Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
Hi Con,
The book published about Andrew Jackson sounds fascinating. I know I would
enjoy reading it, thanks for sharing the information.
I have no doubt of General Andrew Jackson's integrity nor his honor. I
believe him to have been an admirable man, at least from what I've read.
As for my comments about Joel Childress, perhaps suggesting that Andrew
Jackson might have gone easy on him. Also for his encouragement of Joel's last
child, Sarah, to marry James Knox Polk. I have reason to believe he may have
gone easy on Joel. I'm suggesting this due to what I've researched, the
personal papers of my cousin whose ancestor was James Jackson and many other's who
contributed to my research. I'm not talking about anything underhanded by
Andrew Jackson, I'm just suggesting that because of his family ties, political
links and etc, he may have been the reason for Joel's being able to resume his
life without hanging for murder, if that would have been the punishment.
Fact is, Andrew Jackson had many personal relationships with Childress's,
some during the War of 1812 and during the ARW. Even tho Andrew Jackson had no
issue, nevertheless, he had cousins and they were related to the Childress
family, not just Joel's. Please see the series of messages I wrote, Part 1 -
4,"Childress, Hanna, Jackson, Polk (Lauderdale, AL)," Childress Research-List
archives, April 2002. I didn't complete the data due to personal reasons, but I
hope to in the future. If you need to know more about what I'm suggesting,
I'll be glad to give you the facts as I know them.
Andrew Jackson was involved with various branches of Childress's, before
that time, in NC with those who connect to our list owner's [Bob Sanders]
ancestor (Pheifer) who in turn connects to Childress, the same family connects to
Polk. This would have been during the ARW and before Joel's murder trial.
MaryJean
I have been getting all these emails concerning the new inscription on the
headstone. What you need to know, when you order a headstone from the
government and it is a military one, they are strictly name, rank, serial
number. The only way to get both inscriptions on it. It would have to be
done privately.
Michelle
MaryJean,
I'm only going to address this portion of your post.
On another note, with reference to Andrew Jackson's part in the murder
trial
and sentencing against Joel Childress. I found it very odd that it would be
Andrew Jackson, who most say encouraged James K. Polk to marry Sarah
Childress!
From all I've seen in the vital records, Andrew Jackson had many business
and private relationships with the Childress family and not only Joel's. It
was
said that Joel supplied an very impressive uniform for Andrew Jackson. It
might even be suggested that Andrew Jackson's personal and political
connections
to Joel, swayed him during the murder trial. It appears that way to me!
For those interested in getting a good picture of Andrew Jackson I
recommend that you read Andrew Burstein's The Passions of Andrew Jackson,
published in 2003 by Alfred A Knopf, N.Y. It is from this book that I
originally found the reference to the trial of Joel Childress.
Andrew Jackson's world view was formed as an orphan who became a self-made
man in a violent frontier. A persons personal and political connections
would have meant nothing to him in judging that individual. While he liked
children and was always a gentleman in his dealings with women, his
dealings with other men is another matter. Every man was judged on Andrew
Jackson's personal scale, which meant he would have been primarily judged
on how he interacted with Andrew Jackson. He had his own personal code of
ethics, cross him and violate his personal code and you could end up with
an immediate caning or in a duel. Enemies would sometimes become friends
and friends become enemies. He made lots of both. There is nothing
incongruent about Andrew Jackson sentencing Joel to be branded with a M in
1801 and his recommending in later years Sarah, who was a frequent guest at
the Jackson home, and who he definitely knew in her own right, to James
Polk. Joel Childress became a prominent merchant and planatation owner.
As such he would have moved up in the local society and like everyone else
been welcome at events at Jackson's home. Their first meeting in a trial
would not have been a factor in subsequent interactions.
One must be very careful in trying to decipher events from the past not to
impose one's own world view back to the prior time. Tennessee during its
early years was the frontier and polite society only in an embryonic state.
Let's be careful not to view their actions and behaviors through the lens
of our time.
Con
Dear Con,
Dear List,
Thank you for your explanation about Abraham. Logially, it seemed very
possible for Abraham to have taught Joel (then 12 years old) to learn a trade (per
the court order). But, it's just as likely that Joel might have learned the
trade of hatter from another relative.
