LaBrunes Arrive at NYC in 1833

LaBrunes on passenger list of ship Robert Morris, arriving in New York City on November 7, 1833.

I just stumbled across (read "found on FamilySearch.org) the family of Philip LaBrune on the passenger list of a ship that arrived at New York City on November 7, 1833.

First, why I think this is our family. From the 1840 and 1850 US census records of our Philip LaBrune, I have the following family in 1833:

Philippe, b. 1794 in France
Ann, wife, b. 1793 in France
George, son, b. 1824 in France
Unknown, son, b. between 1825 and 1830, probably in France
Nicholas, b. 1831 in France
[born later were:
Unknown, daughter, b. between 1835 and 1840, in France or the US
Jean-Baptiste, b. 1840 in Ohio]

The passenger list shows the following family:
Philippe (probably), 38 years old (b. 1795), male, Weaver, French citizen
? ends in -ria or -nn or -nna, 39 years old (b. 1794), female, French citizen
? ends in -ne M., 14 years old (b. 1819), female, French citizen
? ends in -orge, 11 years old (b. 1822), male, French citizen
? ends in -un C., 7 years old (b. 1826), male, French citizen
? ends in -los, 5 years old (b. 1828), male, French citizen

There is some uncertainty in the names, but what is shown matches well with the LaBrunes whose names we know, the birth years and countries match well, and the arrival fits in the window we thought to be between 1831 and 1840.

They arrived on a ship called the Robert Morris, sailing out of Le Havre, a very large port on the north coast of France, and arrived on November 7, 1833 in New York City. The  153 passengers were mostly from France and Bavaria and included several weavers, seamstresses and shoemakers, as well as bakers and farmers.

This passenger ship record adds some new information about the family.  The LaBrunes immigrated in 1833.  Philip was a weaver in France.  He and Ann had a daughter, name ending in -ne and middle initial M, born in about 1819 that was no longer with the family when we first found them in Ohio in 1840, when this daughter would have been about 21 years old. My guess is that she married, so there is another branch of the LaBrune family somewhere.  Philip and Ann's second son's name ends in -n, his middle initial is C, and he was born in about 1826, probably in France. Nicholas may have been born a little earlier than the census indicates, in about 1828. Their youngest daughter, born between 1835 and 1840, was probably born in the US.

Double Cousins

I recently came across a report of a Dooley cousin in St. Louis - Alex Dooley, Hamburger Man in St. Louis - (though I haven't yet contacted this family and they may not be aware of our connection). My Legacy Family Tree software tells me that Alex's children are my fourth cousins, through two different paths, i.e., double fourth cousins.  I set out to find out what that means genetically and if there is some sort of metric to allow me to compare a "double fourth cousin" to the more common single fourth cousin.  There is a Coefficient of Relationship, R, related to degrees of relationship, but the math might be too much, so first I'll skip to the results, then try a brief basic explanation, then point to some resources for more information, if you're interested.


Single relationships

Siblings have about half of their genes in common, the degree of relationship is 1 or first, and the corresponding coefficient of relationship, R, is 1/2.  Advancing one generation: first cousins have in common about 1/8 of their genes, the degree of relationship is 3, and the corresponding R is 1/8. Each consecutive generation shares just 1/4 as many genes as the previous generation, the degree increases by 2, and the corresponding R is only 1/4 as large.  The following table shows these values through fourth cousins.

Relationship	Degree	R	% genes in common
Self or identical twins	0	1	100
Siblings	1	1/2	50
1st cousins	3	1/8	12.5
2nd cousins	5	1/32	3.1
3rd cousins	7	1/128	0.8
Double 4th cousins	8	1/256	0.4
4th cousins	9	1/512	0.2

