John F., and all three repeat the same parents.

Working citation: Union Vale, Dutchess County, New York, “Record of Soldiers and Officers in the Military Service,” p. 6, entries for Augustus Freeman, Perry C. Freeman, and John F. Freeman; image supplied from the researcher’s confirmed family collection. Register title, volume, date, repository, and archival call number pending.
Next evidence targets

Identify each regiment and company, obtain compiled military service and pension files, compare enlistment dates and residences, and search census and church records for the household of Samuel Freeman and Julia Denny. Pension affidavits may name spouses, children, siblings, birthplaces, and witnesses.

Color landowner map of Union Vale, Dutchess County, New York, containing an S. Freeman label
Union Vale landowner map • open full image ↗
Historic Map of Unionvale Township containing an S. Freeman property label
Map of Unionvale Township • open full image ↗
LANDOWNER MAPS • UNION VALE, DUTCHESS COUNTY, NEW YORK • 1860s–1870s

“S. Freeman” anchors a family to the Union Vale landscape.

Samuel Freeman, the researcher’s fourth-great-grandfather

These two period maps label property with the abbreviated name “S. Freeman.” The researcher identifies that landholder as Samuel Freeman, his fourth-great-grandfather. Read together, the maps offer geographic evidence for tracing Samuel’s household, neighbors, roads, churches, schools, deeds, and tax history in Union Vale.

Directly visibleThe landholder label “S. Freeman” appears on the supplied Union Vale mapsResearcher identificationS. Freeman is identified as Samuel Freeman, the researcher’s fourth-great-grandfatherPlace evidenceUnion Vale, Dutchess County, New YorkTime contextThe researcher dates the maps to the 1860s and 1870s; exact publication details remain to be cited
How landowner maps advance genealogy

A mapped surname can identify a household’s physical neighborhood when census entries and deeds are difficult to connect. Roads, streams, schools, post offices, cemeteries, and adjacent owners create a cluster of people and places to test against census schedules, tax rolls, deed indexes, probate files, church registers, and local newspapers.

These maps are strong location clues, but a printed label alone is not final proof of legal title or personal identity. Some nineteenth-century maps recorded occupants, subscribers, or commonly recognized property holders. The next proof step is to match the mapped parcel and neighboring names to Samuel Freeman’s deeds and annual tax assessments.

Working citation: Union Vale, Dutchess County, New York, landholder maps bearing the label “S. Freeman,” researcher-dated to the 1860s–1870s; images supplied from the researcher’s confirmed family collection. Atlas title, cartographer or publisher, publication year, page, and repository are pending.
Research opportunity

Georeference both maps, identify every adjoining owner, and reconstruct the parcel’s chain of title. Comparing the 1860 federal census, 1865 New York census, 1870 federal census, 1875 New York census, deeds, and tax rolls can test whether the two labels represent the same Samuel Freeman and the same property.

1899 New York City marriage certificate for Emma L. Patterson and Anthony T. Barksville
VITAL RECORD • KINGS COUNTY, NEW YORK • 1899

A marriage record reconnects a family to Virginia.

Emma Patterson and her first husband, Anthony Barksville

This certificate documents the 1899 New York City marriage of Emma L. Patterson—identified by the researcher as his second-great-grandmother—and Anthony T. Barksville. Beyond the marriage itself, the record supplies ages, residences, birthplaces, parents’ names, witnesses, an officiant, and the couple’s signatures.

Documented eventMarriage in New York City on 16 November 1899Bride’s identityEmma L. Patterson, age 21, born in Buckingham County, VirginiaParent cluesThe bride’s parents appear as John “Jack” Patterson and Susan JohnsonResearch valueLinks a Brooklyn marriage to an earlier Virginia family
How a genealogist uses this record

First, transcribe each field exactly and mark uncertain handwriting. Next, compare Emma’s age, Virginia birthplace, parents, residence, witnesses, and signature with census, birth, church, and later marriage records. The user’s statement that Emma was his second-great-grandmother is family-lineage context; it is not established by this certificate alone.

Working citation: New York City marriage certificate no. 66629, Anthony T. Barksville and Emma L. Patterson, 16 November 1899; image supplied from the researcher’s confirmed family collection. Repository and collection details should be added from the original provider or municipal record index.
Evidence note

This display uses a careful working transcription. Names and handwritten details should be checked against the highest-quality original image and corroborating records before publication in a final proof statement.

Historic Beekman New York deed conveying land from Charles Freeman estate heirs to Harvey Tallman
LAND RECORD • BEEKMAN, DUTCHESS COUNTY, NEW YORK • 1845

A deed places Harvey Tallman in the Freemanville community.