We don't know much about Joel's early years. However, I know about his
wife's parents and extended family. I discovered Joel's wife's Thompson ancestry,
while researching my Thompson ancestors.
I also know that the Polks political background connects's to Joel's wife's
family. Joel's wife was Scot-Irish thru Thompson and Irish thru Whitsett
(originally Whiteside). The Whitsetts and Polks (Scottish), the latter being one
of the first settlers of New Bern, NC. This place was a settlement-colony of
Scots arriving from Scotland.
The Polks (originally dePollock), were in the part of NC where the NC
Declaration of Independence took place. It was said by an eye witness that all who
signed it were related. The Polks were the main reason behind the declaration.
The Polks had a political connection to Whitsett due to the government
position's they both held in NC. Actually, this would have taken place before Joel
married Elizabeth Whitsett. So, it seems the two families were acquainted
before Joel and Elizabeth married and also lived in the same area's of NC.
I believe the reason for Joel having gone to Sumner Co, TN would have been
the Thompsons and Whitsett or Whitsitt. Sarah Thompson married John Whitsett,
parents of Elizabeth Whitsett, wife of Joel. Sarah's brother, Laurance
Thompson paid taxes in Sumner Co in 1789.
According to the Whitsett-List archives, Ron Wall, Whitsett-Perry Cemetery -
"The John and Sarah (Thompson) Whitsitt buried on your property are the
grandparents of Sarah Childress Polk, wife of President James Knox Polk. A
prominent Whitsitt researcher wrote to Mrs. Polk in 1880's asking about Mrs. Polk's
grandparents, John and Sarah [Thompson] Whitsitt, were taken to Greene Co., Al
by her Uncles, Lawrence and James Whitsitt, but she knew little about their
lives there. John and Sarah Whitsitt came to SUMNER Co, TN from Orange Co., NC in
about 1789. Their daughter Elizabeth married JOEL Childress and their
daughter Sarah married James K. Polk. No one knows for sure when the Whitsitts
removed to Al., but my guess is that it was not long before 1819." End - If you
note the date, that would be when Joel Childress died.
The Whitsitts and Thompsons were in Sumner Co, TN by 1789. Laurance
Whitsitt settled in TN on a considerable tract of land given to him in payment for
military services rendered at the Battle of Guilford Courthouse in Greensboro,
NC. There were also intermarriages between Thompson and Whitsitt other than
that of Sarah who married John Whitsett, parents of Elizabeth who married Joel
Childress. Those Whitsett's known in Sumner Co were James, William and John,
the latter, ancestor of Sarah Childress Polk.
Sarah Childress Polk also seemed to deny or dispell the fact her mother's
family were prominent planation owners. According to Joseph W. Strickland
(Whitsitt-List) said, "My family records show that my Joseph Thompson Whitsitt was
the son of a Laurence Whitsitt and grandson of John and Sarah [Thompson]
Whitsitt [Elizabeth Whitsitt Childress's parents]. He also had a brother Howell.
Incidentally, the brothers built identical antebellum white-pillared mansions
in Marion, Perry County, AL and in Gainesville, AL, the Marion Home, home to
Joseph T. Whitsitt still stands and is beautiful. The Gainesville home burned
sometime early in 1900's I believe." End.
Another interesting first hand account comes from the "Samuel H. Laughlin
Diary". Section 7 - 1811-1815 - written 1845 - As follows:
"When I went to reside at Murfreesborough, I found a very different condition
in the state of society from that which exists there at present. It was just
after the war, Gen. Robert Purdy, who afterwards was Marshall of Middle TN,
after the death of the late JOHN CHILDRESS, after having risen to rank of a
Colonel in the US Army, being disbanded on the reduction of the army to a peace
establishment, came and settled in the neighborhood on a farm inherited by his
wife who was a Miss PHILLIPS."
NOTE - Could this be the farm where Joel Childress actually died and was
buried. John Childress married two of my relatives, one was Ms Philips of Welsh
ancestry, daughter of Judge Philips, one of the earlier settlers of Davidson Co
TN. John's second wife being the cousin of his first wife., he had issue by
both. - And further on in the diary we read -
"Mr. JOEL CHILDRESS, a merchant, owned and lived in the framed portion of the
tavern house on the West side of the square, now owned and kept by Capt
George Allen Sublett. Mr. Childress was a highly respectable man, and was the
father of Mrs. Sarah POLK, the lady of James K. Polk, now President of the United
States. He had only three other children, a son named Anderson, who died when
quite young man, as did his wife, of consumption. His other son, Maj JOHN W.
