Tag Archives: Arthur T. Bull

Why Hannah left Zebulon in 1858: A circumstantial theory

Sepia Saturday 495: Fourth and last in a series on why my third great-grandmother Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee may have left her marriage in 1858.

In court records of my third great-grandparents’ 1866 divorce proceedings, no direct evidence was submitted by my third great-grandmother Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee to explain why she left her marriage — never to return.

According to my third great-grandfather Zebulon Blakeslee’s divorce petition, Hannah left him on 1 Nov. 1858 — just two-and-a-half weeks before their 30th wedding anniversary on 19 Nov. 1858.

Hannah’s bold action was unusual for women in the mid-nineteenth century, when only 0.3 in 1000 U.S. marriages ended in divorce. So the most intriguing question in this series is: Why did Hannah leave Zebulon?

Godey’s Fashions for Women (June 1864). I believe Hannah’s departure had a great deal to do with her close relationship with her daughters — Rhoda Ann and Mary Elizabeth — and her developing relationship with her young grandchildren. Photo: ctgpublishing

Having examined the court papers, reviewed a timeline of Hannah’s early and later married life, and chronicled what I know of her post-divorce years, I have formed a theory of why she left Zebulon.

And I believe Hannah’s departure had a great deal to do with her close relationship with her daughters — Rhoda Ann and Mary Elizabeth — and her developing relationship with her young grandchildren.

Hannah’s focus: home, children, grandchildren

Hannah married Zebulon when she was 16 — and spent her childhood and married life in nearby rural farm communities of Conklin, N.Y. and Brookdale, Penna.

There is no evidence that she worked outside the home and the family’s farm during that period — so her focus appears to have been on her home and children. By 1858, the year she left Zebulon, she also had three grandchildren: Rhoda’s sons Duane and Albert and Mary’s daughter Emma — all living nearby.

An abrupt change in 1858

Then in 1858, something happened to upset the stability of Hannah’s extended family — possibly an economic depression related to the Panic of 1857, which hit rural areas hard.

For that’s when Hannah’s daughters Rhoda and Mary, their husbands William Whitney and Arthur T. Bull, and their children uprooted themselves and left the cross-border Conklin-Brookdale area — resettling in Delaware County in New York’s Catskills region.

Hannah’s husband Zebulon appears to have simultaneously fallen on hard times, too — because by 1860 he was boarding with another family and no longer living in his own house.

Township Valley in Delaware County, N.Y. During the 1860 U.S. census, my third great grandmother Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee was living in the Catskills village of Walton, Delaware County, N.Y., with her daughters and their families. She joined them there when she left  her husband in 1858. By: Andy Arthur

Hannah steps into the future

I believe this cascade of events in 1858 prompted Hannah to make a life-changing decision: to stay behind as her daughters and grandchildren — her whole world — moved far away, or to join them in search of a better life.

Since she was living with her daughters in 1860 in Walton, N.Y. — and without Zebulon — we know she chose to step into the future.

Did she try to convince Zebulon to come with her? Did he refuse? Or was this a chance for Hannah to break free from limiting marital circumstances? Hard to know without direct evidence.

However, during the Blakeslee divorce case Jehiel W. Snow testified that, “Have heard her say that she never would come back to live with him and heard her say that she should quit him there.”

One phrase from his testimony seems to stand out: “…quit him there.” Am I reading too much into this — or does that sound like the frustrated statement of a woman whose husband simply refused to budge when the rest of the family was suddenly on the move?

Her family sustained her

My theory about Hannah’s departure rests on circumstantial evidence — and without direct evidence there may never be a definitive explanation. There is also a ten-year period — from circa 1862 to 1873 — when I have not been able to determine her whereabouts.

Yet once Hannah made the decision to throw in her lot with her daughters and grandchildren, she did not turn back — and they, in turn, were apparently supportive. During her later years, and for the rest of her life, she lived with one daughter or the other — and even one of her adult grandsons.

Would she have remained as close to them if she hadn’t joined them in 1858? Possibly not. And for Hannah, that may have made her bold decision worth it.

Up next: A series summary, then a fall break for Molly’s Canopy to relax and recharge. Please stop back when blogging resumes after the holiday season.  Meanwhile, please visit the blogs of other Sepia Saturday participants here.

© 2019 Molly Charboneau. All rights reserved.