Land purchased from heirs of the Charles Freeman estate

The researcher identifies Harvey Tallman as his fourth-great-grandfather. This deed conveys land in the Town of Beekman from multiple Freeman heirs and their spouses to Harvey Tallman and his wife Cynthia. The property was described as part of the lands belonging to the late Charles Freeman and lies in the area historically associated with Freemanville.

Named purchasersHarvey Tallman and Cynthia, his wifeEstate connectionGrantors include several Freeman heirs and spousesProperty evidenceTwo described parcels, including about two acres and another half-acreCommunity valueConnects the Tallman and Freeman families through land in Beekman
What the handwriting appears to establish

The instrument states that the land formed part of the estate of the late Charles Freeman and names numerous parties conveying their interests. It references a consideration of two hundred dollars and gives metes-and-bounds descriptions tied to roads, stone heaps, marked lines, and neighboring property. The instrument is dated 29 December 1845.

Working citation: Dutchess County, New York, deed conveying Beekman land from heirs of Charles Freeman to Harvey Tallman and Cynthia his wife, instrument dated 29 December 1845, image supplied from the researcher’s confirmed family collection; deed book and page to be added from the repository index.
Research lesson

Deeds can reconstruct an estate even when a probate file is incomplete. Every grantor, spouse, witness, boundary owner, road, and adjoining parcel becomes a clue for identifying heirs, associates, residence, and community geography.

1890 Coweta County Georgia marriage license and certificate for Willie Bohannon and Emma Montgomery
VITAL RECORD • COWETA COUNTY, GEORGIA • 1890

A marriage license establishes a new Bohannon household.

Willie Bohannon and Emma Montgomery

This record documents the marriage of Willie Bohannon and Emma Montgomery—identified by the researcher as his third-great-grandparents—in Coweta County, Georgia. The license and completed certificate preserve two separate dates and place the couple in the same county immediately before their marriage.

License issued24 December 1890 in Coweta County, GeorgiaMarriage performed26 December 1890Named coupleWillie Bohannon and Emma MontgomeryRecord detailThe groom’s name appears as “Will” on the license line and “Willie” on the certificate
How a genealogist uses this record

The license authorized the marriage on 24 December, while the minister’s return certifies that the ceremony occurred two days later on 26 December. A careful family history should use the ceremony date as the marriage date and retain the license date as a separate event. The spelling variation between Will and Willie should be included in future searches of census, land, probate, church, and vital records.

Working citation: Coweta County, Georgia, marriage license and certificate, Willie Bohannon and Emma Montgomery, license issued 24 December 1890, marriage performed 26 December 1890, p. 100; image supplied from the researcher’s confirmed family collection. Marriage-book and repository details should be added from the original provider or county index.
Evidence note

This record directly documents the couple and their marriage, but it does not name their parents. Parentage and the researcher’s descent from the couple should be supported with additional records connecting each generation.

1962 newspaper death notice for Mary White, wife of John White, of Bridgeport Connecticut
NEWSPAPER • BRIDGEPORT, CONNECTICUT • 1962

An obituary reconnects Mary White to Rex, North Carolina.

Mary Cromartie White, the researcher’s great-grandmother

The researcher identifies the woman published as Mrs. Mary White as his great-grandmother Mary Cromartie. The clipping reports that she died in Bridgeport Hospital on 15 November 1962 and preserves her residence, husband, children, sisters, church service, burial place, birthplace, and length of residence in Bridgeport.

Published identityMrs. Mary White, age 63, wife of John WhiteMigration evidenceNative of Rex, North Carolina; Bridgeport resident for 37 yearsChildren namedCleveland and Walter White; Lucille Bennett and Esther BollingBurialMountain Grove Cemetery after services at Full Gospel Pentecostal Church
What this clipping contributes

The obituary creates a compact family network: husband John White; sons Cleveland and Walter; daughters Lucille Bennett and Esther Bolling; sisters Ida M. Cromartie and Mallie Smith; eleven grandchildren; and four great-grandchildren. The sister named Cromartie supports investigation of Mary’s Cromartie family identity, but the clipping itself publishes her only as Mary White and does not state a maiden name.

Working citation: “Mrs. John White,” unidentified Bridgeport-area newspaper clipping, November 1962; death of Mary White, 15 November 1962; image supplied from the researcher’s confirmed family collection. Newspaper title, issue date, page, and column should be added from the original archive or clipping source.
Next evidence targets

Obtain the Connecticut death certificate, Mountain Grove Cemetery record, church funeral record, and a complete newspaper issue. Compare those sources with North Carolina birth, marriage, census, and church records for Rex and the Cromartie family.

Opening additional research examples…

Build your own family portfolio

From one document to a documented legacy.

NHRI’s Research Desk helps you organize discoveries into sourced trees, evidence summaries, document notes, and shareable portfolios. Personal human research is available by request.

Open your Research Desk →