The Elusive Deed

You're thinking "Not land records again!"

Yes, land records!

If you have ancestors who were land owners, the land records are an important resource. However, they are not always simple. Metes and bounds deeds continue to challenge me. It took me twelve years to find one elusive deed.

You don't want to make the same mistakes I did, right?

First, here are 14 quick tips and then I'll take you through a long tale of my steps and my errors.

1. Deeds can be wrong.
2. Indexes can be wrong.
3. The in-book index and the master index book may not have the same information.
4. Use the tract index if one exists. 
5. Read every single deed for the property and time frame.
6. Get photocopies of all pertinent deeds, not notes or abstracts or transcripts. Consider photocopies of the indexes if cost permits.
7. Know every number and name that might identify the property: patent, warrant, survey, township, range, section, addition, subdivision, lot, tax ID.
8. Find a copy of the original recorded survey where possible, not an abstract.  
9. The recorder/register office may have other resources. Ask for a tour.
10. Collect maps, both those relevant to the time being searched and a current map from County Engineering or the office that is mapping the land.
11. Court cases can trigger deeds. If you find one, look for a copy of the court case.
12. The tax assessor knows more than you think.
13. The local genealogical society may hold or know of special resources. Ask for advice.
14. Early census records can lead to invalid assumptions.

The Twelve Year Quest

My goal was to identify all the children of an old farmer who died just before the 1850 census. The probate did not list the heirs and did not mention disposition of the land. I was working from brief notes jotted by a distant cousin.

First, did she even have the right family? My ancestor (the murder victim) had sold some land, but was it his father's land? Neither man was listed in the grantee index as buying the land in question. After reviewing the deeds for the land the old farmer purchased, I discovered the grantee index was wrong. It listed the 90 acres that he purchased in 1841 with a number that matched not one single thing that was in the deed. If I had not looked at each deed, and had just looked at the index, I would not have seen the connection. I wish my cousin had provided copies or even a note about the index error. I also didn't understand why the maps and deeds had different numbers. I wouldn't learn that for several years.

Working from her notes, I quickly found where each of seven children had sold a one-eighth undivided part of the land within the family. Some of them sold part of 90 acres while others sold part of 50 acres or part of 55 acres. How much land did the old farmer really hold at his death? He had sold 13.75 acres and 38.5 acres from the same tract of land. To this day I don't know the answer, but the deeds with 90 acres were definitely in error.

In 1860, the sibling who owned it sold his 7/8 undivided part of the farm outside the family. The eighth sibling was still unidentified. I began to follow the land as it passed from owner to owner. In 1869, 3/4 of an acre was set aside for a school lot. I failed to read the deeds for the school lot. This was another error.

One of the deeds made no sense. After being lost to foreclosure in 1863, the 7/8 part of the land was auctioned. Yet in 1881, the owner's widow signed a quit claim and dower release for the 7/8 part in exchange for a sum of cash. Had she not lost her rights in the foreclosure? Apparently there was a need to create a clean title through a quit claim.

Unfortunately, this quit claim led me astray. I presumed the missing 1/8 was still missing in 1881. It wasn't. But it took several more years and a couple more courthouse visits to find the missing piece.

Fast forward a few years to year eleven of the search. Technology had advanced and the genealogical society had moved. The society had been in cramped quarters and accessing much of the collection had been a problem. However, I delayed checking out the new larger facility and talking to the staff. This was another error.

Based on the census records from 1820 to 1840, I had concluded that the eighth child was a daughter, born 1820-1825 and married after the 1840 census. I had listed all the young women of the surname who had married between 1840 and 1850. I returned to the recorder's office and checked the deed index and deeds using the husbands' surnames. No luck. The conclusion, based on the 1840 census, was wrong.

Next I decided to start with the present and work the deeds backwards in time. Who owned the property now? The recorder didn't know, so sent me to the tax office. What was the tax ID? I had no clue, so the tax office sent me to engineering to get the parcel number from the current maps.

Engineering was an amazing resource. Hanging on racks around the office were many large maps of the county. The staffer asked for the survey number. I had no clue, as all the early deeds had been written based on the military warrant number. My copy of a D.A.R. survey abstract had the warrant number, but not the survey number. I had never looked for the original survey. That was another error.

