John.....and the rest of you Behymer researchers..... Must tell you, you sound just like a man. One thing I agree, they were most likely from the Clermont Co Behymers. In my mind, I still think that John, Jr would more have named his children as Chapman, Jesse, Aaron, ie, Chapman, a bro-in-law; Jesse, a bro-in-law, Aaron..?; Catherine - sister; Benjamin - brother, Sophia - sister...on and on. As for John L. (most likely Leonard) could have been from Billy Bob's Daniel group in Campbell Co. John L's children went back and forth with OH and or KY, for place of birth. Why on earth would John L and Anna Henry have been living in VA and gone back to Philadelphia to get married? My friend Maxine Wade was one of the old time researchers on both Behymer and Henry families. Unfortunely, she is not alive today, but when we found this information on an Ann Henry, she was adament that there was no Ann Henry...course that does not mean there couldn't have been. But why Philadelphia ... I wonder? I will go into this more later. I had to get up at 6:00 this morning and take a friend to the hospital, and have to take her back tomorrow, and by this time I am about ready to fall in bed hoping to fire up my batteries again for tomorrow. Discussion is great, John, but what happened to our coharts? You guys put in your two cents also but I am sure you males will stick together!!! Sallye..born in Colorado...but with the mentality of a Missourian...

In a message dated 5/2/99 4:17:16 PM Pacific Daylight Time, johndoetippet@csi.com writes: John T. Will answer what I can on these. << In preparation for the next update of my web page, I have been entering and reviewing all the data I have on the descendants of the John Beckelshymer, III who married Anna Henry, the progenitor of a large contingent of Fulton County, IL Behymers. John Beckelshymer, III, you may recall is the likely son of the John Beckelhymer who married Barbara Weddle and who died in Clermont County, OH in 1812. Barbara Weddle may or may not be John, III's mother, however, as it is possible that John, Jr may have married prior to his marriage to Barbara. The following Behymers are those for whom parents have not been established (this is my 10 most wanted list!): (1) Chapman Behymer, b. circa 1811 in OH (2) Jesse Beckelhymer, b. circa 1818 in OH (3) Aaron Behymer, b. 14 Oct 1813 in OH (4) Isaiah Beckelhymer, b. circa 1825 in OH Isaiah was son of Levi, who was a son of Benjamin & Jane Ferguson - in Fountain, IN. (5) John Beckelhymer, b. circa 1831 (age calculated from marriage to Margaret E Holmes in Fulton County, IL on 15 Nov 1852) (6) Latitia Beckelhymer, b. circa 1830 (age calculated from marriage to William P Cass in Fulton County, IL on 1 Apr 1850) (7) Henry Beckelshymer, b. circa 1832 (age calculated from marriage to Sarah Allenbaugh in Fulton County, IL on 16 Feb 1854) can't be Henry, son of John and Anna.... Henry, son of John and Anna marr 2) Nancy Jane Statz, by JP, on Sep 23, 1858 and then died shortly after that. Mary Johnson Behymer said they had a two month son at the time of Henry's death. (8) Elizabeth Becklehymer, b. circa 1829 (age calculated from marriage to Reuben Hurt in Fulton County, IL on 1 Feb 1849) (9) Martin Behymer, b. circa 1818 (age calculated from marriage to Caroline Cummings in Lawrence County, IN on 22 Sep 1839) (10) Catherine Behymer, b. circa 1819 (age calculated from marriage to Noah M Matheney in Lawrence County, IN on 4 Jul 1839) Hezekiah Beckelshymer was living with Catherine & Noah Matheny in 1850 census of Fulton Co, IL ..... Still doesn't tell us who Catherine belonged to. >> So, we have the following: Chapman, c1811 OH Jesse c1818 OH Aaron - Oct 1813 - OH Latitia b 1830 Henry b. c1832 Elizabeth c1829 Martin c1818 Catherine 1819 Chapman, Jesse, Aaron could be brothers--sons of ? Martin, could be son of Martin I suggest we do more census reports on 1. William P Cass - 1850 or 1860 2. Reuben Hurt - 1850 or 1860 3. Martin Behymer 1840-1850-1860 4. Catherine & Noah Matheny - 1860 I do not believe that John L Beckelshymer was a son of John and Barbara. None of their children except Benjamin, follows John & Barbara's family. As you know, I do not think we have enough to even guess about. Don't forget, we have a few more to add to the above list. 1. Esther Behymer, an heir of Barbara, marr James John in Clermont Co., OH, and they went to Spencer IN. She named one of her children after Martin. 2. A Lucy Beckelhymer marr a William Williamson in Fountain Co. IN. 3. I believe there was a Thomas in Fountain Co, IN also. I have to remind you, I am of the old school...facts.facts.facts. is what we need. The best breakthru was material you got on Jonathon...and I really appreciated that. Martin and Lucy had a son: 1. George Washington Behymer b. Sep 8, 1817 d. Sep 9, 1905 Macon, MO lived in Gentry MO in 1850 and Knox, MO in 1860. m. Cynthia Wait (probably in KY) This is new information I have found. George was named after one the Beagles in Campbell Co, KY. The Wait/Waite was one of the original member of 4th Brethren Church in the early 1800's. Campbell Co Gen. Soc. couldn't tell me very much, nothing that would help me, so am going to try Kenton Library. They have always been a good help. Sallye '

Hey, all - I sent the wrong address for my mystery Behymer photo. It should be: http://scribers.midwest.net/unclwil/Behmyer.jpg My father saw the photo for the first time today. The man second from left with the long white beard may be Andrew Jackson Behymer. Dad says he seems to recall a family photo from his youth of older man that looked like that. He wasn't sure if it was his grandmother's father (A.J. Behymer) or not, but the image was familiar.

