Circumstantial Charlie

(c) 2020 by Walton Family Historian Frederick E. Walton

Every life has a beginning and an end. The challenge to the genealogist is to find the specific beginning and end, along with everything in between, that correctly corresponds to the individual being searched. Sometimes the carefully preserved documentary evidence for an individual, once discovered, falls into place as beautifully as a row of dominos falling down, one on top of the other. More often, you scratch and search only to discover your subject lived in one of the few counties where the census was destroyed, or for some reason they weren’t counted. Births or marriages occurred  tantalizingly close to the cutoff date of the available indexes, but are nevertheless not included, or, on the opposite end of the scale, there are so many people with the same name, similar birthdate and similar spouse that you end up with more red herrings than an Agatha Christie mystery novel!

I  have before me an 1874 birth certificate that identifies Charles Walton, brother of my great-grandfather. He is a blood relative that I am investigating. This is a solid “beginning” for this individual.

Also before me is a DNA report that strongly links me to a newly discovered cousin whose grandparents were named Charles and Hannah Walton. This is a strong “ending” since there is a blood link to me through DNA. 

Because Charles died before my cousin’s birth, his early  lineage has been obscured to her by the mists of time. The question now becomes, is her grandfather Charles, the same Charles as my Great-grandfather's younger brother Charles? The answer is unequivocally....probably! 

A third document contains a photo and description of a WALTON grave marker in Brooklyn, New York marking a well documented cousin, Ellen Walton, and two unexpected burials...Charles and Hannah Walton, which suggests an additional “ending” with a strong link to a known ancestor.

Who exactly are Charles & Hanna Walton buried in a Walton family grave in Evergreens Cemetery, in Brooklyn New York? Some evidence (see previous post) makes Charles Walton (1874-?), brother of my great-grandfather, George Walton (1864-1910) a strong contender. Other evidence clearly links Charles and Hannah Walton to my DNA matching cousin and therefore back to me. But can we link all the abundance of evidence together to prove conclusively that this all points to the same Charles??? In this blog post, I will explore the documentary evidence and try to tie it back to my ancestor, Charles Walton.

Start at the Begining

My Great-Grandfdather's younger brother was named Charles Walton. He was born in Cheddleton, England on February 14, 1874 to the same parents as George Walton (1864-1910). I have a copy of Charles' English birth certificate, so up to that point in his life, I am 100% confident in his identity. The question is ... did CHARLES know his birth date? Looking at all the official documents left in his wake, it is questionable as you shall see by my investigation.

Birth Certificate for Charles Walton- 14 Feb 1874

Census Records

Census records are always a good place to find detailed data about a person, their family, their occupation, where they lived, and much more...when you are confident you have the right census for the right person.

Charles Walton, age 7, appears in the 1881 British census living with his parents. This record is positively correct for "our" Charles Walton. By the next census in 1891, his father, John Walton, is deceased and his mother, Eliza,  is living with his older sister Rose in Manchester. Charles is not found in the 1891 census with his family or elsewhere and seems to disappear from English records.  Family oral history, from Rose's grand-daughter, Audrey, indicates that the youngest brothers, Charles and Frederick followed some of their siblings and immigrated to the U.S. around 1890.  To date, I have been unable to find their specific immigration records, but that is not unusual. So we have a strong assumption that Charles immigrated to the United States of America, although we are not sure when. But no matter, at some point in time he made it to America's shore and raised a family...maybe two!

Charles and Hanna- Skipping to the End via a DNA Link

Since Charles and Hanna Walton are the names on the headstone It makes sense to start our search there.

When searching Ancestry.com for all U.S. Census Records, it is remarkable how many Charles Waltons, born in England in 1874 (plus or minus 5 years) show up!  Would you believe nearly 4,000! The 1920 U. S. Federal Census alone has 325 Charles Waltons. Few are likely candidates. When I add "Hanna", the other name on the headstone, as a spouse it drops to ...ZERO.

I tried Hannah, Hana, Hanah and got nothing. The name Hanna (Hana, Hannah) means 'he has favoured me' from the old testament story about Hanna and is a very popular name in the UK. It is also form of Anne, Ann or Anna. So I tried Ann, Anne...Nothing. Then I tied ANNA and bingo, there are 3 matches, but only one where Charles was born in England... about 1879...not a match to birthdate, but close.

