William Cain (abt. 1784)

Thanks for attending to this, Steve.

So... if I understand what's here now, there is only one source for this person's existence and relationships (parents, siblings, wife) and that is the 1986 family genealogy by Wayne R Cain and Shirley Evans, which cites no sources for this William. And that this person appears in no other records anywhere else? No marriage record, no census records, no land deeds, probate?

Am I missing anything?

Yes, this person has not been found in any other records, except the 1986 book. The fact that Cain & Evans do not cite a source for William leaves the possibility that they got it wrong and one or more components of his identity are false. In similar cases, the only remedy is to painstakingly make searches using the range of possibilities for each, and various combinations, of the components of his identity and hope something relevant is found.

Unfortunately, the lack of sources and so many unknowns is what made this profile vulnerable to conflation, and still does. That is why this profile still has the research notes section and shows the unproven info and relationships, to hopefully prevent a new round of conflations.

Thanks for confirming my understanding, Steve.

I believe, though, that we have at least one Wikitree member here who believes that William, purported son of Edmund Cain, and currently represented by this profile IS the same as William (Riley?) Cain who is represented by Cain-7662 and who later ends up in census records in Russell Co., Kentucky. (BTW, as of this date (3 Apr 2024), that conflation is still represented on THIS profile by the data in the death date and place fields here.)

What would address this continued belief would be a research note that explains why William Cain-7662 of Russell Co., KY (married to Margaret and with a set of children and represented in various census records) could NOT be the same man as described in the 1986 genealogy as son of Edmund and with a wife Mary. I *think* the primary reasons are:

1. The 1986 genealogy includes a list of Edmund's children that at least some readers assume are listed in chronological order, giving William (with wife Mary) an estimated birth year of 1784; census records of William Cain of Russell Co (with wife Margaret and several children including Ephraim, William Riley and Nancy and possibly Smith William) calculate William Cain-569's birth back to 1774-1776, almost a decade prior to the estimated age of William son of Edmund.

2. Especially if we believe the 1795 Tennessee marriage license between a William McKine and Margaret Williams represents William Cain-7662 and Margaret of later census records, then William Cain-7662 had only one wife, mother of all his children, and therefore could not be the William Cain with a wife Mary as claimed in the 1986 genealogy. (The 1795 TN marriage record theory still needs attending to-- have we ruled out the presence of a William McKine in subsequent records?)

Is there anything else that rules out Cain-7662 from being the man represented by Cain-569? Because, frankly, if it's just the two arguments above, the disambiguation is based on assumptions (order of list of Edmund's children and a 1795 marriage record for a man with a different but similar surname), not hard, documented facts.

(BTW, I'm personally neutral on the actual family ties-- my focus is on the analysis of the evidence.)

Edited to add: It appears there might be DNA evidence that demonstrates that descendants of Nicholas Cain (which includes descendants of his documented son Edmund) are a distinct haplogroup from descendants of William Cain-7662 of Russell Co., Kentucky. Is this explained anywhere?

JS; I agree with your points. I changed death and a few other clarifications.

Why shouldn't William Riley Cain be the son of Cain-7662? They're on the 1850 census in the same household.

Check Cain-7662, William Riley is there.

I know, I was referring to your statement "Didn't agree that Riley should be on either one. "

MG Pitts created family Nicholas, son Edmond & wife Mary, and grandson William Cain-569 all on Sep 21-22 2010. He cites "Descendants of Nicholas Cain" in Edmond's profile at creation. So his intent for the identity of these profiles is pretty clear.

Then on 7 Jan 2024, another William Cain-3610 was merged into William Cain-569 which introduced the 1860 US Census record of Russell County KY and the middle name Riley. It is not clear what reliable source was leaned on to associate these two profiles.

Meanwhile, William Cain-7662 was created on 14 Dec 2021 as William Cain of Russell County KY, but his multiple decade residence there was only fully sourced through edits since Feb 2024.

That they are the same person (or not the same person) appears to be unsourced. But if the "Descendants of Nicholas Cain" is to be believed, it seems not likely. William Cain, son of Edmond & Mary, is listed as child #7, born some time between child #5 b. 1778 and child #8 b. 1787. That year range 1778–1787 is "somewhat" inconsistent with the US Census records for William Cain of Russel County, KY, which suggest he was born between 1774–1776.

So there appears to be no reliable source to merge them today.

Even though William Cain-569, son of Edmond & Mary, is unsourced as their son, his profile should be preserved as he is documented in a printed family genealogy. If his existence is proved, everything is good. If his existence is disproved or uncertain, it can be templated with Disproven Existence or Uncertain Existence.

Given the ease with which several persons have conflated these two, they will both benefit from project-management.

• William Cain-7662, of Russell Co KY
• William Cain-569, son of Edmond & Mary

I agree with you in that there is no suppoetted father for Cain-569 and Cain-7662, William Cain. But can't agree that the Margaret has the maiden name of Garrett. There is only one record match, but it has an issue (The Marriage record is found under McKine (under searching), while both original records show McKine, one record uses the name twice and that record it reads McKane). Margaret's maiden name is Williams. I will post her on cain-7662 and see what everone has to say.

She's not listed as Garrett here, but as Unknown.

I think you need to make the case that the William McKine on the 1795 marriage record in Tennessee is the same as this William Cain. Can we confirm that he went as McKine (or other Mc* spellings) in other records?

In any case, the merge should go through and we can resolve the wife's name after.

This was posted in the Cain Project of Family Tree DNA Jun 2020. "Big Y should do it alright. We have known for about a decade that the Nicholas Cain descendants are R-L513, which is found along the west coast of Ireland of and Scotland. Then two members of the Nicholas Cain group tested positive for FGC46414. You can see them in the L513 section at www.ytree.net" per post from Rory Cain. I hope this puts the Nicholas Cain Connection to sleep. The Russell County Cains are Y Haplogroup R-FT347395.