Our double relationship

So, where does the "double" come in? Back in 1863, William Dooley married Elizabeth Martin in St. Louis.  In 1887, William's niece, Anastasia LaBrune, married Elizabeth's nephew, James Hogan. This created a double relationship between the Dooleys and the Hogans. William and Elizabeth's son, Thomas, was a first cousin to both Anastasia LaBrune on his father's side and James Hogan on his mother's side.  As an aside, since Thomas was an only child AND the Dooley's were Anastasia's only family in St. Louis AND Thomas and Anastasia were only four years apart in age AND James Hogan was also family AND the Hogan kids and Thomas' kids were all close in age, the Hogans and Dooleys were probably very close, akin to siblings, at least in their teen and adult lives.  In the next generation, Thomas' kids were second cousins to the Hogan kids, once through Anastasia and the Dooleys and again through James and the Martins.  This made them double second cousins. The next generation were then double third cousins, and so forth. How does that change the values in the table? Basically this means that instead of having one set of ancestors in common, they have two, both the same number of generations back, so the descendants of Thomas Dooley and of James and Anastasia LaBrune Hogan all have twice as many genes in common. The degree of relationship for double fourth cousins in 8, R is 1/256, and they have about 0.4% of their genes alike. According to one of the sources listed below, this is about 117 genes of the approximately 30,000 in the human genome.

More about quantifying relationships

If you'd like to know more, perhaps about how to include half siblings, or how to trace out any relationships, here are some explanations on the WWW:

Genetic and Quantitative Aspects of Genealogy
A thorough explanation of the Coefficient of Relationship (R) and related subjects.

Quantitative Consanguinity
A less through explanation with more applications to genealogy, but they only show degrees of relationship through 7, whereas a fourth cousin is degree 9.

Degrees of Relation and Number of Genes Shared
Not thorough, but relates R to the number of genes shared for various relationships.

Cushings of Fort Winnebago, Portage and Lewiston, Wisconsin

[A very frustrating experience at the library.  Found hundreds of newspaper articles including Cushings and Caseys in the Portage newspaper database at the library.  I emailed all my findings to me, then find that only the titles were sent, not the text information. But, there were a few that I remember.  I'll report more precisely when I go back and copy the articles.]

One of the articles reported four marriages that took place at St. Mary's Catholic church in Portage one day.  Two of the brides were Cushings.  One was Nellie, daughter of John, who married Dennis Callahan.  The other I don't remember exactly, but married McSorley (from Texas, I believe) and was from one of the Portage or Lewiston Cushing families.  The article stated that the two brides were no relation to each other, which (if accurate) answers a question we've had for many years. So our Cushings of Fort Winnebago were not, at least closely, related to the other Cushing families in Portage and Lewiston. 

Johanna Cussen/Cushing O'Connell of Lodi, Wisconsin

I've found the last of the known daughters of Dennis and Catherine Casey Cussen/Cushing.

Johanna was born in Galbally in 1836, travelling with her family to Newfoundland, Boston, and Fort Winnebago by about 1848. In about 1858 she married George O'Connell, I believe a recent immigrant from New Brunswick, Canada, and they settled in Lodi, about 25 miles south of Fort Winnebago. They were farmers. From 1860 to 1876 they had thirteen children in Lodi: Katie (1860), Ellen (1861-1931), John F (1863), Mary E. (1864-1937), George, Jr. (1865), Joanna (1866, m. Edward Kerrigan), James E. (1868), Maggie (1869, m. John Bastian 1906), Frances (1871, died 1873), William (1873, died at 6 weeks old), Daniel (1874, died in 1888), Alice (1875), and Mark (1876). George, Sr. died in 1877, leaving Joanna with 11 children between the ages of 4 and 17 and a farm to run.  I have no records over the next 20 years, so don't know how she managed. By 1900, Johanna was living in Portage, near Fort Winnebago, with only James remaining at home.  She remained in Portage until her death, in 1923, and is buried with her family in St. Patrick's Cemetery in Lodi.

A side note: In 1860, 27 year old Michael Welch, also from New Brunswick, was living with George and Johanna.  Ten years later he married Johanna's younger sister, Ellen Cushing. A brief google indicates that Michael's mother's name may have been O'Connell, so he and George may have been cousins.