CHILDRESS, a married man with a family now lives on the farm where his father
died about the year, 18 - - of fever. His other child, his oldest except
Anderson, is Mrs. Susan Rucker of Murfreesboro. Capt. CHILDRESS' widow, Mrs.
Elizabeth CHILDRESS, now lives in Murfreesboro. She was a sister of Col.
WHITSITT, once of Sumner County, TN, where Mr. CHILDRESS married her. Col. Whitsitt
once lived a the old Marable place in Rutherford, and afterwards removed to
and died in South AL." See the following -
[http://home.atl.net/-jlp/reports/shlaughlindairy.htm] -
On another note, with reference to Andrew Jackson's part in the murder trial
and sentencing against Joel Childress. I found it very odd that it would be
Andrew Jackson, who most say encouraged James K. Polk to marry Sarah Childress!
From all I've seen in the vital records, Andrew Jackson had many business
and private relationships with the Childress family and not only Joel's. It was
said that Joel supplied an very impressive uniform for Andrew Jackson. It
might even be suggested that Andrew Jackson's personal and political connections
to Joel, swayed him during the murder trial. It appears that way to me!
Comments are welcome!
MaryJean
MaryJean,
It's highly unlikely that Abraham taught Joel any trade or that Joel lived
with him to age 21. Abraham was not in the best of health by 1788 (he was
ordered exempt paying poll taxes in future on August 12, 1788) and probably
did not live long after the now famous court case of 1789. There was a
second Abraham (likely his son) who began paying poll taxes in 1785 (in a
different district from his likely father) and is clearly identified as
Abraham JR when he paid his poll taxes in 1790. This younger Abraham is
more likely the one in the 1790 census listed as 11400 since in 1790 he was
living in Stokes Co (recently formed from Surry) from whence the record
came. The older Abraham lived in and paid taxes in Lovill's District which
remained in Surry Co. In 1785 in Lovill's district Abraham paid taxes on
100 acres as well as a poll tax. While exempt from paying poll taxes after
1788, he or someone would have to pay taxes on the land. The only record
in Surry county after 1789 is one showing taxes on 100 acres paid by an
Abraham, and that was in 1792 where Abraham paid taxes on 100 acres and a
poll tax. (Clearly Abraham Jr). He also paid poll taxes in 1791, and
1793-4 in Surry Co. but no property taxes. It is likley that Abraham Sr.
is dead by 1790-1791. Moreover, Abraham Jr. disappears after 1794 from the
tax rolls.
This leaves open the question as to what became of Joel. I think there is
much yet to learned about him in the intervening years before he shows up
in Sumner Co. TN. I seriously doubt that he remained with Abraham Jr. or
that part of the family. Recall that my interpretation of the court case
was as an attempt by Joel and Stephen to get Joel out of Abraham's
household. Joel showed too much ambition in later years plus an affinity
for Stokes Co by sending his daughter Sarah to school there. It is more
likley that he moved in with some of the Childresses there in Stokes County
who lived among and had connections to the German community in what became
Winston Salem and there developed that affinity and learned to be a hatter.
He definitely would not have learned to be a hatter in rural Surry Co.
Con
> [Original Message]
> From: <MJCV25(a)aol.com>
> To: <CHILDRESS-RESEARCH-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> Date: 6/16/2004 11:12:57 AM
> Subject: [CHILDRESS] Joel Childress in Sumner Co, TN (Con Childress's
message) -
>
>
>
> Hi Con,
> Hi List,
>
> Re: Joel Childress, Sumner Co TN in the case State v. Childress 1801
(Con
> Childress) -
>
> We know Joel was born 1777, tradition says in VA. So, he lived most
likely
> in NC and with Abraham Childress till he was 21. The court documents
from NC
> (which Lee Rau discovered) bound out Joel, aged 12, to Abraham Childress.