See line 49 & 50 for Charles and Anna Walton (Daughter Margret is on the next page)

Click here  to see full size copy of 1920 census on WWW.Familysearch.org

Reading this 1920 Census it tells us that a Charles Walton, age 41 (b. 1879) and Anna, age 33 (b. 1887) lived at 458 East 143rd Street in Bronx, N. Y. Charles is a Chauffeur. Charles was born in England, as were his parents. Anna was born in Ireland, as were her parents. We know they are married, but not when from this census. They have a one year old daughter named Margret (she's on the following page in the census) who was born in New York. Charles immigrated in 1882. Anna immigrated in 1893. This mean he would have been only three and she would have been six when they immigrated, it you believe their reported birth dates. Neither date syncs to my target subject.

Is this anywhere close to the right couple???? The name Charles Walton and Anna (which could be a formal version of the nickname Hanna) and the birth place of Charles and his parents in England are all good matches but practically everything else is wrong! His birthdate should be 1874 (age 46). His year of immigration is probably wrong. He is a Chauffeur, which is in line with his father and brother's occupation, but we have no evidence that the little 7 year old Charlie  we met in the 1881 English Census was destined to be a Chauffeur! Since no other record found is even remotely close, this has got to be at least considered for the moment.This is a good lead but, disappointingly, not a perfect match. 

1918 Draft Registration Card

Charles Walton's World War One Draft registration card Ties him to Anna and has an almost correct birth date

Continuing my search, I found a strong collaborating  piece of evidence in Charles Walton's 1918 World War One Draft registration Card. This directly ties to the 1920 census because the address is exactly the same: 458 East 143rd Street, as is his wife's name, Mrs. Anna Walton.

The real grabber is his birth date and birth place. February 14, 1875,  England. It is one year off from his birth certificate, but the day is the same! What are the chances that another Charles Walton was born in England on the same date, exactly one year later? So this directly links to the 1920 census by the names and address, but NOT the birth year, which never seems to be the same in any document I found.

1930 U. S. Census

Just when you think you are on to something, it all goes haywire in the 1930 Census.  I found the same couple, now with five children: daughter Margret (10), along with several new children: Three daughters: Rita Walton (9), Agnes Walton (8), Joan Walton (4), and one Son: John Walton (2) All born in New York. Wife Anna has now become Hannah! Bingo! Our lead seems getting stronger, but still not perfect. This is the right family, for sure, but not in the place I was expecting them! They are no longer in the Bronx, the family has moved to Tyringham, Massachusetts. 

See Line 70-76 for the Charles Walton Family in 1930

Click here  to see full size copy of 1930 census on WWW.Familysearch.org

Tyringham is a town in Berkshire County near Pittsfield, Massachusetts. How did they end up there? Perhaps his employer has a summer home in the area and his job took him there?

As in 1920, Charles is a Chauffeur. His parents and himself were born in England. Hannah's parents and herself are noted as being born in the newly formed "Irish Free State" (formed on December 6, 1921, after an Anglo-Irish treaty was in London).

 Some of the other details get a little messy if you bother to check the math. Charles age is 52 (1878) he is only 4 year off his birth certificate, 3 years off his draft card and 1 year off his last census. The last differance may actually be explainable. If he celebrated his birthday on Feb 14 (forget the year for the moment) then he would be 52 when the 1930 census was taken in April 7, 1930  vs. 41 when the  1920  census was taken on January 15, 1920. Meanwhile Anna/Hannah has only aged 7 years since the last census.

Charles age at first marriage was 21 (1878/79+21= 1899/1900).  This is actually correct, but for a different wife and will make more sense the deeper we dig, but initially it adds another layer of confusion. Hanna's age at first marriage is 29 which the age recorded on her Marriage License record on 27 Jan 1918.  If this is correct, then her 1930 census age (40) is, perhaps, only one year off?

Onward another decade to the 1940 Census, the last one currently available until 2022. Hannah is back to Anna, again, and the family is back to the Bronx, where they have resided since at least 1935 at the same residence. Charles is an out of work Chauffeur (remember the U. S. is still experiencing the depression). All five children live at home.

