Big changes have come to — all content is now read-only, and member subscriptions and the Shop have been discontinued.
Learn more

Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Brewer Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: Andrew Brewer
Posted by: Sue Dinkel (ID *****8302) Date: March 09, 2004 at 07:36:41
In Reply to: Re: Andrew Brewer by Bob Merrill of 8988

This may seem a "bit" far-fetched. I have been looking at the info on genforum and regarding Andrew Brewer/Eunice Alderman (researching family for my sis-n-law who is a desc. of Andrew/Eunice). Seems there is a lot of conflicting info. Eunice was dau. of Manna Alderman and Jane Purvis - agreed on. No father for Andrew. Jane (Purvis) Alderman remarried a Frederick Brewer - and have seen info that shows Frederick as son of Nathan Thomas Brewer and Mary/Polly Burns; and as son of William Joseph Brewer and Sarah Elizabeth Caviness. A Frederick and Jane Brewer had at least one daughter, Merinda (also appears as Maranda/Marander). Here's the catch - this Merinda mar. William S. Foster in Morgan Co., Ind. and had six children -- three of their Foster sons married three Sharp sisters - daughters of George Sharp and Celia Jane Brewer (dau. of Andrew Brewer/Eunice Alderman. If Jane (Purvis) [Alderman] Brewer was mother of both Eunice and Merinda - she would have been grandmother to the Foster bros. and great grandmother to the Sharp sisters. And now - here's the "far fetched" idea: The older Frederick Brewer is Andrew's father (mother unknown at this time); and he married 2nd to Jane (Purvis) Alderman; the younger Frederick Brewer also married a Jane (but not Jane (Purvis) Alderman) and had dau. Merinda. William Foster died in 1862/63, but Merinda shows up in a later Census record with two additonal children, born after William's death. There is some indication that she married a David Day (he is not listed with the family in later Census); and the members of the household are all listed under Foster, not Foster and Day, but omission of the Day surname could be on the part of the person giving the info or on the part of the Census enumerator. Am I just spittin' in the wind or has someone figured out these relationships already?? Please help clear up the confusion!!!

Notify Administrator about this message?
No followups yet

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network