Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Barton Warren Stone Returns

Almost 1 year ago today, I blogged about Barton Warren Stone and wondered if he were related to Thomas Stone. Since then, the following information has come to light. An anonymous commenter on our blog offers the following:

"here seems to be further support of that geneology, Barton being son of second marriage thus nephew of Thomas Stone:

http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/glc/7158/7158_24.html

JOHN STONE4(1714-1775)John Stone, son of Matthew and Rachel (Smoot) Stone, was born at "Poynton Manor", Durham Parish, Charles County, Maryland. In court during 1769, he declared himself to be 55 years of age and mentioned his father Matthew Stone, then deceased. He married twice, but the name of his first wife has not been established. Children of John Stone by First Marriage1. Thomas Stone married Catherine (???). q.v. 2. Josiah Stone, d.s.p. Somerset Co., Md., 1781, willing dwelling-plantation, "Drury Lane", to brother John. 3. William Stone married Betsy Murray. q.v. 4. John Stone, d.s.p. 1783, willing "Drury Lane" to brother Thomas, "that which was willed me by brother Josiah", also named his brother William and the latter's wife, Betsy, and his brother-in-law, Jeremiah Gray. Inventory signed by Mary Gray and William Stone. 5. Mary Stone married Jeremiah Gray. By 1763 John Stone had become a widower and had married Mary, the daughter of Barton Warren, but then the widow and administratrix of Harrison Musgrove. On June 6, 1758, she, then being Mrs. Mary Musgrove, shared in the distribution of her father's estate. On April 29, 1760, she was granted letters of administration on the estate of her deceased husband, Harrison Musgrove, with Notley Warren and John Warren offering bond. The final settlement was made by her on May 15, 1762, as Mary Musgrove, and showed distribution to her and unnamed children. Children of John and Mary (Warren) Stone6. Matthew Stone married Jane (???). 7. Warren Stone. 8. Elizabeth Stone. 9. Barton Warren Stone married twice. q.v. John Stone negotiated his will on August 6, 1775, and appointed his wife, Mary, as the executrix. He named the following children--Thomas, Josias, William, John, Matthew, Warren, Elizabeth, and Barton; and grandson John Stone Gray. The instrument was admitted to probate in Charles County on September 12, 1775, by Samuel Stone, Elizabeth Stone, and Theophilus Hanson."

That's not all. The following is from Jay Moose, Park Ranger at The Thomas Stone National Historic Site:

John Stone, son of William Stone, the first protestant governor of Maryland, and his wife Verlinda was born in Accomac County Virginia and moved with his parents to Virginia in 1648. During his lifetime he married three times. He and his first wife, Elizabeth produced a son, Thomas (1677-1727), and a grand-son David. David married Elizabeth Jenifer and produced a son Thomas, signer of the Declaration of Independence in 1743.

John and his third wife Eleanor Bayne produced a son Mathew (1679-1750) who married Rachel Smoot. This union produced a son, John (1714-1775) and a grandson Barton Warren Stone (1772-1884).

Barton Warren Stone, then, and Thomas Stone the signer share a great-grandfather. The respective great-grandmothers are not common so their relationship is step-xxx.

Personally, genealogy makes my head swim, especially when two reliable source provide conflicting information.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I haven't researched the family relationships but if Barton Warren Stone and Thomas Stone share a great-grandfather while having different great-grandmothers, the relationship is half 2nd cousins (not step anything).

Carolyn said...

I have visited Barton Warren Stone's church in Cane Ridge,Kentucky and hanging on one of the outer walls of the original church is a copy of the signed Declaration of Independence. There is a notation next to this stating Barton and Thomas were brothers.

Anonymous said...

I have researched the Stone family extensively - The signer of the Declaration of Independence was a cousin. We have so many same names in this family it is hard to keep them straight. Much confusion is attributed to this. The error I am sure is not intentional but it would be nice if someone at the museum would research and correct the error so it isn't constantly creating errors with newbie genealogists in the family.

Sherri