Swallow / Schwalluw son-in-law Benjamin Johnson

Question

Can anyone experienced with this issue tell me how hopeless it might be to pursue it further? My late mother included the "Benjamin Johnson" mentioned as son-in-law in the will of Schwalluw-1 Johannes Schwalluw, but I can't tell whether it is the same person as Johnson-88725, or if not, whether a new profile can/should be created for either Schwalluw's (unnamed) daughter or his son-in-law, or both.

I have added some Research Notes to the existing WikiTree profiles (one was orphaned) - is that all that can be done right now?

Comments

Did you examine the sureties on the marriage bonds you cited on the Johnson-88725 profile?

Have you examined the tax lists from Amwell Twp. from the 1700s? The 1784 list is especially nice because it indicates each household size.

---

Hi Barry, thanks for the ideas!

I have not examined the tax lists from Amwell Twp from the 1700s - I'm not yet sure where I would find them, but now I can start googling!

Also not sure exactly what you mean by the "sureties on the marriage bonds". Please be gentle with me - all of the actual research (except for what I've been able to find online) was done by my late mother - and she's not available to answer questions anymore.   : (

---

Hi GM,
The very thorough marriage citations on Benjamin's profile:

 https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Johnson-88725

such as citation #5 indicate that they are on microfilm created by FHL (the Family History Library in Utah). These can sometimes be viewed for free through the FamilySearch website as well, but the marriage bond film requires you to be on a computer at a Family History Centers or Affiliate Libraries (these are scattered around the world). Someone presumably got a look at these images.

I have viewed lots of other marriage bonds from this collection. At the time in New Jersey, Virginia, and some other places, a bride- and groom-to-be had to execute a bond through the government after declaring their intention to marriage. If the marriage fell through for some reason, the bond-holders could forfeit their money. The bond also had sureties, and they, too, could be financially responsible. So the sureties were often family members. It's always good to try to figure out who they were and if they were relatives, and it is sometimes an invaluable clue as to the identities of the bride and groom.

---

Hi Barry, thanks for your clarifying response! I think that I may have inadvertently confused you (and others?) by including the citations for the Research Notes I made as I hunted for a fitting spouse and recorded my "rejected matches". The detailed information in those links (unfortunately) appears to have nothing to do with "my" Benjamin Johnson. That may be why I was, in my own turn, confused by your reference to marriage records in this case - all I have at the moment is mention of Benjamin Johnson as son-in-law in Johannes Schwalluw's will. I did find a lot of neat stuff about early families in Amwell township, however! If you are following any families in that area, I can recommend the website by Marfy Goodspeed.

---

I understand. However, are you just using wives surnames to rule out these marriages? Here is my aunt who married into the same Swallow family:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bower-4113

(The image on the profile is a typical example of a marriage bond.)

Family bible records say she was a Bower (as does DNA matching to my family), but the marriage bond calls her “Servey.” The hypothesis is that she was a young widow, perhaps married to the Uri Servey who died about a year prior.

So a wrong surname doesn’t necessarily mean she’s a different person.

---

I’ve encountered Marfy Goodspeed’s website a few times before. I’m interested in Swallow, Shank (but not Schenck), Lake, Blazer, Burroughs, and a few other names in Hunterdon Co. But the FAN principle says to investigate all the neighbors, and that has proven useful to me many times in the past.

---

Both are very valid points. I try to look at a number of things when deciding whether a "near miss" is just some error throwing me off from making a correct match, or if there are really two different people involved. I hope that, by leaving a record of what I found (and why I think they didn't match) it will be easier for me (or someone else) to assess new information as it shows up. My priority at the moment is trying to get as much of my mother's work "saved" onto WikiTree as I can - before it is lost and/or I am no longer able to justify the time and effort involved.

I greatly appreciate the support I've gotten from you and others in the WikiTree community - fully realizing that, at the end of the day, I will need to do as much research as I can manage and make a choice!

Answer 1

This doesn't directly answer your question, but here are observations:

1) I happen to have an image of the 1784 tax lists for Amwell [from FHL film #865475]. It is organized into groups with surname beginning with the same letter. Topping of the 'J' group is:

Johnson, Benj., 180 acres improved land, 29 acres unimproved, 4 horses, 6 cattle, 5 white people in the household

Johnson, Jacob, 250 acres improved land, 44 acres unimproved, 4 horses, 6 cattle, 5 white people in the household

Johnson, Isaac, 147 acres improved land, 4 horses, 7 cattle, 4 white people in the household and 1 black person

Then Thomas Jones.

Then Johnson, Martin 68 acres improved land, 2 horses, 2 cattle, 6 white people in the household

Then 6 lines down: Johnson, Jacob [S B?], 180 acres improved land, 3 horses, 3 cattle, 9 white people in the household

[skip one line, then next page begins]
Johnson, Henry, 85 acres improved land, 4 horses, 4 cattle, 7 white people in the household

And that's the end of the J group.

2) The Benjamin Johnson whose profile you linked would seem a great candidate to be the one in the tax list. His profile incorrectly says that his will was proved in 1794 — the linked source indicates that he died intestate, without a will. But the administrators Isaac, Jacob, and Benajmin have the same names as the first three heads-of-household in the tax list. 

3) This deed gives the heirs of Benjamin who died probably shortly before 1796, including the Isaac, Jacob, and Benjamin so named. 

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSK7-5S6F?i=47&cat=220656

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem a widow was a signatory. And I don't see a deed in the Early Land Records database on which Benjamin was grantor, which could give her name.

Conclusion: My feeling is that since you have a candidate Benjamin Johnson who was probably of the right generation to be the son-in-law, and living in the same township, and existing records are consistent with there being a single man of this name and no others, that it is okay to view this Benjamin as the son-in-law of Johannes Schwalluw with an "uncertain" flag... except that WikiTree doesn't have an "uncertain" flag for spouses, so it would just need to be written into the biography. His wife's forename could be "unknown," but I wouldn't be surprised if more digging turned up a candidate forename for her. Forenames are easy enough to change on Wikitree if one does turn up.

Comments

Thanks, Barry! It would have probably taken me ages to track all of that down - much less to feel confident about what to do next.