Sallye, Rick, Rob, Cliff, et al: In preparation for the next update of my web page, I have been entering and reviewing all the data I have on the descendants of the John Beckelshymer, III who married Anna Henry, the progenitor of a large contingent of Fulton County, IL Behymers. John Beckelshymer, III, you may recall is the likely son of the John Beckelhymer who married Barbara Weddle and who died in Clermont County, OH in 1812. Barbara Weddle may or may not be John, III's mother, however, as it is possible that John, Jr may have married prior to his marriage to Barbara. The following Behymers are those for whom parents have not been established (this is my 10 most wanted list!): (1) Chapman Behymer, b. circa 1811 in OH (2) Jesse Beckelhymer, b. circa 1818 in OH (3) Aaron Behymer, b. 14 Oct 1813 in OH (4) Isaiah Beckelhymer, b. circa 1825 in OH (5) John Beckelhymer, b. circa 1831 (age calculated from marriage to Margaret E Holmes in Fulton County, IL on 15 Nov 1852) (6) Latitia Beckelhymer, b. circa 1830 (age calculated from marriage to William P Cass in Fulton County, IL on 1 Apr 1850) (7) Henry Beckelshymer, b. circa 1832 (age calculated from marriage to Sarah Allenbaugh in Fulton County, IL on 16 Feb 1854) (8) Elizabeth Becklehymer, b. circa 1829 (age calculated from marriage to Reuben Hurt in Fulton County, IL on 1 Feb 1849) (9) Martin Behymer, b. circa 1818 (age calculated from marriage to Caroline Cummings in Lawrence County, IN on 22 Sep 1839) (10) Catherine Behymer, b. circa 1819 (age calculated from marriage to Noah M Matheney in Lawrence County, IN on 4 Jul 1839) Except for the last two, all of the above are known to have lived in Fulton County, IL. The last two, Martin and Catherine, were married in Lawrence County, IN where John, III had lived prior to his move to Fulton County, IL circa 1839 and where his last four children were born. The purpose of this posting is to speculate on who the parents of the above Behymers might be and to elicit a discussion from the group on this topic. I will start the discussion by asserting that all of the above are likely grandchildren (or great grandchildren) of John, Jr. Some of the reasons are: Chapman Archer married Sophia Beckelhymer, daughter of John, Jr (likely where Chapman Behymer got his name); Aaron named his first son, Levi (Levi was a known son of John, Jr), Martin has the same name as Martin, another known son of John, Jr; the Fulton/Lawrence County connection; 3 likely sons of John, Jr: Joel, Daniel and Levi, all married into the France family, many of whose descendants also migrated to Fulton County, IL circa 1830. Now, which of John, Jr's children are their fathers? Let's examine them one by one starting with John, III, himself. John, III was living in Jackson County, IN in 1820. This is the county that is adjacent to and just to the east of Lawrence County. The 12 children of John, III and their dates of birth were recorded in the family bible. The 1820 census enumeration matches exactly the data from the bible: Henry, James, John, Benjamin and Alexander are the sons in the 0-10 age group; Charles and Andrew are the sons in the 10-16 age group; and, Catherine is the female in the 10-16 age group. There is, however, one male listed in the 18-26 age group that is a mystery. In any event, this mystery male would be older than any of the individuals listed above. The 1830 census enumeration in Lawrence County, IN also matches the data from the bible: Lemuel is the son in the 0-5 age group; Thomas, Alexander and Benjamin are the sons in the 5-10 age group; James is the son in the 10-15 age group; Henry is the son in the 15-20 age group; Charles and Andrew are the sons in the 20-30 age group; and, Rebecca is the daughter in the 0-5 age group (the son John who showed up in the 1820 census had died by then and the daughter, Catherine had already married Samuel Guthrie) The 1840 census enumeration in Fulton County, IL also matches the data from the bible, taking into account that the household also included the grandchildren (Charles, Hezekiah and Diantha) and wife (Elizabeth Briney) of son, Andrew who had died a few months before: Charles and Hezekiah, are the two grandsons in the 0-5 age group; Lemuel is the son in the 10-15 age group; Thomas is the son in the 15-20 age group; Alexander is the son in the 20-30 age group; Diantha is the granddaughter in the 0-5 age group; Rebecca is the daughter in the 15-20 age group; and, Elizabeth Briney is the daughter-in-law in the 20-30 age group. The two other sons, Benjamin and Henry, were already married and were listed as heads of households as well in the 1840 Fulton County, IL census enumeration. There is one female in the 5-10 age group that is a mystery. Conclusions from the above are: (1) None of those listed in the top 10 list could be the children of John, III, otherwise, why wouldn't they have appeared in the census enumerations? Some have speculated that Jesse (2) was a son of John, III and his first wife, Charity Harger. In his will, Charity's father, John Harger, however, only names his son-in-law, John, as an heir. Charity had obviously died by then, and John and Charity had no issue, otherwise, why wouldn't they have been named as heirs? Not to mention the fact, that Jesse who married John, III's daughter, Rebecca, would have been marrying his sister! (2) Jesse was not a son of John, III. (3) Latitia (6) in the above top 10 list could be the mystery female that shows up in the 5-10 age group in the 1840 census enumeration. It seems likely to me that she is another daughter of Andrew and Elizabeth, especially since Elizabeth was living in the household at that time. However, more work needs to be done to firmly establish this fact. Census enumerations and the like on William P Cass and his wife would be helpful to establish her parents. Perhaps an obituary could also be found. (4) Elizabeth Briney and Elizabeth (8), as Sallye Gundy pointed out, are likely one and the same person, i.e., this is her 2nd marriage, the first being to Andrew Beckelhymer. The next son of John, Jr (at least by my reckoning) is Solomon. (5) I think Solomon can be ruled out as the father of any of the top 10 as he didn't make it to Clermont County, OH until after 1822. He first appears in the Clermont County census of 1830, and he was in Lincoln County, KY in 1820. The first land transactions in Clermont County, OH for Solomon are in 1837. The next son of John, Jr (by my reckoning) is Daniel. He is a good candidate as a father of one or more of the top 10 because: (1) he married Mary France, and (2) he shows up with two males in the 0-10 age group in the 1820 census for Clermont County, OH. This matches the birth dates of (1), (2), (3) and (9) above. The 1 Feb 1893 newspaper article in the Clermont Courier on the Behymer family, however, says that Daniel was married, but