Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Well, Cliff, this discrepancy should be easy to verify. The obit on Daniel doesn't mention his going to California, but I assume we're talking about the same brothers. I wouldn't be so quick to go with the NYT: the obit on David says he was a member of the first CA legislature, but in fact he was a Democratic assemblyman in the THIRD legislature (1852)from San Francisco County. The 1850 SF city directory shows that David was the county assessor at the time of the first legislature; the 1854 directory simply lists him as a "merchant" at Armory Hall. The 1850 census clearly shows a "D.W.," not "D.M.," and there are multiple references to a "D.W." Chauncey in both the SF Herald and the SF Alta California. Of course, this doesn't mean I'm right, and given Daniel's prominence it seems like it would be easy to check whether his middle initial was indeed M or W. The NY census as well as the city directory should clear this up. An interesting puzzle, yes?
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/chauncey/messages/79.html | ||
 |
Agreement of Use Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|