We have clearly identified the same family across three decades. Not all the data is a great match, but it is convincing.

So how does this prove that this is George Walton's brother Charles? It Doesn't! What it does show is that Charles and Anna/Hannah had a daughter named Joan. Other records identify this particular Joan as the wife of  Steve Ramondelli and  mother of  Joanmarie Gemma. Joanmarie is my newly discovered cousin.  Why? Because we have a strong DNA Match (123 centimorgans shared across 7 DNA segments).

This then suggests, but does not prove, that this Charles and my Great-grandfather's brother Charles are one and the same. The evidence is circumstantial...I've come to think of my target as "Circumstantial Charley"!

I have corresponded with my newly discovered cousin Joanmarie, unfortunately her grandfather passed before she was born, so she never knew him and didn’t have much information about him. I am hoping there are still clues from her family branch that will help us fill in the blanks.

Can I provide documentary evidence that links Joanmarie's grandfather Charles to my Great-grandfather's brother Charles? After nearly two months of obsessive research (according to my patient wife) I think I can finally say Yes, at least circumstantially.

Filling in the Middle

We don't find Charles and Hanna in the 1910 Census, because they are not married until 1918, as documented by the New York, New York, Marriage License Index (17 Jan 1918) and the New York, New York, Marriage Index which shows that someone named  Chas Walton married Hanna M O'Connor on Sunday, 27 Jan 1918. I was unable to get a copy of either document, so I can not be positive that this is the same couple from the 1920-1940 Census. Since there are no other Charles and Hanna Waltons found in this time period for either the Census or Marriage certificates, this then suggests, but does not prove, that this Charles and Hanna are the same couple as we have been following in census. The evidence is circumstantial...Circumstantial Charley!

Sometimes what you don't find is as meaningful as what you do find, but this can also mislead. Remember absense of evidence is NOT evidence of absense. Sometimes there are no documents, sometimes we just haven't found them yet!

The Marriage License record for Charles Walton tells us some more information which generally supports our conclusions but also creates some new questions:

Marital Status: Widowed  (Hmmm this is a good clue!)

Birth Year (Estimated): 1877 (Close...should be 1874)

Birthplace: England (Correct!)

Father's Name: John Walton (Correct!)

Mother's Name: Elizabeth Cooper (Wrong...Should be Eliza Bonsall)

Since this Marriage record identifies Charles as a widower, and the 1930 census identifies his age at first Marriage as 21 (1900)  then going backwards, can we find Charles Walton with another family? Yes, we can!

Charles Walton's First Family

In the 1910 U. S. Federal Census we find a Chauffeur named Charles Walton (age 32- 1878) married (first Marriage for both) for 10 years (1900),  to Mary Walton (age 31- 1879). They have two children; Charles L. (Lawrence) and Helen L .(Louise)  and  live at 691 E 137th St in the Bronx.

We also find a Chas Walton, Chauffeur listed at this address in the period from 1911 through 1917. The directories become unavailable after that. 

Going back a decade to 1900, we find a Coachman named Charles (Age 23- Feb 1877) married for 1 month (May 1900) to Mamie (age 21- Oct 1878) and living with her father Patrick Condon.

Mamie? it's a nickname for Mary. Since her mothers name was also Mary, perhaps this was used to avoid confusion in the household. 

This then gives us a clue to the exact date of their Marriage record. The New York, New York City Marriage Records show a marriage on May 12, 1900 between Mamie Condon and Charles Walton. 

Once you accept that Charles indeed had a previous marriage, this marriage record syncs nicely with what we already know and generally supports our conclusions:

Marital Status: Single

Birth Year (Estimated): 1877 (Close...should be 1874 but consistent with the above Charles))

Birthplace: England (Correct!)

Father's Name: John Walton (Correct!)

Mother's Name: Elizabeth Moore (Wrong again...Should be Eliza Bonsall)

Brides Father: Patrick Condon

Why is Charles Walton mother's name wrong? Could it be a transcription error? Could it be he wasn't really sure of her maiden name, after all he was only a teenager when he immigrated.  If her name was Eliza, did he perhaps think Elizabeth was her "formal name" to be used on an official document? Could this be the wrong person altogether? I don't think so since almost everything else syncs up. Is is a coincidence that both marriage documents list his mother as Elizabeth? So we will accept this flawed document as circumstantial evidence....circumstantial Charley

New York State Census

Unfortunately there is no 1890 Census U. S. Federal  available and since "our" Charles is still in England in 1881, we won't find him in the 1880 U. S. Federal Census. Having reviewed all the Federal Census data, We turn to the New York State Census. 

