tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post704198484159927809..comments2024-03-26T11:22:41.940-07:00Comments on Genea-Musings: 52 Ancestors Week 19: #26 Devier James Lamphier Smith (1839-1894)Randy Seaverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17477703429102065294noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-5101087348233910172014-05-09T10:13:59.723-07:002014-05-09T10:13:59.723-07:00Thanks, Randy, for putting this in one place. I&#...Thanks, Randy, for putting this in one place. I'm going to save this in my "friends' brick walls" folder on Evernote, in case I ever come up with a Lamphere clue. In my most recent 1860's "adoption" research, I have a strong theory that the child was actually the mother's son, one way or another. The mother then married, and her new husband adopted the child (not in court, which was not required then), who was about 3 by then. There was some misinformation spread around to cover this up of course, but that's what I think. My theory hinges on finding a baby with a slight variation of name in the mother's household in the 1860 census (before the marriage), plus looking at what various people reported in the very informative 1900 census. Plus, she married in 1863 reportedly for the second time but there is no record of the earlier marriage, death or divorce (yet, anyway). Diane Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01651983086274990288noreply@blogger.com