> Since the 1801 document said Joel was a "hatter", then perhaps it was the
trade
> Abraham taught him. The court document said Abraham would teach him a
trade.
> My suggestion is, that perhaps Abraham was also a "hatter".
>
> As for Joel's marriage (time gap) to Elizabeth Whitsitt, I have some
theories
> on the subject, more later. Comments welcome!
>
> MaryJean
>
>
>
>
Hi Con,
Hi List,
Re: Joel Childress, Sumner Co TN in the case State v. Childress 1801 (Con
Childress) -
We know Joel was born 1777, tradition says in VA. So, he lived most likely
in NC and with Abraham Childress till he was 21. The court documents from NC
(which Lee Rau discovered) bound out Joel, aged 12, to Abraham Childress.
Since the 1801 document said Joel was a "hatter", then perhaps it was the trade
Abraham taught him. The court document said Abraham would teach him a trade.
My suggestion is, that perhaps Abraham was also a "hatter".
As for Joel's marriage (time gap) to Elizabeth Whitsitt, I have some theories
on the subject, more later. Comments welcome!
MaryJean
MaryJean,
I erred when I said that the Joel who was likely the son of
Armajor/Major(R. Major) was born after 1784. I forgot about the NC State
Census which was taken in 1786. I should have said after 1786.
Con
MaryJean,
If there was a second Joel in Summer Co in 1801, he was not one of those
you listed. The Joel in the 1810 census was undoubtly Sarah's father. The
Joel from Perry Co is most likely the son of Armajor/Major(R. Major)
Childress from Stokes\Surry Co NC prior to moving to TN. If so, since he
was not one of the older boys, he was born after 1784 based on prior
censuses. He clearly would not have been 21 in 1801. Moreover, the family
was still in Stokes Co in 1801, based on poll taxes. I think that it is
highly likely that there was only one Joel Childress in Sumner Co in 1801
and that was Sarah's father. I await some actual evidence to the contrary,
but it must be just that, evidence that this Joel was in Sumner Co.
Otherwise, the evidence points to Sarah's father.
Con
> [Original Message]
> From: <MJCV25(a)aol.com>
> To: <CHILDRESS-RESEARCH-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> Date: 6/14/2004 7:19:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Joel Childress, Sumner Co TN in the case State
v. Childress 1...
>
>
>
> Con -
>
> Wow, how interesting, I've never heard about this Joel before! Thanks
for
> sharing that with us! You asked for anything we might have. I have a
little on
> Joel Childress (two of them) which might be helpful. I think the Joel
> Childress you mention was not Sarah's father. I'll keep digging thru my
files to see
> what I can find, but anyway, here goes -
>
> 1. 1810 Census for Rutherford County TN, JOEL CHILDRESS aged 26-45, 2
males
> under 10 - wife 26-45, 2 daughters under 10. The Rutherford Co, TN
census is
> the only one to survive. Prior to 1810, you must rely on tax, land,
wills and
> etc. Everyone believes this is Joel, father of Sarah, he had died by
the
> 1820 census. (from original census) - published by: Mrs Molly Reigard, Ed
of
> "Childress Chatter" -
>
> 2. 1820 Census for Perry County, TN - Page 4 - JOEL CHILDRES (one S)
aged
> 26-45, 2 sons under 10, wife 26-45, 1 daughter under 10 - Note: This is
most
> likely the Joel you mentioned, he could have been about 21 in the 1801
data you
> show. Others in Perry County were - (all on page 6) John Childres (one
S) -
> Benjamin Childres (one S) - Major Childres (one S), all are between 26
and 45
> years old.
> Published by Molly Reigard, Ed of "Childress Chatter" -
>
> 3. "Acts of TN, 1796 - 1830: C (Pt 3)" - TN State Archives and History,
JOEL
> Childress, 1813 - Commissoner of Murfreesborough - 1817, Director of
> Murfreesborough TN Bank. Note - This is most likely Sarah Childress's
(Polk) father.
> I've read alot about him and apparently he held these positions. Do you
think
> he could have been a "hatter" and arrested? I kinda think it was the one
in
> Sumner County.
>
> Other JOEL's (and maybe the one you mentioned) were in the 1830 Census's
for
> Gibson Co, Giles Co, Humphries Co and Williamson Co, TN. If you want
those,
> I'll be glad to give the details. The census's I have go from 1810 to
1850.