After 1875, the next N. Y. State census is 1892, but the records were destroyed for Manhattan & Bronx. In the June 15, 1905 New York State Census I found Coachman, Charles (28- b.1877 in England, immigrated 1891), Mamie (26- b.1878) and their son Lawrence (2- b.1903; Charles L. in the 1910 Census). The Address is 136 E 28th Street. This Syncs to the earlier 1900 Census.

In the 1915 N. Y. State Census I found Chauffer (not Coachman), Charles (40- b.1875 in England, immigrated 1890), wife Mary (36- b.1878).  Daughter Helen L., first listed in the 1910 Census, is listed here as "Louise", age 8  and son Charles L. is listed as Lawrence, age 10. 

Also living with them is  Edward Walton (32) born in England, listed as the brother of Charles. Interestingly enough "our" Charles did have a brother named Edwin, but he is older than Charles so the age recorded is wrong. Edwin was born 12 Dec 1865 and would have been 49 when this Census was taken. Reviewing all the census data for Charles, almost NONE of the birth dates are ever correct. Could Edward therefore be Ellen Walton's, husband?  More circumstantial evidence, since it is Ellen's grave who Charles and Hanna share. Is Edwin's name and age not exactly matching on this document just a clerical error or is this whole inclusion just an odd coincidence? 

One piece of solid corroborating evidence may be found in the 1915 Trow's New York City Directory which lists Chas Walton, Chauffeur (the ONLY one listed) at the same address as the 1915 census- 691 East 139th Street, Bronx, N. Y.  Edward is NOT listed in this, previous or subsequent directories. Was he just passing through and visiting when the census was taken?

Trow New York City Directories 

Since the Census and Directory information synced for 1915, the decided to research every directory I could find.

There was, in fact, a single individual named Charles or Chas Walton who listed his occupation as Coachman or Chauffeur in the NYC directory from 1878 to 1925, but after much research, I think this is actually two people with the same name and a similar occupation that overlap....Circumstantial Charlie!

City Directory Listing for Charles Walton (probably not "our" Charles)

I discovered a Chas Walton, usually listed as coachman, living at 22 or 20 E 39th for the years spanning 1884 through 1908, (Although there are missing directories throughout this period). In 1884, "our" Charles Walton,  born in 1874, would have only been 10 years old! While this is possible, it is improbable that a 10 year old would be living alone, working in the responsible position of a coachman (vs. stable boy or groom) and listed in the city directory. I think that this person is actually another, older Charles Walton.  He consistently lives at 20 E 39th until he  disappears around 1908 and “our" Charles Walton appears at 691 E 137th St in 1910. It is somewhat circumstantial! The earlier Charles Walton is consistently a Coachman, a person responsible for Horses and Carriages, while the later Charles Walton is a most frequently a Chauffeur, a different skill set, although our Charles claims to be a coachman in the 1900 & 1905 Census once again muddying the waters! Circumstantial Charlie!

There is one overlap that supports this conclusion. In the 1905 Census, Charles and Mamie live at 136 E 28th Street. At the very same interval (1904-1908) Chas Walton, Coachman lists his home address in the directory at 20 E 39th street.

 I tried to manually locate the specific address for 20 E 39th Street in the 1905 census,  but was not successful. I also checked ALL the Charles Waltons in Manhattan in the 1905 census and found none (except for "our"Charles) with the occupation of coachman and none with the address of 20 E 39th st. This is why I conclude that these were two different Charles Waltons.

Click here for a look at all the directory data I gathered and reviewed.

First Wife's Death

Sadly, Mamie (Mary) Condon Walton died on January 21, 1917. Additional research into details found in her death certificate indicate that the address where she died, 208 Larch Road, Cambridge, Massachusetts is the home of her sister Ethyl (Condon) Fields and  husband Robert Fields. Mary died of Uterine Cancer and is buried in the Cambridge Cemetery.   