had no children. It is possible, therefore, that he was taking care of two sons of a deceased brother, say Levi or David (remember that Jonathan Behymer, John, Jr's brother, indicated he had a cousin, David, who had died prior to about 1840 - I believe this David is the one with wife, Elizabeth who died circa Jul 1818 in Clermont County, OH and that he was the likely son of John, Jr). That Daniel was tending after a brother's children seems even the more likely when we consider that there are no children in Daniel's household as enumerated in the 1830 census for Clermont County, OH. The next son of John, Jr (by my reckoning) is Joel. The births of all of Joel's children are recorded in his family bible. Since none of the top 10 are listed in Joel's bible, he can be ruled out as a potential father. The next son of John, Jr (no argument on this one) is Levi. He is a good candidate as the father of one or more of the top 10 as he married Esther France. He died before 2 Mar 1820, when his wife married for the second time to John Gray. A question that needs to be answered is: in which household were the top 10 living as enumerated in the 1830 census? Clearly they weren't living in Lawrence County, IN with John, III or in Fulton County, IL with any Behymers in 1830. It seems likely they were still in Clermont County, OH (or perhaps Campbell County, KY), Were they living in the Gray household? This needs to be checked. Or perhaps they were living with members of the France family in Fulton County (has anyone checked the 1830 Fulton County census for Frances? - I haven't) The next son of John, Jr (again no argument) is Martin. He is another good candidate as the father of one or more of the top 10. In the 1820 census for Clermont County, there is a male in the 0-10 age group and a female in the 0-10 age group, that, as far as I know, have yet to be identified. My guess is that Martin (9) and Catherine (10) are children of Martin Beckelhymer and his first wife, Lucinda Beagle. The 1830 census enumeration for Clermont County is also consistent with this theory as there is a son and a daughter listed in the 10-15 age group. The next son of John, Jr (again no argument) is Benjamin. He married first Jane Ferguson on 17 Oct 1819 and second Eunice Fitzpatrick on 12 Sep 1824, both marriages taking place in Clermont County, OH. He moved his family to Fountain County, IN sometime after his second marriage. He died in Fountain County on 7 Apr 1844. He had two known sons, Levi and Isaiah. I speculate that son, Isaiah, by Levi's second wife, Eunice Fitzpatrick, is the one who shows up in the 1850 census for Fulton County, IL. Note that Isaiah's two sons, Isaac and William, ages 5 and 2, were born in KY and OH, respectively. Why Isaiah was living in KY is a mystery to me. Perhaps he went there because his uncle, Martin was living there at that time. Maybe Sallye Gundy has an opinion on this (or more data on Benjamin and his family). Because the jury is still out on whether Jacob is a son of John, Sr or John, Jr (I vote for the former) based on his marrying a France and his close association with Joel and Daniel in Clermont County land transactions, he should at least be examined as a potential father of one or more of the top 10. I think I can rule him out, however. This is because all 5 sons born in the 1807 to 1820 timeframe have been identified: John, Daniel, Elias, Adam and Solomon. They along with two daughters, yet unidentified, born in the same timeframe, leaves no room for any more. Lastly, it should be noted that there was one male in the 0-10 age group, 1 female in the 0-10 age group, and 1 female in the 10-16 age group living with Barbara Weddle, John, Jr's wife in 1820 per the census enumeration for Clermont County, OH. These are almost certainly her grandchildren. It is also interesting to note that the child in the 0-10 age group, along with the two males in the same age group living in the Daniel Behymer household, could very well be Chapman (1), Jesse (2) and Aaron (3) in the top 10. Now, if the David with wife, Elizabeth, who died in Clermont County, OH circa Jul 1818 (per probate records) was the David who married Elizabeth Sailor in Franklin County, VA circa 15 Jan 1802 (per marriage bond), then that would leave quite a few years for them to have had several children. Unfortunately, we have no dates with which to base any similar conclusions for Levi. With only a guess as to which is correct and until more information comes in, I place my vote, however, for Levi since we are sure that he was a son of John, Jr and based on the fact that Aaron (3) named his eldest son, Levi. Unfortunately, the names of the children of Chapman and Jesse offer no clues. So far, I have addressed all but John (5) and Henry (7). As for Henry (7), there is only one Henry that I know of in Fulton County, i.e., Henry, the son of John, III. He married Elizabeth Myers in Lawrence County, IN on 4 Feb 1835 and he is enumerated in the 1840 and 1850 censuses with her in Fulton County, IL. She died in Fulton County, IL on 11 Feb 1852 and is buried in the Howard Cemetery. Henry also supposedly married Nancy Jane Statz on 23 Sep 1858, I assume, in Fulton County, IL (does anyone know the source for this information?). As there was no other Henry, I must assume that he was married a third time to Sarah Allenbaugh on 16 Feb 1854. If so, she must have died (or they were divorced) prior to Henry's third marriage to Nancy Jane Statz. Lastly, for John (5), I have no clues. John, III had two sons named John, but both of them died in infancy. Does anyone have any data on John (5)? In closing, I want to say how much fun I had putting this article together. I welcome comments and discussion on my theories, as I plan on posting an update to my web page (probably next weekend) and will include any corrections that are warranted. As genealogy is not an exact science, I will go with my educated guess work as stated herein, unless someone convinces me otherwise of a more probable scenario. Enjoy! John Charles Tippet JohnDoeTippet@csi.com P.S. Three more items of interest: (1) One of the Frances also married a Rutledge - Orville France married Matilda Rutledge in Fulton County, IL on 4 Nov 1847. Was she a sister to the Rilda who married Aaron Behymer (3) on 9 Sep 1844 in Fulton County? (2) Does anyone know (or have census data) on Catherine Beckelhymer who married Samuel Guthrie on 13 Aug 1829 in Lawrence County, IN? I ask this because I would like to know when John, III moved from VA to OH. From various records, it appears that John III was living in OH from roughly 1812 to 1814, in KY from 1816 to 1819, in IN from 1820 to approximately 1839 and in IL from 1840 until his death. (3) There was another marriage for a Samule Guthrie in Lawrence County, IN: to Sophia Laws on 16 Dec 1831. Was this Samuel Guthrie, Sr?