>
> MaryJean
>
>
Con -
Wow, how interesting, I've never heard about this Joel before! Thanks for
sharing that with us! You asked for anything we might have. I have a little on
Joel Childress (two of them) which might be helpful. I think the Joel
Childress you mention was not Sarah's father. I'll keep digging thru my files to see
what I can find, but anyway, here goes -
1. 1810 Census for Rutherford County TN, JOEL CHILDRESS aged 26-45, 2 males
under 10 - wife 26-45, 2 daughters under 10. The Rutherford Co, TN census is
the only one to survive. Prior to 1810, you must rely on tax, land, wills and
etc. Everyone believes this is Joel, father of Sarah, he had died by the
1820 census. (from original census) - published by: Mrs Molly Reigard, Ed of
"Childress Chatter" -
2. 1820 Census for Perry County, TN - Page 4 - JOEL CHILDRES (one S) aged
26-45, 2 sons under 10, wife 26-45, 1 daughter under 10 - Note: This is most
likely the Joel you mentioned, he could have been about 21 in the 1801 data you
show. Others in Perry County were - (all on page 6) John Childres (one S) -
Benjamin Childres (one S) - Major Childres (one S), all are between 26 and 45
years old.
Published by Molly Reigard, Ed of "Childress Chatter" -
3. "Acts of TN, 1796 - 1830: C (Pt 3)" - TN State Archives and History, JOEL
Childress, 1813 - Commissoner of Murfreesborough - 1817, Director of
Murfreesborough TN Bank. Note - This is most likely Sarah Childress's (Polk) father.
I've read alot about him and apparently he held these positions. Do you think
he could have been a "hatter" and arrested? I kinda think it was the one in
Sumner County.
Other JOEL's (and maybe the one you mentioned) were in the 1830 Census's for
Gibson Co, Giles Co, Humphries Co and Williamson Co, TN. If you want those,
I'll be glad to give the details. The census's I have go from 1810 to 1850.
MaryJean
I beg to differ, I see direct correlation between the two. And once again,
Mark and Gary's instrustion. As for Joel's family and their involvement? I
believe Joel's original tombstone was anything but humble, not the one described
by Mark and Gary Childress. The theory of Joel's tombstone is unproven. If
you are so sure of the tombstone being part of an supposed fireplace, go there
yourself and demand to see it. If you had researched Joel's wife's family,
you might have a better perspective of the real truth, rather than heresay.
Joel's nephew's letters, published on this list, suggest what I'm saying. Read
them.
Ted Childress
Dear List,
The following is from James W. Ely, Jr. and Theodore Brown Jr. editors, Legal Papers of Andrew Jackson, Univ. TN Press, 1987.
page 212. "On November 13, 1801, the Mero District grand jury returned a true bill upon the indictment of Childress, a 'Hatter' who resided in Sumner County, for the murder the previous September of one John Regan (Document I). The defendant pleaded not gullty on November 16. When the case went to trial two days later, a jury returned a verdict finding Childress not guilty of murder, but guilty of 'the felonious slaying' of the deceased (Document II). On November 19, Childress appeared before Jackson and Judge White for sentencing and entered a plea of benefit of clergy. Jackson and White granted the plea and sentenced the defendant to be branded on the left hand with the letter M (Document III)."
Document I is the Indictment of Joel Childress, found on page 214 of Ely and Brown.
Document II is a Minute Book Entry in the Mero District Superior Court for November 18, 1801, found on page 215.
Document III is a Minute Book Entry in the Mero District Superior Court for November 19 1801, also found on page 215.
Benefilt of clergy is an ancient custom holdover from English Law which was effectively eliminated in TN in 1829. It was used to mitigate the harsh English criminal laws in England and remained in use during the colonial era for a few capital crimes such as larceny and manslaughter in the colonies.
While it is not 100% certain that this Joel is Sarah's father, I have seen no evidence of another Joel Childress in that county at that time. If it was her father, then we need look no futher for an explanation as to why she never seemed to know anything about her ancestry. It was not something to be talked about and delved into at great length.
