Posted By:Fred Samson
Email:
Subject:Re: John Grant VA Lacy Lacey
Post Date:May 15, 2010 at 15:22:25
Message URL:http://genforum.genealogy.com/lacy/messages/3017.html
Forum:Lacy Family Genealogy Forum
Forum URL:http://genforum.genealogy.com/lacy/

Earlier, I forwarded an inquiry as to John Grant, Lacey or a Russell.

Due to email, I though the following some additional background on John Grant (-1836), Revolutionary War soldier and my SAR line, might help better understand my two questions and request for information.

I firmly believe family history should be based on substantive records; wills, deed, bonds, minister returns, or other Court record; and not on name association or looking for a name association. In some cases as demonstrated by Robert N. Grant in his work with the Wrights and Grants, use of the Colonial naming convention can provide an inferential approach to tracing a family’s history.

Lets briefly discuss John Grant (-1836), my line to the SAR and used successfully for at least three DAR memberships.
John Grant’s (-1836) line

The relationship of Samuel Russell Grant, John Addison Grant and Robert Franklin Grant is well established by Wills. The relation of Samuel Russell Grant (1786-1861) to John Grant (-1836) to the best of my information was first summarized by Grant and Samson (1974)—their direct line. They describe this relationship on three Court records; the tithable list, voting list, and property on the Manors of Leeds (see below for a concern on this record).
John Grant’s (-1836) family.

John Grant family, based on Court records, include John Jr., Samuel Russell, William, Harvey, Anna, James H., and probably Jemima. I say “probably” for Jemima in that her marriage bond is signed by James (presumably James H.) and not John.

If you look at a larger picture, tax and census records (using census, tax, Schreiner-Yantis and Love 1987 and other Court records) show three relevant Grant families: (1) an “early” family of James, John, and Daniel (nicely described in the book “The Paynes of Virginia”); 2) John Sr., John Jr., Daniel, Joseph, William and Isaac; and 3) a “latter” family of John Grant Sr., John Grant Jr., Samuel Russell and so on.

John Grant’s (-1836) parents

I have yet to uncover a Court record (a Will in particular) that documents who were John Grant’s (-1836) parents. Some suggest John Grant and Lydia Barbee. The connection of John/Lydia I have found is based on a single narrow thread of evidence linking them as a whiteness to a Will (Jane Hurst) in Stafford County, through a series of Court documents, to Hurst being a neighbor to John, John, and Daniel Grant on the Manor of Leeds.

The material I am familiar with (Grant and Samson 1974, Russell 1978, Hirsch 1994) describe but one Grant on the Manor of Leeds. In fact, there are at least four Grants on the Manor (Samson 2009).

a)The Payne and James, John and Daniel Grant Lease. I believe this Grant group includes the John Grant who died in 1817 with Paynes handling the estate. It is a strong possibility that Daniel Grant (1758-1831) who served in the Revolutionary War is this “Daniel.” The Paynes and Grants interacted for over 100 years, Daniel as a name is common to this line, but does not appear anywhere in property, offspring, or other record for John Grant (-1836).

b)The John, John and Daniel of 6 November 1771 Lease. This group appears as a “blip” in the various Court and Census records and I have yet to find a Court or other substantive record that identifies the lineage of this Grant group to John Grant (-1836).

c)Samuel Russell Grant (1786-1861). Grant and Samson (1974) use the 1771 Lease to like Samuel to John Grant (-1836). The issue is that mapping the location (Samson 2009) and tracing the Lease histories does not provide strong evidence for this relationship based on the 1771 Lease as suggested by Grant and Samson (1974).

d)John Grant (-1836) resided late in his life on the Lease originally granted to James, Malon, and Manual Lacey. James H. Grant in his property record also mentions the Lacey Lease. This does not establish a link to a Lacey as a wife to John Grant.

e)Some believe family histories are important such as Grant and Samson (1974). Samuel Russell Grant (1786-1861) appears to have been a literate person—he sold a library among other items when they left the Manor. Samuel told his children/grandchildren that his father was from Scotland. My view is that a very strong possibility exists that John Grant (-1836), Revolutionary War veteran, came to America with thousands of others from Scotland sometime between 1745-1755.

John Grant’s (-1836) wife.

I know of no Court record that has identified his wife. Grant and Samson (1974) suggested an unknown Lacey, and latter in the summary, a Russell.

A recent note on Rootsweb list a Lydia Vilet Lacey as his wife but no Court or other record is provided. I have always associated Lydia or Vilet with the John Grant of Bedford County, Virginia due to a Parish record. On the other hand, a “Lacey” would be great in that Effie L Pattee working for Grace Grant in the 1930s suggested a Lacey.

Let us assume that the Colonial naming convention is of value. “Russell” appears in four Grant generations (Samuel on), Alexander in two generations, and “Lacey” or “Lacy” never appears. The Grant line is very strong in use of the naming convention and would lead to the suggestion that John Grant’s (-1836) wife was a Russell, thus my first question—is there a Court record that identifies John Grant’s wife, a Lacey or a Russell?

Daniel Grant (1758-1831)

Daniel Grant (1758-1831) is an enigma. Hirsch (1994) has several what I view as significant errors in describing the military service of John Grant (-1836), he served three years and not six, was not at the Battle of Cowpens (1781), and so on. No evidence exists in the transcribed NARA military records of either Daniel or John Grant that they were brothers (Samson 2009). Clearly, the birth date of William Grant, son of John and Lydia Grant, differs by nine years from the William Grant that served in the Revolutionary War.

Second, Daniel Grant (1758-1831) is not part of the property trail or other Court record associated with the John Grant (-1836) line. He simply drops out of the picture of any Grant line until surfacing somewhat latter in poverty in Kentucky.

John Grant (-1790)

No Grant researcher has yet to offer a Court record that John Grant (-1790 and son of John Grant (-1762), who according to work by Effie L. Pattee and funded by Grace Grant in the 1930s (with appropriate letter in Grant and Samson 1974) died in 1790 according to a “Wright Bible,” ever married. My second question as to whether any Court record existed as to his marriage was to see in the name “Russell” came via a marriage by John Grant (-1790).
Thus, again, I am interested in a substantive evidence, a Court record, that would document who John Grant (-1836) married and second, in any Court record that John Grant (-1790) married.

In sum, 1) the record from current to John Grant (-1836), Revolutionary War soldier, is very strong as evident in Court and or other public records (one SAR and three DAR memberships that I am aware of). 2) It is very likely the John Grant (-1836), Revolutionary War soldier, came from Scotland, and married either before coming to the Colony or after, a Russell, unless a Court record surfaces to show a Lacey or both a Russell and a Lacey. 3) At this point, John Grant (-1790) is a dead end in terms of a Grant lineage.

I hope the above helps to better explain my two questions and any Court record that might help answer either would be appreciated.

Thank you for the email!

Fred B. Samson
.