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

1850-58: The later married years of Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee

Sepia Saturday 494: Third in a new series on why my third great-grandmother Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee may have left her marriage in 1858.

Nothing in her early married years (1840-50) appears to explain why my third great-grandmother Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee left her husband in 1858. So I examined her later married years (1850-58) for possible clues.

Women’s fashion in 1850. The later years of my third great-grandmother Hannah’s marriage brought many changes. Could the pace of events have created rifts in her marriage? Photo: victoriana.com

Hannah and Zebulon Blakeslee lived on a farm in 1850 with their younger daughter Mary Elizabeth, 12. Their older daughter Rhoda Ann, 19, lived on the farm next door with her husband William Whitney.

Their situation appeared stable, with both farms depicted as comparable to those of their neighbors in the 1850 U.S. census. Yet the ensuing eight years brought many changes for Hannah, as summarized in the timeline below.

Timeline: Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee’s Later Married Years (1850-58)
Year Location Event
1850 & 1852 Conklin, Broome, NY Birth of Grandsons Duane & Albert Whitney[1]FamilySearch requires free login to view documents.
1851-1854 Conklin Centre, Broome, NY Farmer Zebulon was also a postmaster and offered therapy for stuttering from their home
1854 Brookdale, Susquehanna, PA Hannah & Zebulon move there; he was postmaster until 1855
1855 Conklin, Broome, NY William & Rhoda Ann Whitney remained on their farm[2]ibid.
1856 Brookdale, Susquehanna, PA Daughter Mary Elizabeth wed tanner Arthur T. Bull
1857-1858 Brookdale, Susquehanna, PA Store owner Zebulon paid merchant and “real/acre” taxes
1858 Brookdale, Susquehanna, PA Birth of granddaughter Emma Eulalie Bull

Mother, grandmother, empty nest

With the birth of Duane Whitney in 1850, Hannah became a grandmother at the relatively young age of 38 — while her younger daughter Mary, 12, was still at home. Two years later her second grandchild, Albert Whitney, was born.

From 1850-54, the Blakeslees and Whitneys lived next to each other in Conklin, N.Y. — which would have made for convenient grandmotherly visits by Hannah. Meanwhile, Zebulon cobbled together several jobs as a farmer, postmaster and folk cure practitioner to make ends meet.

But in 1854, Zebulon apparently gave up the farm — or left it to William and Rhoda Ann Whitney — because he moved with Hannah and Mary back across the border to Brookdale, PA. There he opened a country store near the local tannery — and Hannah no longer lived close to her grandsons.

Two years later, their daughter Mary Elizabeth and Arthur T. Bull (my great-great grandparents) got married — leaving Hannah with an empty nest at age 44.

In summary: many life changes over a short period of time.

Conklin and Brookdale: different as night and day

On a recent road trip to Binghamton, N.Y., I drove south through Conklin toward Brookdale to get a sense of the rural environment where the Blakeslees once lived.

Image by 12019 on Pixabay
A New York Farm. Conklin, N.Y., is sunny and bright with broad expanses of farmland stretching west from the Susquehanna River to meet distant, rolling hills. Was Hannah disappointed to relocate to forested Brookdale, Penna. in 1854 — leaving her young Whitney grandsons behind?

Much has changed in the 160 years since they resided there — and the Brookdale community as they knew it no longer exists. Yet the cross-border areas remain as different as night and day.

Conklin and nearby Corbettsville. N.Y. — where Hannah’s parents and other Hance relatives are buried — are sunny and bright with broad expanses of farmland stretching west from the Susquehanna River to meet distant, rolling hills.

But just across the Pennsylvania border the road to Brookdale darkens as it parallels the Snake Creek and enters forests that at times climb sharply up steep inclines.

Ancestors of those tannin-rich trees once fueled the Brookdale tannery whose workers shopped at Zebulon Blakeslee’s store. Yet I have to wonder: Did their shadows cast gloom over Hannah, who may have missed the young grandsons she had to leave behind?

A happy occasion capped off the eight years of change when Hannah’s first granddaughter Emona Eulalie Bull was born 1858. Yet that was the same year that Hannah left Zebulon for good. A coincidence? Or somehow connected to her bold action?

More in the next post. Meanwhile, please visit the blogs of this week’s other Sepia Saturday participants here.

© 2019 Molly Charboneau. All rights reserved.

Follow my blog with Bloglovin


1 FamilySearch requires free login to view documents.
2 ibid.

1865: Where in the world was Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee?