The importance of this for us, if it is the Joel we have examined and argued about at length, is that there is now a possible additional clue to help us bridge the time gap between age 12 in Surry Co NC and his marriage to Sarah's mother. How and where did he become a "hatter"?
Con
Ted, or whoever you are,
This message is just plain stupid. I wondered how long it would be
before some one would try this type of twist. There could not be a better
illustration of why, with the existance of this type of thinking, that no
one should be allowed to change a tombstone inscription and preserve it for
the future. Without doubt in Joel's case his relatives followed his wishes
as to what was put on the stone. As to what else was on the stone, besides
what is on the piece that is now visible (and it was a very large stone
with postioning of what remains leaving anyone who looks at it to wonder if
there was more), I guess we will just have to wait until that fireplace is
torn down to find out.
Con
> [Original Message]
> From: <TChildress45(a)aol.com>
> To: <CHILDRESS-RESEARCH-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> Date: 6/11/2004 9:54:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] RE: [Childress-L] letters4
>
>
>
> Con,
>
> You said, "The only people who have the right to change the inscription
on
> any tombstone are the people who put up the stone".
>
> I'm reminded of another tombstone debate, I reference the tombstone of
Joel
> Childress. Do you suppose by chance, those who were responsible for the
> supposed genealogical data [engraved] apon Joel Childress's tombstone, if
it
> existed, took it unto themselves to "correct the past"? Was it their
right to
> alter/add to a tombstone? To my knowledge, Sarah Childress Polk never
mentioned the
> purported historical significance in relation to her father's tombstone.
> Futhermore, she is not referenced as having mentioned it even once.
However, the
> tombstone theory came from several of the nephews, did they rehash old
heresay
> and decide it was their duty to "change the inscription", perhaps due to
> Joel's recognition as the father-in-law of President Polk? I suppose we
shall
> never know. The tombstone was said to be part of a fireplace and no
longer
> exists. No one living actually saw the engravings, real or imagined.
Something
> to ponder isn't it?
>
> As for the tombstone in question, I would have to believe the existance
of
> the people who put up the tombstone no longer exist. Therefore, the next
of kin
> to David M. Childress, whomever they are, should have the last word,
period.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ted Childress
Con,
You said, "The only people who have the right to change the inscription on
any tombstone are the people who put up the stone".
I'm reminded of another tombstone debate, I reference the tombstone of Joel
Childress. Do you suppose by chance, those who were responsible for the
supposed genealogical data [engraved] apon Joel Childress's tombstone, if it
existed, took it unto themselves to "correct the past"? Was it their right to
alter/add to a tombstone? To my knowledge, Sarah Childress Polk never mentioned the
purported historical significance in relation to her father's tombstone.
Futhermore, she is not referenced as having mentioned it even once. However, the
tombstone theory came from several of the nephews, did they rehash old heresay
and decide it was their duty to "change the inscription", perhaps due to
Joel's recognition as the father-in-law of President Polk? I suppose we shall
never know. The tombstone was said to be part of a fireplace and no longer
exists. No one living actually saw the engravings, real or imagined. Something
to ponder isn't it?
As for the tombstone in question, I would have to believe the existance of
the people who put up the tombstone no longer exist. Therefore, the next of kin
to David M. Childress, whomever they are, should have the last word, period.
Regards,
Ted Childress
Dear Con,
Dear List,
As for the tombstone question and debate? If the tombstone was placed on the
Childress Civil War grave, perhaps carved by a soldier or whomever, how can
this person "change" anything when they are no longer alive? I'm assuming this
was the case? If not, then who placed it there or is this known?
I personally was involved with cemetery survey's for Ancestor's Unlimited,
Inc., which in turn, published a cemetery book. I've seen Civil War grave
stones, 95% had no name, no information at all. So with this said, I feel that ANY
interest in this type project is commendable and important in preserving
history. However, I also believe the original tombstone along with the
"corrected" version both be displayed on the gravesite. If a descendant of the said
person wants his or her ancestor's surname "corrected" on a new stone along with
the original information, why not? This should be the choice of those
involved, such as a descendant. I believe Al Medcalf's writing to Jack was an
indication that this was his purpose, to find descendants. Mr. Medcalf didn't HAVE
to do so, but he did out of apparent consideration to the soldier's
descendants, if any.
