Samuel Cutshall 2 3 4
- Born: 15 May 1789, Maryland 5
- Marriage (1): Mary Elizabeth Darner on 26 December 1812 in , Frederick County, MD 1
- Died: 18 November 1873, Allen County, IN at age 84 5 6
- Buried: After 18 November 1873, Fort Wayne, IN 6
General Notes:
NOTE - Samuel's age varies somewhat in the census records. The 1850 census record shows his age as 58 which would make his birth year about 1792. The 1860 census record shows his age as 69 which would make his birth year about 1791. The 1870 census record shows his age as 78 which would make his birth year about 1792. His gravestone apparently shows his actual birth date as 15 May 1789 which is two or three years earlier than he reported in the census records. ----------------------------------------
Noted events in his life were:
• He has alternate birth date of 1791 and a birth location of Maryland.
This birth year was referenced by his age of 69 on the 1860 census. . 3
• He has alternate birth date of 1792 and a birth location of Maryland.
This birth year was referenced by his age of 58 on the 1850 US Census. It was also referenced by his age of 78 on the 1870 US Census. . 2 4
• He appeared on the 1850 US Census in Washington Township, Allen County, IN on 18 September 1850. 2
1850 US Census Page 143, Dwelling 920, Family 932, Roll 135 Washington Township, Allen County, Indiana Samuel Cutshall..58..MD..Farmer (Living with wife and 5 children.)
NOTE - If his birth date was 15 May 1789, then his age should have been 61 instead of 58. .
• He appeared on the 1860 US Census in Washington Township, Allen County, IN on 6 June 1860. 3
1860 US Census Page 11, Roll 243, Dwelling 74, Family 74 Washington Township, Allen County, Indiana Samuel Cutshall..69..MD..Farmer (Living with wife and married son, Thomas, and his family.)
NOTE - If his birth date was 15 May 1789, then his age should have been 71 instead of 68. .
• He appeared on the 1870 US Census in Washington Township, Allen County, IN on 13 July 1870. 4
1870 US Census Page 3, Dwelling 22, Family 22, Roll 298 Washington Township, Allen County, Indiana Sam Cutshall..78..MD..Farmer (Living with wife.)
NOTE - If his birth date was 15 May 1789, then his age should have been 81 instead of 78. .
• He was buried after 18 November 1873 in the Bethel Cemetery in Fort Wayne, IN.
Samuel married Mary Elizabeth Darner, daughter of Andrew Darner and Magdelena Elizabeth Schnorren, on 26 December 1812 in , Frederick County, MD.1 (Mary Elizabeth Darner was born in September 1794 in , Frederick County, MD,7 died on 4 May 1881 in Allen County, IN 6 7 8 and was buried after 4 May 1881 in Fort Wayne, IN 7 8.)
Noted events in their marriage were:
• They appeared on the 1850 US Census in Washington Township, Allen County, IN on 18 September 1850. 2
1850 US Census Page 143, Dwelling 920, Family 932, Roll 135 Washington Township, Allen County, Indiana Samuel Cutshall..58..MD..Farmer Mary Cutshall..53..MD George Cutshall..22..OH..Laborer Martha A. Cutshall..19..OH Joseph Cutshall..17..OH..Laborer William N. Cutshall..16..OH Thomas Cutshall..13..OH Harlow or Newton (?) Colman..19..IN..Laborer .
• They appeared on the 1860 US Census in Washington Township, Allen County, IN on 6 June 1860. 3
1860 US Census Page 11, Roll 243, Dwelling 74, Family 74 Washington Township, Allen County, Indiana Samuel Cutshall..69..MD..Farmer Mary Cutshall..67..MD Thomas Cutshall..23..IN..Farmer Martha Cutshall..17..IN (DauL) Isaac W. Cutshall..1..IN (GSon)
NOTE - Sons Joseph and William Cutshall were married and living in the same township as their parents in 1860. George also was probably out on his own. .
• They appeared on the 1870 US Census in Washington Township, Allen County, IN on 13 July 1870. 4
1870 US Census Page 3, Dwelling 22, Family 22, Roll 298 Washington Township, Allen County, Indiana Sam Cutshall..78..MD..Farmer Mary Cutshall..71..MD..Keeps House .
Marriage Notes:
Mary's age is not consistent between the 1850 and 1870 census. Her supposed birth date was September 1794. The 1850 census record was completed on September 18, 1850 but the data was supposed to be as of 1 Jun 1850 which means Mary's age should have been entered as 55. However, the rules of data entry were not always followed closely so if her 56th birthday had occurred in the first 18 days of September just prior to her family being enumerated, then her age could have shown up as 56. Either way, the entry of only 53 years suggest her birth year could actually be 1797 instead of 1794. Mary's age on the 1860 census suggest her birth year was 1793 or 1994. It is my belief that the 1850 entry is not the correct age and it should have been entered as either 55 or 56. (Brian L. Lightfoot) ----------------------------------------
Martha's age is not consistent between the 1850 and 1860 census. She is listed on the 1850 census as being 19 years old but only 17 years old on the 1860 census. If the 1860 census entry of 17 years old is correct, then her birth year was about 1843 and that would mean that her mother was about 49 years old at the time of the birth which is not unreasonable. However, that also puts quite a gap between the next youngest child who was born in 1837. If I assume that the 1860 census is not correct and that her age should be shown as 29 instead of 17, that would put her birth year at 1831 which fits in comfortably with the other known birth years of the children. One other problem is that the 1850 record shows her place of birth as Ohio and the 1860 record shows it as Indiana. The only simple solution of avoiding all of these conflicts is that they were two different people but I don't believe that is true. (Brian L. Lightfoot) ----------------------------------------
Thomas' age is consistent between the 1850 and 1860 census records but his birth location is shown as Ohio in 1850 and Indiana in 1860. However, the 1860 census record for his brother, William, shows that his birth year of 1837 would be the same as Thomas' which can't be true unless they were twins. I believe that the age of Thomas is correct in both census records for Thomas which would result in a birth year of 1837. I believe that only the 1850 census record of William is correct which shows his age as 3 years older than Thomas and would result in a birth year of 1834 for William. (Brian L. Lightfoot) ----------------------------------------
|