She pulled out a copy of a ledger that cross-indexed the surveys and warrants. I was stunned when I saw the survey number matched the number on the landowner maps. Why had I never seen that cross-reference index? She told me where in the recorder's office I could find copies of the original survey book and of the cross-reference ledger. These books were stored above my eye-level and I didn't know they were there! Had I ever had a tour of the recorder's office? I should have asked.

Having found the survey number, she pulled out a lovely color-coded map of the area that included the property. She made me a color copy, zoomed in on the farm. Since she had no way to charge for the copies, she just gave me the copy!
 

Survey 12346 (green boundary), Tax Parcel 376-01, Part of Military Warrant 6498. Map as of 2014.

With map in hand, it was back to the tax office. They gave me not only the name of the current owner, but also the deed book and page number where the owner's purchase had been recorded.

The newer deeds each listed the previous deed, so it was fairly quick to follow the deeds back to 1881. The land was being transferred as a whole parcel, so the missing 1/8 had been sold to an owner at some point. Why couldn't I find it?

I went through the survey book and bought copies of each survey of interest. I also wrote down warrant to survey cross-references. Notice that, in the survey, the number 12346 is written inside the plat diagram. When D.A.R. abstracted the written information, they missed documenting the survey number, which is vital information.

Survey 12456 for Military Warrant 6498, in 1823

In the final hours of my visit to the county, I went to see the new genealogical society facility. It was now a wonderful research library. The volunteers had indexed many of the holdings. The staffer on duty took me on a tour and showed me the storage area where the volunteers were cataloging and indexing old court records, which was a collection in which I was interested. But that would be another visit. In the meantime, I purchased, on CD, an index to the marriage consents and affidavits. I also purchased some printed indexes.

When I returned home, I reviewed my purchases. There, in the marriage consents index, I found the answer. The missing daughter had married in 1839 and her father, the old farmer, had signed a consent. I should have included earlier marriages in my search. I sent off for a copy of the consent for my files. If I had found that consent during the visit, I could have concluded the deed search that trip.

A year later, in year twelve of the search, I returned to the county. First stop was the recorder's office. With the new clue, I found a handful of deeds. But there was still a missing link. Why couldn't I find it?

There were two more road blocks to remove. One deed was indexed incorrectly. It covered two parcels of land and only one of the parcels was in the index -- the other parcel. And lastly, the consolidation of the land into one owner was only understood by reading a court case.

The eighth daughter had died, leaving two children. In the sale of the school lot to the Board of Education, those two children had been two of the grantors, each owning a 1/16 part. Had I read that deed years ago, the puzzle would have been solved.

Although I had the genealogical answer, I wanted to understand how the land was consolidated. The answer was in the court cases held by and indexed by the genealogical society.

The son had a guardianship that referred to him as an imbecile. In 1874, his father petitioned the court to partition the land. This may have been the best legal way to deal with the 1/16 fractional ownership by his handicapped son. The daughter had already sold her 1/16 to her father. The appraisers determined that the partition could not be done without damage to the property and so the entirety of the land was ordered sold at auction. The 7/8 owner bought the entire parcel at the sheriff's sale. Reading the deed alone didn't clarify the ownership. In fact, it made no sense to me. Only by a combination of the court case and the deed could I understand the puzzling transaction.

Along the way I collected some landowner maps that I share here for cousins, along with my own index of the transactions. I am also happy to share scans of the deeds and the court case with any cousin who asks.

1844

1858

1871

Click on image below to see a larger version.

Deed Index for part of Military Warrant 6498, Pickaway County, Ohio, 1841-1881

Please use the contact form to send me a message. Include your email address to get a copy of the index in Excel format and copies of deeds and court records in a pdf format.

After the Flood: 52 Ancestors

In 1928, one of the deadliest hurricanes in American history devastated the area around Lake Okeechobee, Florida. Hundreds of people died from the storm surge that flooded the farms south and north of the lake. One of the results of the disaster was the construction of flood control channels, gates and levees around the lake. Nearly ten years later, a young man lost his life when he drowned at the Chosen Locks near Belle Glade, near the southern tip of the lake. Without the flood control changes, would that family tragedy have occurred?