As for Mark Childress'es response to Mr. Medcalf? I was distressed (for Mr.
Medcalf) by Mark's lack of decorum and rudeness. There's a way to respond
without unacceptable behavior. Gary Childress on the other hand did make some
good points, but, both he and Mark's opinion was overshadowed by their behavior.
I hope the cemetery project goes as planned with exception to the old stone.
As stated before, I personally would like to see the original info, plus a
new stone with the same info, along with the revised. I would also like to hear
the opinion of those who are connected to D.M. Childress ancestry, if they
know of this project?
MaryJean Childress-Voegtlin
The only people who have the right to change the inscription on any
tombstone are the people who put up the stone. One must assume that what
is there is what they intended. Not even later descendants have the right
to change the inscription. The world is full of revisionists, be they
historians or genealogists. Since we only know the past dimly from what
little has been left us, any argument which claims to know what was true in
the past is automatically suspect. The best we will ever be able to do is
to make our best informed guess, which likely is wrong in some unknown way.
Now, let's take personalities and factions out of this and do the right
thing. Mark and Gary are basically correct in their arguments. Don't try
to correct the past. You can't.
Con
> [Original Message]
> From: Mark and Gary <london2005(a)charter.net>
> To: <CHILDRESS-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> Date: 6/10/2004 10:54:26 PM
> Subject: [Childress-L] letters4
>
>
> Jerry Childress wrote:
> I don't see a problem with what the Sons of Confederate Vets are doing.
> The old head stone will remain at the grave. This means all the
> information will be there.
>
> My comment:
> The old headstones have deteriorated to the point of needing
> replacement, barely readable, and while they will be left at the grave,
> the policy of the Sons of Confederate Veterans was never to replace
> them. In a few years they will be completely unreadable. You are
> correct that all the information will be there for a short period of
> time. Then what.
>
> Jerry Childress wrote:
> For those worried about the old head stones, they will fade away no
> matter what the Sons do.
>
> My comment:
> Historians want to preserve what is written on the gravestone, not the
> stone itself. Even if the headstone is a replacement dating from the
> 20th Century, the inscription is "original historical data" even though
> the physical stone is not.
>
> Jerry Childress wrote:
> If the information was wrong on one of my families graves, I would want
> it corrected.
>
> My comment:
> Who is to say that the old record is "wrong" and the new record is
> "right". That is the BIG issue. The person doing the work must become an
> expert on every Civil War grave in the cemetery and accurately determine
> that person's identity. That is not likely to be error free. So instead
> of the grave marker being "C. Shapman" the new marker might be changed
> to "Chapman" or "Shipmen".
>
> Importantly, individual identities are being assigned to what were
> effectively unknown soldiers. "D.M. Childust" is being given a new
> identity, Lieutenant David Childress even if new evidence comes to light
> that contradicts that. For example, what if a record such as a deed for
> purchasing land emerges that shows Lieutenant David Childress was alive
> after the supposed death date. What if we find out that D.M. Childust
> had a father D.M. Childust Senior or a son D.M. Junior. Any of whom may
> be in the grave. What if the "M" in the name is his mother's maiden
> name, like "Medcalf" and all the children in the family carried this
> middle name. Lieutenant David M. Childress might have brothers Donald
> Medcalf Childress, or Daniel Medcalf Childress and they all may have
> served in the military from the same County and State. Any of them could
> be D.M.Childust. What if there is another family in the area with
> similar names...in Amherst County, Virginia there were at least 8 "John"
> Childresses all alive at the same time...very confusing. Wouldn't it be
> nice to have more records...so why are people so eager to see destroyed
> those few records that exist for everybody in the cemetery.
>
> Yet people on this list are encouraging Al Medcalf, Sons of Confederate
> Veterans to continue....yikes.... double yikes., if you haven't seen by
> now how many different ways this research can be put together....how
> complex these intertwined records are.... what am I to make of
> researchers who would discard for eternity....historical records.