Another side note: As I research Johanna's family, I find that their last name is O'Connell only on the markers of their Lodi graves. George O'Connell's marker looks to be an original tombstone, strong evidence of the last name O'Connell.  Nonetheless, every other record I've found, for generations, gives a last name of Connell and I've decided to use this as the family name.

Hypothesis: Philip LaBrune m. Josephine Oligée in Ohio in 1868

[Just realized I posted this information at Iowa GenWeb in 2012, but nowhere on my blog or website. So:]

If there are any LaBrune researchers listening, please let me know if you have any information that might support or refute an hypothesis I'm working on.

What I think I know:
(1) Philip and Ann LaBrune and family were in Clermont Co., Ohio in 1840. Jean-Baptiste was born there after the census. In 1850, the family was in Dubuque co., Iowa. Comparing the 1840 and 1850 censuses, a 20-25 yr old boy and a 10-15 yr old girl are not with the family in Dubuque. (These are the ages they would have in 1850.) Did they stay behind? Did they die? Were they not members of the family, but just living with them in Ohio? I don't know, but I have looked around to see if there are any LaBrunes back in southern Ohio.
(2) We don't know what happened to Philip. He is in the 1860 census. He is listed in an 1865 property tax roll. He is not in Dubuque in the 1870 census. He is not buried with his wife and the other LaBrunes. I have not researched extensively myself, but know of no death records for Philip. As an interesting, a little surprising, side note: Daniel Dooley, a neighbor and father-in-law to Philip & Ann's son, Jean-Baptiste, is buried next to Ann. Ann died in January 1868.
(3) In Oct 1868, a Philip LaBrune married a Josephine Oligée in Brown co., Ohio, a county adjacent to Clermont co., where the LaBrunes lived in 1840. Thinking this might be the missing LaBrune son, who possibly stayed behind, I dug deeper. I found Philip and Josephine in the 1880 census. They were both born in France: he in 1796; she in 1804. This Philip is about the same age our Philip who disappeared from Dubuque. Could it be?

Putting together the pieces:
As I said, the last record I have of Philip in Dubuque is a tax roll in 1865. If he did not die there, I assume he would have remained with his wife, Ann, while she was living. She died in Jan 1868, about 9 months before the marriage in Ohio. Perhaps after the death of his wife, he went back to the Clermont/Brown co. area of Ohio for something. Maybe that's why when Daniel Dooley died a year later, in 1869, the LaBrune family allowed him to be buried in "Philip's plot", since Philip had moved away and remarried. Maybe that's why there is no record of Philip's death in Iowa - he didn't die there?

Why?:
Why would Philip go back to Ohio? I haven't found other LaBrunes there, so I'm giving up on finding the missing son. But what about the daughter? She could have been 5 in 1840 (listed as female under 5 at the time of the census). The first record I'm aware of in Iowa is the 1850 census, so the LaBrunes could have left Ohio as late as 1850. The missing daughter could have been as old as 15 years old when they moved. Still kind of young. I've gone back and looked at the 1860 census of the Oligée family in Brown co., Ohio. Josephine was married to an older Jacob Oligée and had several sons. The three that I saw were all married, and their wives were 20 to 25 years old, the age range of the missing LaBrune daughter.

Conclusion:
I think the missing LaBrune daughter being married to one of the Oligée boys is a stretch. But I think there's a good chance that our Dubuque Philip moved back to Ohio and remarried. The age, the name, the location, the timing, and the lack of other LaBrunes in that area prior to the 1868 marriage are an awful lot of coincidences. I don't spend alot of time on my genealogy, but I'd like to dig up more information to either support or shoot down this theory.

Goodwins of Cascade, Iowa from about 1856

Posted this on Rootsweb this week. A brief summary of the Goodwin family, the family of Lydia LaBrune's biological mother, from 1856 Dubuque co. to California in the mid-1900s.