Hi, Gang: The following message was posted to the list, but was not sent by Rootsweb, because it included an attachment. You'll have to reply individually to the sender, William Martin, Rassler101@aol.com to request the attachment. Twila Listowner Re: Clermont County Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 07:13:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Rassler101@aol.com CC: owner-BEHYMER@bl-14.rootsweb.com >From BEHYMER-L-request@rootsweb.com > --part1_a584f372.245db72d_boundary > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Hi ya counsins, > My name is William Martin and my line of Martins are related to the > Behymers of Clermont County. I have not done much research lately but I > throughly enjoy reading about what you all are doing with the Martins and > Behyers. Most of the time I do not feel like I can be of much help to your > group so I dont write. However, I use the maps on the internet every day so > maybe I can be helpful for a chance. > If I knew the exact address of the place you are seeking, I would send > you a map along with directions to get there. Each internet server has its > own set of maps. Here on AOL, go to Maps and Directions, type in the > address and you will get what you want. On other net servers, it is usually > called Finding people and places. The maps are great and the directions are > super. Attached is a map of one of the Clermont Co Libraries in Batavia > Hope this is helpful >

The Clermont Ct. Geneaology Society is in the Batavia Library. All of Ralph Behymer's papers are there along with his pictures. The library is easy to find once you get into Batavia. Good Luck. Gaye ( a fellow Behymer)

If anyone is interested, I have posted my mystery Behymers. You can access photo at: http://scribers.midwest.net/unclwil/behmyer.jpg Please note: Behymer is misspelled in the tag line, didn't have time to change it. Thanks, Wilfred

Can anyone (Bill) tell me exactly how to get up to the Clermont County Historical Society where all the info that Ralph Behymer put together is? I think i am going to drive up there Monday. jen

Deanna: My data for Lemuel/Samuel marrying Mary Jane Thompson comes from Sallye Gundy, however, she has Lemuel's wife also shown as Allenbaugh with a question mark. I know that Lemuel married Mary Allenbaugh on 10 Sep 1848 in Fulton County, IL, and that she was born in IN. Consequently, I believe Sallye's information regarding Mary Jane Thompson is incorrect. From another source, I have your Samuel Hymer shown as a son of John B. Hymer and Sarah Jackson, both born in Guilford, NC, John on 6 Oct 1793, and Sarah on 15 Jan 1794. John and Sarah died in Rushville, Schuyler County, IL on 29 Oct 1862 and 19 Feb 1883, respectively. I hope this clears up the confusion. Sorry, I can't help you with the parents of Mary Jane Thompson. BTW: who are the parents of your John B. Hymer who was born in NC? Regards... John Charles Tippet JohnDoeTippet@csi.com P.S. I will be updating my web page tomorrow, and will include this correction. ---------- > From: Crafdee2@aol.com > To: johndoetippet@csi.com > Subject: Re: BeckelHymer > Date: Friday, April 30, 1999 9:35 PM > > Hi > Thanks for the email address. I have another question to ask you. You > have a Lemuel Beckelhymer (also known as Samuel) b. June 11, 1828 married to > a Mary Jane Thompson. I have a Samuel Hymer who is married to a Mary Jane > Thompson in Illinois. Is your Lemuel Beckelhymer the same one as the one I > have who goes by Samuel Hymer b. May 17, 1829 in Harrison County, Indiana Son > of John B. Hymer and Sara Jackson ( Married Mary Jane Thompson in 1849 in > Schuyler County, Illinois) > I saw yours and was so confused when I saw this I didn't know what to > think. my second question was do you know who the parents of Mary Jane > Thompson are? I have Samuel Thompson of Cecil County, Maryland. > I hope I am not driving you nuts Thanks again ! > Deanna

Sorry John, I think there's two of us Deanna's on this list? :)

John, Are you sure you intended this for me? My descent is: John Abraham Jacob Levi Henderson Levi Edith Mae ------my grandmother. Deanna

Fellow Behymers - Help me if you can!! I recently came into possession of a photo which belonged to Clyde Behymer (who passed away from lung cance last May). The photo is marked on the back, "Dad's relation - Behymers." I assume "Dad" means his father, Francis Marion Behymer (son of Andrew J. Behymer). These could be F.M. Behymer's father and/or uncles, who would be the children of John and Jane (Meeker) Behymer. OR, they could be the grandsons of John and Jane. John and Jane had several sons, who could be in this picture, which I am guessing was taken in the 1890s sometime. Suspects could be Nathaniel (died 1896); Andrew Jackson (died 1899); Francis Marion (died 1924 - not Clyde's father, this would be an uncle); and/or Thomas (died 1915). A son Daniel I have no info on and Lewis died in 1890 (probably too early for this photo). At one time, there were a handful of descendents of John and Jane on this list. Can anyone help?? I can't send an attachment through Rootsweb, but if anyone thinks they can help, e-mail me and I can send a JPEG file. Thanks! Wilfred Pennington

Sorry, I don't have any information on him. I was just playing around one day in Hotbot to see what would happen and this came up. s/greg At 09:06 AM 4/22/99 -0700, you wrote: >Greg, > This is interesting! Do we know which Abraham Behymer this was? >Do you know a birth date or anyway to specifically identify him? >Rob > >gdbehymer wrote: >> >> U.S. Supreme Court >> >> TEXAS & P. R. CO. v. BEHYMER, 189 U.S. 468 (1903) >> >> 189 U.S. 468 >> >> TEXAS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, Plff. in Err., >> v. >> ABE BEHYMER. >> No. 224. >> >> Argued March 20, April 6, 1903. >> Decided April 20, 1903. >> >> Messrs. David D. Duncan, John F. Dillon, and Winslow S. Pierce for >> plaintiff in error. >> >> Mr. Cone Johnson for defendant in error. >> >> The opinion of the court was delivered by Mr. Justice Holmes: >> >> This is an action for personal injuries, brought by an employee against a >> railroad company. It was >> tried in the circuit court, where the plaintiff had a verdict. It then was >> taken to the circuit court of >> appeals on a writ of error and bill of excep- [189 U.S. 468, 469] tions by >> the company, and now is >> brought here on a further writ of error, the company being a United States >> corporation. A good deal >> of the argument for the railroad is devoted to disputing the testimony of >> the plaintiff below and >> arguing that the verdict was excessive, but of course we have nothing to do >> with that. New York, L. >> E. & W. R. Co. v. Winter, 143 U.S. 60, 75, 36 S. L. ed. 71, 80, 12 Sup. Ct. >> Rep. 356; Lincoln v. >> Power, 151 U.S. 436, 38 L. ed. 224, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 387. We must assume >> the most favorable >> statement of the plaintiff's case to be true, unless some particular >> request for instructions makes it >> necessary to deal with conflicting evidence. That statement may be made in >> a few words. >> >> Behymer had been in the employ of the company as a brakeman about three >> months. On February >> 7, 1899, at Big Sandy, in Texas, he was ordered by the conductor of a local >> freight train to get up >> on some cars standing on a siding and let off the brakes, so that the >> engine might move them to >> the main track and add them to the train. The tops of the cars were covered >> with ice, as all >> concerned knew. He obeyed orders; the engine picked up the cars, moved to >> the main track, and >> stopped suddenly. The cars ran forward to the extent of the slack and back >> again, as they were >> moving up hill. The jerk upset Behymer's balance, the bottom of his >> trousers caught in a projecting >> nail in the running board, and he was thrown between the cars. It is true >> that the jury might have >> drawn a different conclusion from his evidence, or have disbelieved it in >> essential points, but they >> also were at liberty to find, as they must be taken to have found, that the >> foregoing statement is >> true. The car belonged to another road, but was in the charge of the >> defendant company, and, >> according to the statement of the counsel for the plaintiff in error, had >> been inspected before the >> accident, although we should have doubted whether the testimony meant to go >> so far. Behymer >> based his claim upon negligence in stopping the cars so suddenly with >> knowledge of his position >> and the slippery condition of the roof of the car, and upon the projection >> of the nail, which >> increased the danger and contributed to his fall. It should be added that, >> by a statute of Texas, if >> there was negligence, the fact that it was the [189 U.S. 468, 470] >> negligence of a fellow servant was >> not a defense. Tex. Gen. Laws 1897, Special Session, chap. 6, 1; 2 Sayles's >> Tex. Civil Stat. 1897, >> art. 4560 f. >> >> The fundamental error alleged in the exceptions to the charge is that the >> court declined to rule that >> the chance of such an accident as happened was one of the risks that the >> plaintiff assumed, or >> that the question whether the defendant was liable for it depended on >> whether the freight train was >> handled in the usual and ordinary way. Instead of that, the court left it >> to the jury to say whether the >> train was handled with ordinary care; that is, the care that a person of >> ordinary prudence would use >> under the same circumstances. This exception needs no discussion. The >> charge embodied one of >> the commonplaces of the law. What usually is done may be evidence of what >> ought to be done, but >> what ought to be done is fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, >> whether it usually is complied >> with or not. Wabash R. Co. v. McDaniels, 107 U.S. 454, 27 L. ed. 605, 2 >> Sup. Ct. Rep. 932. No >> doubt a certain amount of bumping and jerking is to be expected on freight >> trains, and, under >> ordinary circumstances, cannot be complained of. Yet, it can be avoided, if >> necessary, and when >> the particular and known condition of the train makes a sudden bump, >> obviously dangerous to >> those known to be on top of the cars, we are not prepared to say that a >> jury would not be warranted >> in finding that an easy stop is a duty. If it was negligent to stop as the >> train did stop, the risk of it >> was not assumed by the plaintiff. Texas & P. R. Co. v. Archibald, 170 U.S. >> 665, 672, 42 S. L. ed. >> 1188, 1191, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 777. >> >> However, the plaintiff did not rely on the management of the train alone. >> The projecting nail was >> another element in his case. The jury were instructed with regard to that, >> that the railroad company >> was not liable unless there was a nail there improperly projecting, and a >> reasonable inspection >> would have discovered and remedied the defect. The car was in the custody >> of the company. >> There is no suggestion that the company had not had an opportunity to >> inspect, and the contrary >> was assumed by a request for instructions on the part of the company. >> Indeed, as we have said, >> its counsel interprets the evidence as meaning that the car had been >> inspected before [189 U.S. 468, >> 471] the accident. It is not pressed that there was error on this point. >> See Mackin v. Boston & A. R. >> Co. 135 Mass. 201, 46 Am. Rep. 456; Glynn v. Central R. Co. 175 Mass. 510, >> 512, 56 N. E. 698. >> The jury were instructed properly on the subject of assumption of risks and >> contributory >> negligence, and we think it unnecessary to deal more specifically with this >> part of the case. >> >> It was argued that Behymer had aggravated the injury by refusing proper >> surgical treatment. With >> regard to this the jury were instructed in substance, but at more length, >> that it was his duty to submit >> to all treatment that a reasonably prudent person would have submitted to, >> in order to improve his >> condition, and that no damages could be allowed which might have been >> prevented by reasonable >> care. It is suggested that, as a prudent man, he might have postponed >> recovery from his injury to >> recovery of damages. The instructions plainly excluded such a view. The >> argument hardly is >> serious. We have examined all the minute criticisms on the rulings and >> refusals to rule, and >> discover no error. We deem it unnecessary to answer them in greater detail. >> >> Judgment affirmed. >> >> ==== BEHYMER Mailing List ==== >> Behymer webpage: BillyBob's Genealogy Homepage >> http://members.iglou.com/wbehymer/ >> Thanks, BillyBob! > > > >==== BEHYMER Mailing List ==== >Picklesimer webpage: Shawna's Genealogy Page >http://www.concentric.net/~shahall/ >Thanks, Shawna! > > >

My E-Mail hasn't been working, so I'm resending this in case it didn't go thru the first time: Hello John and All, You caught my ear with Fulton County, Illinois and especially Chapman Behymer, who is my direct ancestor (My G-G-G Grandfather). Sorry it took me so long to respond, I have not been able to check my E-Mail for several days. I have visited most of these cemeteries in Fulton County several times and have noted most of these Behymers (Beckelhymers) that you listed, but I have to admit that I am also very confused about how they all tie together. I do know that there was a large concentration of them in the Isabel Twp. and Pleasant Twp. areas and I would bet that they are all fairly closely related, but they are definitely not all from the same immediate family. Also, we know that many of them came to Fulton County, Illinois after a short stay in Lawrence County, Indiana (or that area) and before that were in Clermont County, Ohio or Northeastern Kentucky. Chapman Behymer apparently met his wife (Francis "Franky" Martin in Indiana). I hope soon to do some research on a theory of mine that Chapman was a son of Levi Beckelhymer (Born about 1792 - son of John Beckelhymer, Jr. and brother of John Beckelhymer III) and Esther France. Chapman may have headed West with his Uncle John Beckelhymer III and Aunt Anna (Henry) Beckelhymer some time after his father Levi died in 1818. This might explain why Chapman and John Beckelhymer III lived so close together in Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, Illinois. Please keep in mind that this is only a theory of mine - there is so little information about my Chapman Behymer that I am attempting to fit him in by process of elimination and then maybe I can find some leads to try to prove it. Below is information about my Fulton County Behymer relatives. Merle Saunders Dixon, Illinois Descendants of Chapman Behymer Generation No. 1 1. Chapman1 Behymer was born ABT 1812 in Ohio (Source: 1850 Census for Isabel Twp., Fulton County, IL lists Kentucky as place of birth.1880 Census for Isabel Twp., Fulton County, IL lists Ohio as place of birth.), and died Bef. 1860 in Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, Illinois (Source: Illinois 1860 Census for Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL). He married Frances Martin November 19, 1837 in Fulton County, Illinois. She was born ABT 1814 in Indiana (Source: Born Abt 1814 or 1816, depending on which census used.), and died Unknown. Notes for Chapman Behymer: This family was listed as "Belymer" in the 1850 census for Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL, Chapman's last name was written "Beclehymer" on their marriage license. They were then listed as "Beckelshymer" in the 1860 Census for Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL, This was apparently after the death of Chapman, since he is not listed. And then, when Susan Jane and Rebecca Esther were married in 1865 & 1868, respectively, they spelled their maiden names "Behymer" on their marriage certificates. More About Chapman Behymer: Comment 1: 1850, Owned property worth $700. Interesting Fact: Bef. November 1837, Came to Illinois. Occupation: Farmer More About Frances Martin: Comment 1: 1860, Total value of Personal Estate listed as $20 (Apparently after husband's death). (Source: Illinois 1860 Census for Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL) Interesting Fact: Bef. November 1837, Came to Illinois. Occupation: Seamstress (Source: Illinois 1860 Census for Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL) Children of Chapman Behymer and Frances Martin are: 2 i. Aaron2 Behymer, born August 13, 1839 in Woodland Twp., Fulton County, Illinois (Source: Obituary lists birthplace as Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, Illinois.); died October 20, 1907. He married Asenath Smith May 26, 1864; born ABT 1841 in Illinois (Source: 1870 Census of Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL - Name from Obituary of Aaron Behymer in Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois Newspaper.); died July 1898. More About Aaron Behymer: Burial: Oak Hill Cemetery, Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois Cause of Death: Heart Trouble Fact 5: September 26, 1862, Was taken prisoner and held at Vicksburg, Mississippi before being paroled. Interesting Fact: Fought in Civil War - Company 'G' 11th Regiment of Illinois Cavalry. Interesting Fact (2): Fought at Fort Donelson, Shiloh, Vicksburg, Kenesaw Mt. and Sherman's March. Occupation: 1860, Laborer (Source: Illinois 1860 Census for Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL) Residence: After Civil War, lived in Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois (Source: Obituary in Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois Newspaper.) More About Asenath Smith: Burial: Oak Hill Cemetery, Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois 3 ii. Oliver P. Behymer, born ABT 1841 in Illinois; died Unknown. Notes for Oliver P. Behymer: The 1895 atlas of Fulton County, IL shows O.& D. Behymer owning 80 acres in section 32 of Isabel Twp. 4 iii. Susan Jane Behymer, born ABT 1844 in Illinois; died Bef. 1868. She married John Brown February 9, 1865 in Fulton County, Illinois; born February 1844 in Fulton County, Illinois (Source: Date from 1900 Census of Lewistown Twp., Fulton County, Illinois.); died Unknown. More About Susan Jane Behymer: Interesting Fact: Apparently died when Almina was an infant. More About John Brown: Comment 1: 1900, Listed as a Day Laborer, and owned home in Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois. (Source: 1900 Census of Lewistown Twp., Fulton County, Illinois.) Comment 2: 1900, Listed as living on Market St. in Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois. (Source: 1900 Census of Lewistown Twp., Fulton County, Illinois.) Occupation: Farmer (Source: 1880 Census for Isabel Twp., Fulton County, IL) More About John Brown and Susan Behymer: Marriage Fact: Married by Abram Tippy, Justice of the Peace. 5 iv. Elias Behymer, born ABT 1846 in IL; died Unknown. 6 v. Rebecca Esther Behymer, born September 1848 in Illinois (Source: Middle name from Illinois 1860 Census for Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL - Date from 1900 Census of Lewistown Twp., Fulton County, Illinois.); died Unknown. She married John Brown February 4, 1868 in Fulton County, Illinois; born February 1844 in Fulton County, Illinois (Source: Date from 1900 Census of Lewistown Twp., Fulton County, Illinois.); died Unknown. More About Rebecca Esther Behymer: Residence: April 1944, Was still living in Minot, Ward County, North Dakota. More About John Brown: Comment 1: 1900, Listed as a Day Laborer, and owned home in Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois. (Source: 1900 Census of Lewistown Twp., Fulton County, Illinois.) Comment 2: 1900, Listed as living on Market St. in Lewistown, Fulton County, Illinois. (Source: 1900 Census of Lewistown Twp., Fulton County, Illinois.) Occupation: Farmer (Source: 1880 Census for Isabel Twp., Fulton County, IL) 7 vi. Austin Behymer, born ABT 1851 (Source: Illinois 1860 Census for Pleasant Twp., Fulton County, IL); died Unknown. John Tippet wrote: > FYI: Found the following under Cemetery Inscriptions of Fulton County, IL, > Vol 2, Kerton, Isabel, Waterford Townships: > > Otto Cemetery, Isabel township, Section 30 > > Otto Cemetery is located on property of R. Keeler and Marshall Tippey. It > is West of Junction 136 and Route 100 on a gravel road which is passable at > all times. The ground was deeded in 1852 by Hiram Wentworth and the first > burial was in 1832. More information concerning Otto Cemetery may be found > under Isabel Township in "The History of Fulton County, Illinois in Spoon > River Country, 1818-1968" > > Buried therein are the following: > > Mary J. Beckelhymer, daughter of J. and R. Beckelhymer, d. 15 Nov 1853, 5 > years > John L. Beckelhymer, son of J. and R. Beckelhymer, d. 3 May 1870, 4 yr, 1 > mo, 20 da (dc. says 1 yr) > Melissa J. Beckelhymer, daughter of J. and R. Beckelhymer, 20 Feb 1855, 11 > Sep 1857 > Christopher Beckelhymer, son of J. and R, Beckelhymer, 4 Oct 1857, 16 May > 1859 > Infant of J. and R. Beckelhymer, d. 16 Feb 1854 > Platt, son of J. and R. Beckelhymer, d. 13 Jun 1862, 3 mo, 9 da > > The above are children of Jesse and Rebecca (Beckelhymer) Beckelhymer > > >From Vol 3, Oak Hill Cemetery, Lewistown and other Lewistown Township > Cemeteries: > > Buried in Oak Hill Cemetery, Lewistown, IL: > > Aaron Behymer, d. 20 Oct 1907, 68y, 2m, 7d (D. C.) > Mrs. Aaron Behymer, int. 15 Jul 1898, age 57 (B. R.) > > >From Vol 16, Greenwood Cemetery of Canton, Fulton County, IL, Section 34: > > Francis Marion Behymer Wid. (d.c.) b. 1 Jan 1846 in Fulton Co., IL, d. 4 > Apr 1924 in Canton, IL, bur.d 6 Apr 1924, 78y, 3m, 3d, fa: Aaron Behymer b. > Ohio, mo: Katherine Rutledge, S. G. lot 222 Div. M > > Rella Catherine Hyff (d.c.) b. 25 Jul 1869, Camp Point, IL, d. 30 Nov 1921, > North of Canton, IL, bur.d 2 Dec 1921, 52 yr, 4 mo, 5 da, fa: Z. T. Akers > b. IL, mo: Minerva Ferguson b. IL, lot 101, Div. A > > Neither of these two are familiar to me. Can anyone help? > > >From Marriages of Fulton County, IL 1824 - 1861: > > Chapman Beclehymer md Frankey Martin 19 Nov 1837, Vol A, p. 40, license # > 107 > Diantha Beckelhymer md Ezekil Clark, 19 Dec 1849, Bol B, p. 127, license # > 11 > John Beckelhymer md Margaret E Homes, 15 Nov 1852, Vol B, p. 207, license # > 207 > Latitia Beckelhymer md William P Cass, 1 Apr 1850, Vol B, p. 134, license # > 74 > Henry Beckelshymer md Sarah Allenbaugh, 16 Feb 1854, Vol B, p. 242, license > #43 > Thomas Beckelhymer md Ortha Webb, 12 Jul 1846, Vol B, p. 45, license #92 > Alexander Becklehymer md Sarah Ann Brown, 30 May 1849, Vol B, p. 112, > license # 101 > Elizabeth Becklehymer md Rueben Hurt, 1 Feb 1849, Vol B, p. 2, license #13 > Lemuel Becklehymer md Mary Allenbaugh, 10 Sep 1848, Vol B, p. 90, license # > 128 > > Except for Chapman, Diantha, Thomas, Alexander and Lemuel, the rest are > unfamiliar to me. Can anyone out there shed some light on how the others > fit in? > > John Charles Tippet > JohnDoeTippet@csi.com > > ==== BEHYMER Mailing List ==== > Picklesimer website: Jeff's Genealogy > http://users.vnet.net/jwjones/gen/ > Thanks, Jeff!

Greg, This is interesting! Do we know which Abraham Behymer this was? Do you know a birth date or anyway to specifically identify him? Rob gdbehymer wrote: > > U.S. Supreme Court > > TEXAS & P. R. CO. v. BEHYMER, 189 U.S. 468 (1903) > > 189 U.S. 468 > > TEXAS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, Plff. in Err., > v. > ABE BEHYMER. > No. 224. > > Argued March 20, April 6, 1903. > Decided April 20, 1903. > > Messrs. David D. Duncan, John F. Dillon, and Winslow S. Pierce for > plaintiff in error. > > Mr. Cone Johnson for defendant in error. > > The opinion of the court was delivered by Mr. Justice Holmes: > > This is an action for personal injuries, brought by an employee against a > railroad company. It was > tried in the circuit court, where the plaintiff had a verdict. It then was > taken to the circuit court of > appeals on a writ of error and bill of excep- [189 U.S. 468, 469] tions by > the company, and now is > brought here on a further writ of error, the company being a United States > corporation. A good deal > of the argument for the railroad is devoted to disputing the testimony of > the plaintiff below and > arguing that the verdict was excessive, but of course we have nothing to do > with that. New York, L. > E. & W. R. Co. v. Winter, 143 U.S. 60, 75, 36 S. L. ed. 71, 80, 12 Sup. Ct. > Rep. 356; Lincoln v. > Power, 151 U.S. 436, 38 L. ed. 224, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 387. We must assume > the most favorable > statement of the plaintiff's case to be true, unless some particular > request for instructions makes it > necessary to deal with conflicting evidence. That statement may be made in > a few words. > > Behymer had been in the employ of the company as a brakeman about three > months. On February > 7, 1899, at Big Sandy, in Texas, he was ordered by the conductor of a local > freight train to get up > on some cars standing on a siding and let off the brakes, so that the > engine might move them to > the main track and add them to the train. The tops of the cars were covered > with ice, as all > concerned knew. He obeyed orders; the engine picked up the cars, moved to > the main track, and > stopped suddenly. The cars ran forward to the extent of the slack and back > again, as they were > moving up hill. The jerk upset Behymer's balance, the bottom of his > trousers caught in a projecting > nail in the running board, and he was thrown between the cars. It is true > that the jury might have > drawn a different conclusion from his evidence, or have disbelieved it in > essential points, but they > also were at liberty to find, as they must be taken to have found, that the > foregoing statement is > true. The car belonged to another road, but was in the charge of the > defendant company, and, > according to the statement of the counsel for the plaintiff in error, had > been inspected before the > accident, although we should have doubted whether the testimony meant to go > so far. Behymer > based his claim upon negligence in stopping the cars so suddenly with > knowledge of his position > and the slippery condition of the roof of the car, and upon the projection > of the nail, which > increased the danger and contributed to his fall. It should be added that, > by a statute of Texas, if > there was negligence, the fact that it was the [189 U.S. 468, 470] > negligence of a fellow servant was > not a defense. Tex. Gen. Laws 1897, Special Session, chap. 6, 1; 2 Sayles's > Tex. Civil Stat. 1897, > art. 4560 f. > > The fundamental error alleged in the exceptions to the charge is that the > court declined to rule that > the chance of such an accident as happened was one of the risks that the > plaintiff assumed, or > that the question whether the defendant was liable for it depended on > whether the freight train was > handled in the usual and ordinary way. Instead of that, the court left it > to the jury to say whether the > train was handled with ordinary care; that is, the care that a person of > ordinary prudence would use > under the same circumstances. This exception needs no discussion. The > charge embodied one of > the commonplaces of the law. What usually is done may be evidence of what > ought to be done, but > what ought to be done is fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, > whether it usually is complied > with or not. Wabash R. Co. v. McDaniels, 107 U.S. 454, 27 L. ed. 605, 2 > Sup. Ct. Rep. 932. No > doubt a certain amount of bumping and jerking is to be expected on freight > trains, and, under > ordinary circumstances, cannot be complained of. Yet, it can be avoided, if > necessary, and when > the particular and known condition of the train makes a sudden bump, > obviously dangerous to > those known to be on top of the cars, we are not prepared to say that a > jury would not be warranted > in finding that an easy stop is a duty. If it was negligent to stop as the > train did stop, the risk of it > was not assumed by the plaintiff. Texas & P. R. Co. v. Archibald, 170 U.S. > 665, 672, 42 S. L. ed. > 1188, 1191, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 777. > > However, the plaintiff did not rely on the management of the train alone. > The projecting nail was > another element in his case. The jury were instructed with regard to that, > that the railroad company > was not liable unless there was a nail there improperly projecting, and a > reasonable inspection > would have discovered and remedied the defect. The car was in the custody > of the company. > There is no suggestion that the company had not had an opportunity to > inspect, and the contrary > was assumed by a request for instructions on the part of the company. > Indeed, as we have said, > its counsel interprets the evidence as meaning that the car had been > inspected before [189 U.S. 468, > 471] the accident. It is not pressed that there was error on this point. > See Mackin v. Boston & A. R. > Co. 135 Mass. 201, 46 Am. Rep. 456; Glynn v. Central R. Co. 175 Mass. 510, > 512, 56 N. E. 698. > The jury were instructed properly on the subject of assumption of risks and > contributory > negligence, and we think it unnecessary to deal more specifically with this > part of the case. > > It was argued that Behymer had aggravated the injury by refusing proper > surgical treatment. With > regard to this the jury were instructed in substance, but at more length, > that it was his duty to submit > to all treatment that a reasonably prudent person would have submitted to, > in order to improve his > condition, and that no damages could be allowed which might have been > prevented by reasonable > care. It is suggested that, as a prudent man, he might have postponed > recovery from his injury to > recovery of damages. The instructions plainly excluded such a view. The > argument hardly is > serious. We have examined all the minute criticisms on the rulings and > refusals to rule, and > discover no error. We deem it unnecessary to answer them in greater detail. > > Judgment affirmed. > > ==== BEHYMER Mailing List ==== > Behymer webpage: BillyBob's Genealogy Homepage > http://members.iglou.com/wbehymer/ > Thanks, BillyBob!

In a message dated 99-04-20 13:35:03 EDT, you write: << Beckleheimer, Anderson (s/o Artemisa Delone) & Payne, Sarah; 30 Aug 1860, Montgomery Co. >> Let me back track this a second because I know it doesn't say Levi anywhere on the record, I have the actual record from Floyd Co. It just says A. Beckelhimer and it doesn't say one word on the record about son of Artemissa Delone/Delong either so makes one wonder where these look up records are coming from? Deanna

Jennifer Black just got some lookup's from Montgomery Co. Va. This is the first time I've seen Anderson Beckelhimer mentioned as the son of Artimissa and Levi Beckelhimer. I'm forwarding this for Jennifer. Right now i am going through the 1850 Franklin County Census to see what's in it. I got these marriages from a lookup today, not much there though. Beckelhimer, Isaac & Vest, Rachael, d/o Littleberry Vest, 17 Jun 1843, Floyd Co. Beckelhimmer, Levi & Newman, Nancy Ann; 13 Feb 1841 Floyd Co. Beckleheimer, Abraham & Graham, Nancy; 10 Sep. 1853, Pulaski Co. Beckleheimer, Abraham & Muirhead,Julina, 10 Feb 1846 Pulaski Co. Beckleheimer, Anderson (s/o Artemisa Delone) & Payne, Sarah; 30 Aug 1860, Montgomery Co. Beckleheimer, James & Wright, Julianna 15 Nov 1846 Pulaski Co. Beckleheimer, John & Akers, Elizabeth J.; 31 Mar 1851, Pulaski Co. Becklehimer, John & Redpath, Catherine D. (d/o James Redpath) ; 23 Mar 1822 Montgomery Co. Deanna

John, I guess I missed your posting of your hypothesis on the Behymer sons. Could you send it again? Rick Phillips John Tippet wrote: > > So, no one on this list has an opinion as to which of the early Clermont > County Behymers were sons of John, Sr Vs John, Jr? I posted my latest > hypothesis, and have received no replies as yet either yea or nay. Surely, > someone out there can motivate the discussion? > > John Charles Tippet > JohnDoeTippet@csi.com > > ==== BEHYMER Mailing List ==== > THE GIANT OF BECKLEHYMER RESEARCH: The Tippet Home Page > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JohnDoeTippet/ > Many, many thanks, John!

So, no one on this list has an opinion as to which of the early Clermont County Behymers were sons of John, Sr Vs John, Jr? I posted my latest hypothesis, and have received no replies as yet either yea or nay. Surely, someone out there can motivate the discussion? John Charles Tippet JohnDoeTippet@csi.com

I'd like to hear John W.'s and Sallye's opinion on this. Deanna