NOAA has provided a map of the devastated area that can be found at Wikipedia (the county lines on the east side of the lake are not drawn correctly). The areas circled by the blue lines were flooded by the storm surge.

By NOAA - From http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mfl/newpage/Okeechobee.htm.,
Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=358954

I write often about the Lake family and the Maddox family, but rarely both families, as with today's story from the Tyner family of Florida.

Dottie May Maddox, born in Kansas on August 5, 1881, was the second child of Elizabeth Lake and Joseph Allen Maddox. Dottie married John Newton Tyner on February 9, 1899, in Garfield County, Oklahoma. The Tyners farmed in both Oklahoma and Florida throughout their marriage. They had ten children, the seventh being Ruth Elizabeth Tyner, born October 22, 1914 near Goltry, Oklahoma.

Dottie May Maddox and John Newton Tyner with seven children, about 1915

Because the family split their time between Florida and Oklahoma, records for the family members can be found in both states, as well as Kansas and Arkansas. However, Florida seemed to be preferred by the children when it came time to marry and raise families. Ruth was certainly no exception.

On May 2, 1931, Ruth Tyner married John Edward Winne in West Palm Beach. On December 12, 1933, just a few days after the birth of their second child, Ruth died. Young John, only 20, was left with two young children. Five years later, the children were orphaned when John drowned in Lake Okeechobee. The children were raised by their widowed grandmother, Dottie Maddox Tyner.

Newspapers tell the story of the tragedy that took John Winne's life.

Source Unknown, Clipping in possession of cousin Lori N.
FATHER SEES SON DROWN IN CANAL,  Belle Glade Man Falls From Lock at Chosen

     Belle Glade, FLA, Jan. 28--John Edward Winnie [sic], 25, lost his life late today when he fell from the Chosen locks after opening the flood gates.  Ross Winnie, his father, was near the scene and dragged his son from the water.
     Winnie was born in Fort Lauderdale and has spent most of his life in or near Belle Glade.  His wife died four [sic] years ago.  He is survived by a daughter, Gertrude, 6, and a son, Milton [sic] 4; also his parents, Mr. and Mrs. Ross Winnie, two sisters, Miss Dorthea Winnie and Miss Mary Winnie and three brothers, Ross, Jr., Herman, and Milton.
    The Everglades Funeral Home, Pahokee, Fla., is in charge and burial will be at the Mayaca Cemetery Sunday.

Palm Beach Post, 30 January 1938, page 2
JOHN EDWARD WINNIE

     PAHOKEE--Funeral services for John Edward Winnie [sic], 25, of Chosen, who drowned at 4:30 o'clock Friday afternoon after falling from the flood gate at the mouth of the Hillsborough Canal, will be held this afternoon at 2 o'clock at the Everglades Funeral Home.  The Rev. J. O. Jameson of the Methodist Church in Belle Glade, will officiate.  Burial will be at the Port Mayaca Cemetery.
     He was the son of Mr. and Mrs. Ross W. Winnie, a prominent Everglades family of Chosen, who survive him.  Other survivors include his children, Fred and Gertrude, of Chosen; two brothers, Wilton Winnie, Pensacola and H. C. Winnie, Chosen; and two sisters, Mary and Dorothy Winnie, Chosen.
     According to attaches of the Everglades Funeral Home here, upon falling he apparently was knocked unconscious when his head hit an obstruction.
(Remainder omitted)

Ruth and John were buried together in the Port Mayaca Cemetery, a site where many victims of the 1928 hurricane were also laid to rest.

Ironically, in another water-related tragedy for the Winne family, son Frederick Wilton Winne drowned in 1970, in the St. Johns River near Jacksonville, Florida. He was only 36 years old.

Death and Taxes: 52 Ancestors

Don't you hate filing your taxes? Our 19th century ancestors paid taxes, too, but they didn't have to fill out a dozen forms. Every time and place had different requirements. Kentucky is one of the states with extremely useful tax records. The Family Search wiki on Kentucky tax records says that the records are very complete for the pre-1850 period and mentions some of the early state tax laws.

