Thanks for that post. I too have been puzzling over this line for some years.
Regarding your 1882 death date for Joseph Hurley, I presume it's a typo' and should read 1822.
Regarding Sarah Burley b. 1796, I see the Rev. Robert McDowell's register has an MR: "Wm. Solmes, Sarah Burly Ernesttown, 29 July, 1821".
I think this would tend to eliminate the biological daughter of Joseph Burley/Burleigh as wife of Joseph Soles. The date and her age fix well with with a birth year of 1796.
The 1840's Will of Joseph Burley was also interesting in that it left property to his sons by second wife Sarah Ann Hurd and not to his biological daughters by her and tokens of five shillings to sons by first wife Jemima, also ignoring his biological daughters by Jamima but it also leaves 100 acres in Portland Township to daughter "Sarah Soles". She would have been adopted by him at age 15 or so and although I take GT Ridlon's book with a grain of salt since a lot of it seems based on hearsay, Ridlon does suggest that Joseph Soles was not much of a business man (I can empathize with that!). Perhaps he felt his adopted daughter was in special need.
I've also puzzled over Jim Soles note of his grandmother's 'Vanness' connection. It does seem likely from Census records that mention Dutch and German heritage, not to mention given names such as 'Vanandus' (my 2nd ggf who based on his own Will, was illiterate, which may help to explain the various other spellings of his name) that there was such a connection but I wonder if perhaps Caroline Townsend may have assigned the Vanness surname to the wrong generation.
So I'm inclined to agree that the wife of Joseph Soles 1802-1879 was the Sarah Hurley daughter of Joseph Hurley and Sarah Ann Hurd who later married Joseph Burley. That's why I call her Sarah Hurley-Burley!
Just curious, what is your connection to this line?
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|