>
> There is an altered gravestone of Robert Childress of Kanawha County,
> West Virginia that includes researched data and was placed on the old
> grave several decades ago and claims the interred person is a well
> documented Revolutionary War veteran. The only trouble is the real
> Robert Childress, Revolutionary War veteran, created a death inventory
> record in Franklin County, Virginia as did his wife.....ooops. It will
> be a hell of an undertaking trying to undo the error of the person who
> amended that Kanawha headstone....and because the original inscription
> wasn't preserved we don't know if that original inscription perhaps said
> "R. Childress" and might be "Richard" instead of "Robert". You can't
> un-ring the bell. Thanks but no thanks to anybody who wants to update
> grave inscriptions AND NOT PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL WORDS for future
> researchers.
>
> In early colonial Virginia Courthouse records were taken outside and
> burned in great bonfires because they had no more value to anyone. Just
> because one person doesn't value the old evidence doesn't mean somebody
> in the future will feel the same. Even relatives should be thwarted
> from changing headstones.....some want to create a record that lets them
> join some organization like SAR, DAR, Sons of Confederate Veterans.
>
> Genealogy 101 should teach everyone not to destroy any evidence.
> Unfortunately the person revising the headstones at Greenwood Cemetery
> is not a trained historian. He is an overworked, underpaid volunteer who
> wants to contribute something...and in the process effectively
> vandalizes the cemetery. The correct procedure should be to publish the
> corrected information on a separate document, such as publishing an
> article in a historical journal for example, but never ever encourage
> the destruction of the original historical document.
>
> What little money the Greenwood Cemetery custodian has to preserve the
> text of the original stone was not being used to do what it
> purported.... to preserve the text of the original stone. There is
> funding provided by agencies, individuals and charities for historical
> preservation. The cemetery accessed this money under the pretense of
> preserving the monuments.
>
> At the same time the custodian claims he isn't touching the old stone.
> The original stone will remain on the grave, but the custodian from the
> Sons of Confederate Veterans says no money is available to preserve it.
> The custodian can't have it both ways, accessing funding for historical
> preservation but then claiming that no money exists to preserve the
> gravemarkers.
>
> It is an act of deception to use the money that is needed to preserve
> that original text and use it to alter the ultimate replacement stone to
> a non-historical record, a modern text based on modern research. The
> original historical headstone inscription may last a few more years, but
> the new altered headstone may last 100 years. The claim that they were
> preserving historical records with this headstone replacement is a
> blatant falsehood.
>
> And it is not apparent that even the new records will be any more error
> free than the old record. The new headstones on some 67 graves or more
> will be a "best guess" or "seems reasonable conclusion" as of today.
> And any evidence, that emerges in the future, about who is buried in the
> grave will not be utilized after the original records are lost to
> researchers.
>
> "D.M.Childust" becomes Lieutenant David Childress not Daniel or Donald,
> not David Senior or David Junior... no matter what records emerge in the
> future. It may be right but then again how often have any of us changed
> our research....and the entire cemetery was locking in this new research
> on a number of Civil War graves.
>
> I have contacted a number of local authorities, politicians, civic
> leaders, historical societies, and newspapers and they seem to be taking
> the situation seriously. They have options, and I expect that now that
> they are alerted, they will want to preserve the original data one way
> or another.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ==== CHILDRESS Mailing List ====
> Contact List Owners Mark or Gary Childress at
> NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS
> London2005(a)Charter.net
In a message dated 6/9/2004 9:24:48 AM Central Daylight Time,
INJACK1(a)aol.com writes:
http://www.geocities.com/injackcw/
Hello,
I think we have emailed each other in the past. Could you please add
Zachariah D. or Z.D. Childers/Childress to your list of soldiers who died at
Andersonville prison? I have sent the documentation to the Andersonville Prison
and have received a hearty thank you from them. So little is known of my
ancestor and it would be great to have his name added to your site as well.
thank you for such a wonderful site
Lisa Nash
I've been asked as to my viewpoint about the new headstones for confederate
soldiers and as far as I feel, I think it is fantastic for future researchers.
I know if I was buried there I'd want my name spelled right!!! As far as
restoring the crumbling stones, that is most likely way too expensive a
proposition, but I'm not a lawyer so I don't know:)
I DO know that I, as a list administrator for 63 lists and thousands of list
members on Rootsweb, would NEVER leave the types of messages haranguing my
list members as I have seen on another list pertaining to this subject.
Bob Sanders