QUAKER-ROOTS-L Archives

Archiver > QUAKER-ROOTS > 1999-05 > 0925832074


From: "L.A.McGinnis" <>
Subject: Re: Migrations to Ohio discussion
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 10:34:34 -0500


True - mine included - sure would be interested in hearing
any reason(s) for this migratory influx -

anne-ology

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Fields/8379/index.html

>One thing that is very general but bears repeating is the overall influx of
>people to Ohio from 1802-1820. In his excellent history series, Page Smith
>quotes a source that by 1820, Ohio had a population of 500,000, most of
whom
>had come in just 18 years.
>As a Beeson, I have learned from this digest about the circuitous route
from
>PA down to NC, back up to WVA then on to Indiana. As a Curless descendant,
I
>have learned that many of the New Jersey people went straight to Ohio. But
>some Pennsyvanians, like my Ashton ancestors, stopped at the Redstone
>settlement in western PA first, stayed a few years then went to Ohio.
>But the bottom line is that people flocked to Ohio. However they got back
to
>PA, they went on flatboats on the Ohio River.
>Another interesting and relevant migration is to Indiana in the 1830s. Many
>people, including my direct Curless left from Ohio in 1833. It looks like
>some of the NC-WVA Quakers bypassed Ohio though and I look forward to the
>more knowledgeable of you to describe that part of the journey.
>And by the way, I understand the passion about life habits and
>generalizations about Quakers being the subject of much back and forth. I
>therefore propose a few more items for possible over-discussion:
>Modern Friends are always considered "liberal," mostly because of the
>anti-war stance and overall committment to charity. We know of famous
Quaker
>Republicans, like Nixon but I would like to ask the body: Do you think the
>descendants of Quakers are more or less likely to be in the Democrat party
or
>just reflect the same variety as other historical-cultural groups? I
>specifically ask because my overview of history includes the Massachussetts
>Congregationalists, Rhode Island dissenters, Maryland Catholics, the
Virginia
>Anglicans, the NewJersey-Pennsylvania Quakers (of various countries), the
>Scots-Irish of 1717-1790, the Irish Catholics of the 19th century and
>everybody after.
>Perhaps its fruitless to ponder over such things but I am very well-read in
>American history and I am often tempted to connect political-philosophical
>thought in patterns, just as I have recently discovered about my own
>genealogy. Since I discovered my Quaker roots, I have found the damnedest
>coincidences that led to my Curless Grandma (a pioneer Californian
descendant
>from old NJ-Ohio Quakers) meeting my recently -arrived Beeson grandpa from
>Indiana in a remote part of Northern California. It was like a reunion of
two
>venerable Quaker families with many actual ties, but neither of them knew
>much about it.
>Maybe its just that we are so numerous that it is just mathematical odds
but
>was I ever surprised to find that my son's babysitter is a descendant of
>Joseph Kirkbride, like me and that his best friend is a Collins descendant
>who came from NJ to Ohio along with my kin.
>I would even be so bold as to suggest that like migrating animals, people
>seem to end up near their own kind, but in nearly invisible and unmeant
>methods. Like when I moved into my house in 1988 and discovered that a
Beeson
>had lived next door for over 30 years and had only moved six months prior!
>And we are talking about Northern California, not Indiana where I guess you
>can't spit without hittin a Beeson.
>California is such a mixed-up place but as I stated before, I keep finding
>that I am surrounded by familiars. As I stood at a small cemetery in
Fortuna,
>CA looking at my Curless ancestors grave, my eyes wandered over to the next
>plot and there was a huge family group of Byards, the long-standing NJ
>family, whom my GGGGGrandpas brother named his son after (of course along
>with a Stacy!).
>Anyway, keep discussing things but try not to get mad. Some of us quite
>frankly use the digest for genealogy, look for our surnames and move on. My
>only request would be that you erase the previous message that
automatically
>appears in your Reply mode. You risk losing context, but most of us are
>following and the rest will catch on.

This thread: