Hi Sue, I am sure you remember we share this line so let me suggest that in those years pregnancy was not talked about or even eluded to in nice company. So yes it sure is possible the child she was carrying wasn't mentioned. I have another case like that out in MO about the same time. Had the babe not been male and named for his father we would still be scratching our heads. I do think both of the girls were Giles daughters. Ginny -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 1:01 am Subject: OHGALLIA Digest, Vol 2, Issue 153 Today's Topics: 1. Legal mention of children in 1840's (S Edwards) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:24:32 -0700 (PDT) From: S Edwards <[email protected]> Subject: [OHGALLIA] Legal mention of children in 1840's To: [email protected], [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 While on vacation, I stopped by the courthouse and acquired a copy of an ancestor's estate from the Probate court. The widow was named the "admministratrix" and later in the document their minor daughter was mentioned. My question: If the widow was pregnant at the time of the ancestor's death (Dec 1848); gave birth (Feb 1849); and the Probate docutment was dated 11 May 1849 - would the infant have been mentioned? Or because birth was after his death, was not mentioned? In 1900 census, my ggg-grandmother stated that she gave birth to 7 children - we (various researchers) have accounted for 6 - 1 daughter from first marriage, 3 sons, 2 daughters from 2nd marriage. Some researchers have mentioned that family stories indicate she had 2 children with her first husband. In the 1849 Mortality Index, I found a Lucetta Case - died Aug 1849 age 6 (year/month no stated) of croup - there are no other Case's in Meigs or Gallia County in the 1850 census. Further down the page there is a Lovina Chase who died in Aug, 1849 - her age is given as 7 (year/month not stated) but her grave stone says 7 months. So it is possible that Lucetta was 6 months - this would fit for the child of Clarissa and Giles S. Case Does the fact that she is not mentioned in the court papers mean that Clarissa and Giles only had one child? Or, if she was born after his death, would she not be mentioned in the court documents? Any help/comments would be appreciated. SueEd NY _________________________________________________________________________ ___________ Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. http://travel.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ To contact the OHGALLIA list administrator, send an email to [email protected] To post a message to the OHGALLIA mailing list, send an email to [email protected] __________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body of the email with no additional text. End of OHGALLIA Digest, Vol 2, Issue 153 **************************************** ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.