Sepia Saturday 487: Fifth in a series on the 1866 divorce of my third great-grandparents Zebulon and Hannah (Hance) Blakeslee — what the court records reveal.

As part of his 1866 divorce case in Susquehanna County, Penna., my third great-grandfather Zebulon Blakeslee reached out to three witnesses to give depositions on his behalf.

The first deposition from James E. Whitney piqued my interest, and I discovered he was a collateral relative — a younger brother of William Whitney, husband of Zebulon’s older daughter Rhoda Ann.

Wondering where James Whitney lived when he gave his deposition, I found him enumerated the 1865 New York State Census for Conklin, Broome County, N.Y. — but that’s not all I found!

Nine women with rakes (circa 1890-1920). Hannah Hance was just 16 when she married Zebulon Blakeslee in 1828, By age 46, when she left him, she may have tired of rural life and wanted something else for her remaining years. But where did Hannah live from 1860-1873? Photo: Franck Taylor Bowers collection – Broome County Historical Society

A series of surprises

Surprise No. 1: The 1865 state census (excerpted below) revealed that both Blakeslee daughters and their families were back in Conklin, N.Y. — apparently having returned en mass from Walton, Delaware County, N.Y. where they lived in 1860.

Surprise No. 2: Rhoda Ann (Blakeslee) Whitney lived right next door to her brother-in-law James when he gave his deposition in support of her father Zebulon’s divorce petition. And her sister — my  great-grandmother Mary Elizabeth (Blakeslee) Bull — lived close by.

1865 N.Y. State Census – Conklin, Broome County, N.Y. – Whitney and Bull Families – Source: FamilySearch
Dwell. Fam. Name Age Relation. Born County Job/Other
15 16 James E. Whitney 35 Head Chenango Farmer
Mary Whitney 79 Mother Columbia 13 living children
Pamelia Whitney 44 Sister Broome
John B. Whitney 39 Brother Chenango
16 17 William Whitney 40 Head Broome Farmer
Rhoda Ann [Blakeslee] Whitney 34 Wife Penna. Children Duane, 14 & Albert, 12
37 39 Arthur T. Bull 29 Head Greene Farmer
Mary Elizabeth [Blakeslee] Bull 27 Wife Broome Children Emona, 7, Carrie, 5 & Milo, 3

Surprise No. 3: Hannah was not living with either daughter! And so far I have found no trace of Hannah for a span of 13 years — from the 1860 federal census of Walton, N.Y. (when she lived with her daughter Rhoda Ann and son-in-law William Whitney) to her first appearance in an 1873 city directory for Binghamton, N.Y.

“It broke up his family”

In his 1866 deposition, James E. Whitney testified about my third great-grandparents’ breakup — precipitated by Hannah leaving Zebulon in 1858.

She left him about about seven years ago and has not lived with him since. Know of no reason for her leaving and in consequence of it it broke up his family. She went to live with her son in law and has remained away ever since.

There is some truth to what he says. Hannah went away, yes — and she did live with her son-in-law. She also apparently stayed away — and under the radar — as I found no record of her  from 1860-1873.

Maybe, maybe not

But did Hannah’s actions really break up the family? Maybe, maybe not. By 1865, both Blakeslee daughters had returned together from Walton, N.Y., to their Conklin, N.Y., hometown — along with their intact families.

They were then living within five miles of their father Zebulon — who, per his 1865 divorce filing, still resided just over the border in Brookdale, Penna.

Rhoda Ann lived next door to her brother-in-law James Whitney when he provided his deposition supporting Zebulon’s divorce petition — but apparently she did not hold this against him when she later moved into his household after her husband William died.

And after their parents’ divorce and Zebulon’s second marriage, the families of both Rhoda Ann (Blakeslee) Whitney and Mary Elizabeth (Blakeslee) Bull took turns housing their mother Hannah for the rest of her life — while supporting her public persona as a “widow.”

A modern family

Of course, census records, city directories and court documents cannot tell the whole story. But in some ways, the Blakeslees’ and their daughters appear to have handled the divorce much like families do today — by maintaining familial relationships as best they could while adjusting to the new situation.

Up next: Two more depositions in the Blakeslee divorce case. Meanwhile, please visit the blogs of this week’s other Sepia Saturday participants here.

© 2019 Molly Charboneau. All rights reserved.

Follow my blog with Bloglovin