Yvonne's suggestion to me to look for Thomas Moore's probably widow and orphaned children with their mother's kin, is starting to show more potential than it did when she made it yesterday. Yesterday, I hadn't a clue who their mother's kin were and was at a loss. Today, it occurred to me that surely back when the girl was born, which was around 1830, her father WAS living in the vicinity. An elderly woman named Elizabeth Riker, a good 40 years older than Emaline, who was Thomas Moore's wife, and born in New York, was found living with them in the 1850 census. Emaline was reported in 1860 to have been born in Maryland. I looked for a Riker in Cecil County, Maryland, in the 1830 census, and found one, and the family fits. I did not know until a day ago that Riker is an evolution from the names Reichter and Richert and is spelled many ways. Actually, the Riker family may have lived not far away in Chester County in the 1840 census, spelled Richter. The family are likely to have been illiterate, as the 1850 census reports that their daughter could not read or write. I have a several times great grandparent like that in Montreal who couldn't seem to make up her mind if her name was Bane, or Cabane. It probably originally was McBean. But I found in the 1830 census, close to when Emaline was born, John Riker, in Cecil County, Maryland, in the 4th election district, wherever that was. For the 1830 census, Cecil County was broken into four election districts, no clue which one was where. John Riker was an elderly man; 60-69 according to the census record. His wife was between 40 and 49, which is the right age to have been 60 in 1850. And they had a girl child under the age of five, which most likely was Emaline, unless another child was born after 1830, which did not happen if the family I found in Chester County in 1840 census was them. The next youngest child was between 11 and 14 years old, and this and the 20 or so year age disparity between husband and wife suggest that Elizabeth probably was not his first wife. John Riker had three sons between ages 15 and 29 in the 1830 census; they must ahve been born between 1800 and 1815, when Elizabeth, who was atleast 40 in 1830 and 60 in 1850, was only a girl. He also had four daughters, and the other three were born between 1810 and 1820. Emaline probably was born between 1828 and 1830, unless she was born later, in which case the girl in the census was born after 1825. Emaline was not able to read or write, according to the 1850 census, and judging from teh way she reported ages in the census, she also could not count and definitely couldn't cipher. Thomas was a not very successful farmer and then a laborer. Thomas lived and owned a small to moderate sized farm in Lower Oxford township in Chester County, in 1850 census. Emaline's mother lived with them. By 1857, they no longer lived there. By 1860, Elizabeth Riker was not living with them, and Thomas was a landless laborer - and he lived in Safe Harbor, a tiny rural to the point of isolation, as I'm told, hamlet on the Susquehanna River, by the Safe Harbor Dam, in Conestoga Township, Lancaster County, not far from the Maryland border. I don't know where Chestnut Level would be in relation to it, but I somehow would not be too surprised if it was not far away. By 1870, it strongly appears as if Thomas Moore died, neither he, nor his wife, nor his eldest son, as heads of the household containing his children including 10 year old Charles Moore, can be found anywhere in Delaware, Maryland or Pennsylvania in the 1870 census. I examined all eligible households. However, Rikers with variant spellings were sprouting up in Harrisburg, the majority of tehm on the same page according to the census index, like they were flies. Since only two of them lived there and only one at most was named John in 1830, it is not possible to account by reproduction for about three John Sr's and two John Jr's or vice-versa, by 1850 census. Or was taht 1870. I did alot of extremely fast browsing. Meanwhile, Charles Moore mysteriously turns up married to a girl who lived in a little town adjacent to Harrisburg, by 1880 census enumeration. How did Charles Moore get to the Harrisburg area, one wonders? It was suggested to me that if something happened to Thomas Moore, his widow would most likely have gone to stay with her own relatives. Her father was clearly not still living by 1870, it is unlikely that he was living in 1850, and her mother was probably gone, too. She might have gone to stay with a brother. Now if I find them living with some Riker in Chestnut Level, I will choke. You write of three Riker aka Rikerd/ Richter families, one settled early in New York state and had many descendants there, the other one also went to New York, and a third settled somewhere right around the southeastern Pennsylvania/ Maryland border and seemingly moved back and forth over that border, had a son named Frederick who I guess founded the dynasty of Frederick's I kept running into, who took off for Ohio with most of his progeny or something, except that two sons including a John Riker settled in Chestnut Level, and their descendants remained there. Here is what I know about my John and Elizabeth Riker. I am hoping you know more about my John and Elizabeth Riker. First of all, Elizabeth Riker must have been born around 1790, and the 1850 census record says she, alone of Thomas Moore's household, was born in New York. This suggests that she and her husband, John Riker, may have come from New York, where there sure were enough Riker's. Other members of the family may also have come from New York. This is not necessarily true, though; people of German as well as Dutch descent from New York migrated southward across Pennsylvania and Maryland, and John Riker could have been a native of the area where he lived in 1830, and married a woman who came from New York. In 1840, there is no John Riker or any other Riker in Cecil County, Maryland, but there is a John Rickard in East Fallowfield, Chester County, which contained noone with name resembling Riker in 1830 - and didn't contain him in 1850, either. Here is how the two records line up. I THINK they were the same family, and some characteristics of this family are unlikely to have been true of two different families by chance, such as the advanced age of the parents; but I cannot be sure. I'll let you reach your own conclusions about when John Riker of the 1830 census, who clearly IS Elizabeth's husband and the father of Emaline, would have been born. If the family had moved to East Fallowfield, this would go far to explain how Thomas Moore met up with them. Male Female 1830 1840 1830 1840 1-4 1 5-10 1 11-14 1 15-19 1 1 1 20-29 2 30-39 40-49 1 1 50-59 1 60-69 1 Elizabeth, who probably no more could read or write or cipher than her daughter could, could easily have reported she was 40 in 1830 and 49 in 1840, if she was 60 in 1850. Don't know how John got ten years younger between 1830 and 1840. It's hard to figure out what went on with the youngest boy, too - though Thomas Moore was 30 in 1850, and 35 in 1860. I kind of suspect it is mostly his wife who talked to the census enumerator... It is unlikely that two families by happenstance would have aging parents and a small daughter, who did advance in age in a consistent fashion. Do you know who were John Riker of Cecil County in 1830, and his wife, Elizabeth from New York? Do you know who were the Rikers of Harrisburg? There may have been two or three possibly unrelated to each other Riker families there. I'd really very much appreciate whatever information you have. Can you please also direct me to other Riker researchers, and to anything published about them. Yours, Dora Smith __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/