Thomas Jefferson Goodwin m. Eliza A Summers

Thomas Jefferson Goodwin, b. 1832 Indiana, m. Eliza A Summers, she b. 1841 in Iowa, in 1856 in Dubuque, Iowa. They had 5 children and raised them in Cascade township: Emma (1880), Alonzo (1862), Ida (1863), Rollie (b. 1876, d. 1877), and Monroe (1879). The 1880s brought big changes for the families.

Emma had married Oscar Albert in 1879, but he apparently abandoned them in 1885 and she was granted a divorce in 1887. By then, the Goodwin family, including Emma, had moved across the state to Sioux County. Emma had four children (as far as I can tell), of whom she was granted custody. I know that Verda was adopted by the Board family in Cascade and that Lydia was adopted by the LaBrune family (my family) in Jefferson twp. [Verda went on to marry William Gearhart, then Daniel Moore; Lydia married Frank Schirmer.] I don't know what became of the other two kids, nor why the children were given up (taken?) for adoption. Emma began a new family with Lars Peterson in about 1894.

Emma's sister, Ida, married Pedermar (?) Jester. They had seven kids before he died in the late 1890s. She remarried Stanley (?) Tibbets.

I don't know what became of Alonzo.

Sometime around 1908 the whole clan moved out to southern California: Eliza Goodwin to LA with Monroe, Emma Peterson and family to San Diego, and Ida Tibbets and family to Long Beach (LA co.). Some of the older grandchildren may have married and stayed in Iowa, as did Emma's children from her first marriage.

I'm especially interested in finding out why the Emma Goodwin Arnold children might have been given up for adoption.

Rules of Thumb for my Family Tree

FWIW: Here are some of the rules I follow when deciding whether or not to include someone in my family tree. This is just off the top of my head.  If I've missed someone or inadvertently implied that I don't consider someone family, please let me know so I can fix it.

1) Publicly post only deceased relatives.
2) When sharing with others, share deceased and any living up to first cousins.
3) Include biological, adopted, foster, etc. relatives and their immediate in-laws: parents, siblings, siblings' spouses. Some exceptions when assisting close cousins with their genealogy. Including generations of relatives for every in-law is just too many people to keep track of. [If I were requested to add a family tree, I probably would because I love my in-laws! 8-) ]

For recently deceased:
[
4) Don't include all marriages.  Include those that yielded children, the last marriage, marriages mentioned in important sources, like obituaries, etc. This is not hard set.  I tend to ignore it more with ancient relatives, but with relatives recently deceased, I'd rather not advertise someone's difficulty staying married by listing seven spouses.
5) Don't publicly post information concerning mental health, including death by suicide.
]

6) Where many variations in spelling exist for old families (prior to about 1900?), adopt an American spelling and an immigrant spelling.  For instance Cussen (native Irish ancestors) and Cushing (descendants in the US), or Donley (native Irish ancestors) and Donnelly (descendants in the US).
7) Record a source for all information.
8) Publicly, post only basic information: birth, marriage, death. This is to encourage serious genealogists to contact me for additional information (sources, burial, places of residence, etc.) which I am happy to share (within privacy constraints) and to share information that they may have about the family in question that I do not have.
9) Include individuals ...
Tier 1: for whom primary sources exist (birth, marriage, death certificates, land records, wills, ...)

Tier 2: from living family members closely enough related to know from personal knowledge and family interviews; corroboration with primary sources preferred
Tier 3: some secondary sources, such as census records, obituaries, grave markers, biographies, town histories, etc.
Tier 4: Published, well-researched, well-scrutinized genealogies (such as Douglas, Pierce, Matthew Cushing, ), corroboration with primary sources preferred
Tier 5: Posted genealogies which cite any of the above sources

Don't include:
Posted genealogies/trees with no source citations, or that cite only other posted genealogies, including LDS IGI and AF information, Ancestry.com and Rootsweb and other like sites

But ...
Unsourced information can be used to start research that, once substantiated, can be added to my tree. Authors of posted information can be contacted for leads or sources that might lead to substantiated information added to the tree.

10) Respect living family wishes regarding public information, such as fathers of children born outside of a marriage, etc.
11) Don't stir up old family feuds!