The extensive Breckinridge County tax rolls reveal a little about Aaron Lake's life and even provide a clue to his death. In some years, he was not taxed as being a male over 21. Those may be years he evaded the tax assessor or years that he lived in Indiana. He was taxed on land only once. Since there are no deeds, it was probably leased land. He owned one horse for awhile, but not every year. He must have used another type of animal to plow the land he farmed.

Aaron did not appear in the tax rolls for 1809 and earlier. This is consistent with Israel Lake being born in Pennsylvania about 1808 to 1809. Unfortunately there is no 1810 list for Breckinridge County and Aaron is not found on the 1810 census at all. Aaron is first listed on the tax rolls in 1811.

Aaron's sons began to appear on the rolls as they reach the age of 21. Aaron Lake, Senior, is listed in 1827 for the last time. In 1828, only one Aaron is listed, most likely Aaron Lake, Junior.

The death date for Aaron Lake, Senior, can be inferred as 1827-1828. That date can be analyzed along with the assertion of Lindsey Lake that he came to Morgan County, Illinois, in 1828, and was a native of Breckinridge County, born in 1813. Only one Lake family lived in Breckinridge in 1812-1814, so Lindsey must be Aaron's son. Lindsey also named his eldest son Aaron.

It is possible that Aaron Lake, Senior, moved to Illinois, taking his youngest children with him. However, being in his 50s, it is more likely that he died in Breckinridge County, not long after paying his taxes for 1827. Read more about Aaron at this link.

Following is a list of abstracted tax records found for Aaron Lake in Breckinridge County, Kentucky. It is possible to view the microfilm images at the FamilySearch website, where the film number is 7834405.

Breckinridge County, Kentucky, Tax Roll Abstracts for Aaron Lake

1810 - None Available
1811 - Aaron Lake, 1 white male over 21
1812 - Aaron Lake, 1 white male over 21
1813 - Not on roll
1814 - Aaron Lake, 1 white male over 21, 1 horse
1815 - Aaron Lake, 1 white male over 21, 1 horse
1816 - Aaron Lake, 1 white male over 21, 1 horse
1817 - Aaron Lake, 1 white male over 21, 3 horses
Also 50 acres  (leased?) on Dorret's [Dorridge] Creek, chartered and patented by Bibb
1818 - None Available
1819 - Aaron Lake, 1 white male over 21, 1 horse (Jesse Lake is first listed)
1820 - Aaron Lake, 1 white male over 21
1821 - Not on roll ([Harrison] Laird Lake is first listed)
1822 - Not on roll
1823 - Not on roll
1824 - Not on roll (includes Jesse and Harrison)
1825 - Aaron Lake Sr, 1 white male over 21 (includes Jesse and Harrison L)
1826 - Aaron Lake Sr, 1 white male over 21 (includes Jesse, Harrison and Aaron Jr who is first listed)
1827 - Aaron Lake Sr, 1 white male over 21 (includes Jesse, Harrison and Aaron Jr who now has 2 horses)
1828 - One Aaron Lake, probably Jr, as he has 1 horse (includes Jesse and Harrison]
1829 - Not on roll. Hancock County was formed, taking part of Breckinridge County.
1829 - On Hancock County list is one Aaron Lake, probably Jr, as he has 2 horses (includes Jesse and Harrison L]

Breckinridge County, Kentucky, Delinquency Abstracts for Aaron Lake

Each year a list of delinquent taxpayers was presented in court.

Abstracts from the Breckinridge County court books from 1813-1823 were published in Breckinridge County, Kentucky Records, Volume 3. The books were authored by Michael L. Cook and Bettie Anne Cook, and published by Cook Publications, Evansville, Indiana, 1984. The Family History Library call number is 976.9854 V2c v. 3.

Aaron Lake was listed twice in the delinquency records. He was delinquent for 1819 and listed as delinquent and insolvent for 1820. For the 1821 tax year, reported in 1822, [Harrison] Laird Lake was listed as having "removed over the Ohio". In other words, he moved to Indiana. That is a clue to where Aaron and the rest of the family went in the early 1820's.

These tax records provide information that is not available in the census or any other known record. They are a vital part of the proof case for Aaron Lake of Breckinridge County being the father of the Lake men and women who lived in Breckinridge County, Hancock County and in Perry County, Indiana.