Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Susan, I agree that there were no Beach/Beech families listed in the Colleton censuses of 1790 and 1800 (in fact, the whole community that I call "the Stokes area" seems to be missing in the 1800 census, ie, no Lopers, no Hiotts, no O'Bryans or Robinsons or Razors, etc.), but I differ with you in that there WERE Beeches among the Lopers, Hiotts/Hyatts, etc. in 1810. Thomas Beech was living between Peter Hyatt (Hiott) and Samuel H. on one side, and Martha Costine and Messick Loper, Sr., on the other side. Closer to Peter, Messick (Jr.), and Joseph Loper was a "William Beeck", who was probably a Beech.
Also in the county in 1810 was Joseph Beech. His location next door to Wm. Lowndes, big rice planter, with 259 slaves owned by Lowndes, none by Beech (Beach), makes me wonder if he wasn't something on the order of an overseer for Lowndes?
Perhaps the Beeches/Beaches arrived in Colleton just after the 1790 census (so missed it) and were in the "Stokes" area before and after 1800 (but the census missed everyone there around "Stokes" for that decade, but finally got counted in the 1810 census? Well, it's my theory.
---David
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/costine/messages/19.html | ||
 |
Agreement of Use Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|