Cain-7662 and Cain-569 do not represent the same person because: These two profiles were conflated. Now separated and Easily Conflated research note added to both.

The following is for a William Cain who married *in 1823 in Virginia* a Margaret Garnett:

"Virginia, County Marriage Records, 1771-1989", , FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:66VG-K52B : Sat Oct 21 14:41:12 UTC 2023), Entry for William R Cane and Margarett Garnett, 10 Nov 1823.

This is an indexed entry; to see the original, one would have to go to an LDS Family Search center. Or perhaps Ancestry.com has a digital image of the record.

Edited to correct marriage location. Note that Kentucky was not formed (from Virginia) until 1825, so this *could* be the marriage for the William Cain who ends up in Russell Co, Kentucky.

Ms Smith, I forgot about that record. But isn't that orginal record for Wm R. Care, not Cain and Margaret Garrett, not Garnett? The William Riley Cain he is using was born in 1776 per his profile, cain-569. I could not locate a birth record for a William Riley Cain, son of Edmund Cain. If he is using the book "Descendants of Nicholas Cain" page 196, William Cain is the 6th Child. The birth date, 1776 would be invalid, he would be born before child 5 and 4. His birth date would have to be closer to 1682 to align with the siblings dates and their sources.

Without being able to see the original record, I can't answer your questions about the spelling of the surnames of either spouse. It could be an indexing or transcription error.

Cain-7662 and Cain-569 are not ready to be merged because: There are no sources to show that William Cain, father of Ephraim Cain is the son of this couple

There is, likewise, no source that identifies Cain-569 as the son of this couple. I agree that Cain-7662 and Cain-569 represent the same person and should be merged.

Cain-7662 and Cain-569 appear to represent the same person because: I have verified that Edmond Cain had no son named William and that the parents for both of these Williams is unknown. There's no evidence there were two seperate william cains

Cain-7662 and Cain-569 do not represent the same person because: William Riley Cain was born in 1776 in Augusta, Virginia, his father, Edmond, was 30 and his mother, Mary, was 23. He married Mary Margaret Garrett in 1797 in Tennessee. They had six children in 31 years.

Online trees claim his middle name was Riley, as his son's was (William Riley Cain (abt.1814-1885)), but there is no documentary evidence showing a middle name or initial.

William Cain was living with with his son Ephraim in the 1860 Census in Russell County, KY. Instructions were to list all persons living at the residence on 1 June 1860, so he died after this date. He is not found in any later census.

Cain 7662 has conflicting data in bio and death date, rejects known fact he had son William and five other children, thus should be removed from the wiki database, and other entries by the profile owner should be scrutinized.

Cain-7662 and Cain-569 do not represent the same person because: cain-569 Profile Record has numerous errors/issues, no sources/references to collaborate the mariage to Mary Margaret (Unknown) Garrett — married 1797 in Tennessee, the Father of William Riley Cain, Birth date, Birth place, nor who his Parents are.

Cain-569 needs to be edited, ater this action is completed we can then deal with merging William Riley Cain (cain-3076 and 9611).

I think, Edward, what you're saying is that Page 127 of The History of Welcome Garrett... says nothing about a 1797 marriage between "Mary Margaret 'Polly' Garrett and William Cain/Cane (and therefore should not be used as a source for such a marriage). That page lists Elijah Garrett and his SONS.

See https://books.google.com/books?id=29gyG7JClYAC&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+of+welcome+garrett&hl=en#v=snippet&q=Elijah%20garrett&f=false

Can you provide a source for the 1897 marriage to Margaret Garrett?

Joseph, what sources support William being son of Edmond and Mary?

I found an agricultural census (1860) that lists William *R* Cain of Russell County, Kentucky, who is probably the same as the William Cain enumerated in the same county in the regular 1860 census.

"United States, Kentucky, Agricultural Schedules, 1850-1880", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSXS-HSFT-L?cc=4231101 : 9 February 2023), > image 1 of 1.

There are issues with the 1860 Agricultural Census listing a William R. Cain and proving which William R. Cain represents this record. Ephraim A. Cain, son of William Cain and brother of Ephraim R. Cain, had a son also named William R. Cain and was a property owner at this time. This makes at least three William R. Cain's owning property in Russell County and without getting into who this William R Cain is, 1860 Census for Russell County, Ky, list a William R. Cain with wife Elizabeth, (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33SQ-GB9V-N7C?view=index&personArk=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AMZBB-KHZ&action=view). I beleive the wife's name is transcribed incorrectly and should be Isabella, but proving it is as hard as the William Cain issue.

A few years ago, I failed to locate resources needed to prove the date and location of death for not only William Cain, but his wife, Margaret, the son he was living with, Ephraim, and his wife, Rebecca (1860 Census). Since then, I was able to obtain Ephraim Cain's date of death (30 Apr 1864) using his probate record (Kentucky, U.S., Wills and Probate Records, 1774-1989). Grave marker locations are still unknown.

Mary Margaret Garrett's profile has no information, no date of Birth, date of death, date of marriage, appears to only have a name. Do you have any information on Ms Garrett?

This was posted in the Cain Project of Family Tree DNA Jun 2020. "Big Y should do it alright. We have known for about a decade that the Nicholas Cain descendants are R-L513, which is found along the west coast of Ireland of and Scotland. Then two members of the Nicholas Cain group tested positive for FGC46414. You can see them in the L513 section at www.ytree.net" per post from Rory Cain. I hope this puts the Nicholas Cain Connection to sleep. The Russell County Cains are Y Haplogroup R-FT347395.