Grave of Mary Condon Walton in Mount Auburn Cemetery

                                     Cambridge, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, USA
                                 BIRCH AVENUE, Lot: 8313, Grave: Space 1
                        photo by Elizabeth Adams

Why is Mary in Massachusetts at her sisters home when she died? I'm GUESSING that when Mary became ill in Dec 1916, she went to live with her sister for nursing care,  because she had no one else to help her in NYC . This may also explain why her first child , Charles Lawrence, was born in Massachusetts in 1903  rather than New York where they resided. In 1916 she had two young children and perhaps her husband was not able to work and provide the care needed, thereby forcing her to turn to her sister for help.  

There is enough circumstantial evidence between Mary's death and the marriage to second wife Anna to make a case that this is the same Charles...circumstantial Charlie!

Charles Lawrence and Helen Louise are living in Cambridge in 1920

But what about his first two children? Why are they not in Charles' new household in 1920? I can't explain why they are living apart, but I did find them living with their deceased mother's sister, Ethyl Fielding, in Cambridge in the 1920 Census. They also appear in Cambridge City directories at this address and appear to have made a life of their own without their father, although this is yet another branch of the Walton family to be explored in the future.

The Missing Link

While viewing all this documentation together may be somewhat convincing, it is not really good enough to be conclusive. I have given up and restarted  a number of times alternately finding a dead end, new clues and ultimately more confusion due simply to wrong dates. The saving grace is that even amongst a matching set of documents, the dates are often wrong! This proves that exact dates can not be relied on for this investigation. 

Being able to document a descendant of the specific Charles and Hannah Walton family above, with a strong DNA match to myself makes a strong scientific case that links me to "circumstantial Charley". The names on the gravestone, even though the dates are off, makes an additional circumstantial link to this Specific Charles and Hannah Walton family through well documented family member Ellen Walton.   

But what about the first family? How can we conclusively link back to them? I recently discovered an offhand remark documented  in 2012 by cousin and researcher Gayle Judd on Family Search.

"Charles' niece, Alice Louise Starling, and her husband both listed Charles' address as their residence when they were married in 1915. Charles was a witness at their wedding. "

Alice Louise Starling is the daughter of Mary Walton Starling who was the sister of Charles Walton. I have requested a copy of this document, but Gayles sterling reputation as a researcher is good enough for me to accept a matching address from the Charles Walton in family one as a direct link back to "our" Charles Walton!  

Summary

After 2 months on obsessive searching I find five distinct phases for Charles Walton, each well documented by themselves, but lacking concrete documentation to link them together. They are however linked by strong circumstantial evidence.

1. Birth and childhood in Cheddleton, England (Well documented)

2. Immigration to America (Assumed, but no satisfactory direct immigration documents found to date)

3. Marriage to Mamie/ Mary Condon & 2 children (Well documented as a family unit, but only a circumstantial link to 2 , 4 or 5 and an indirect link through a nieces marriage document to #1)

4. Marriage to Anna/Hannah & five children (Well documented as a family unit, but only a circumstantial link to 2 or 3, and an indirect link to 1, through me and a granddaughter of Charles and Hannah who is a strong DNA match to me)

5. Death (Burial in Evergreen Cemetery in Brooklyn in 1954. Common grave with Ellen and Hannah provides a circumstantial link to brother Edwin the family in #4 & #1)

I hope I have made a persuasive case, at least through circumstantial evidence that linearly defines the life of Charles Walton:  

Son of John and Eliza Walton, he was born in England on 14 February 1874. He immigrated to America in the last quarter of the 19th century. He followed his fathers footsteps, becoming a Coachman and later a Chauffeur. He married Mary Condon in 1900 and raised two children with her, before her untimely death in 1917 broke up this family. The children lived with their mother's sister after her death and within a year Charles remarried Hannah O'Connor in 1918 and raised a second family of five children in New York City while generally working as a Chauffeur. His Children later married and raised families of their own. He died in 1954 and was buried in Evergreen Cemetery in Brooklyn followed a decade later by his wife Hannah who is buried with him. Over a century after his birth, one of his granddaughter took a DNA test and the results linked her to me, and therefore linked Charles back to this particular Walton Clan. Even though the document trail in incomplete and misleading, there is enough circumstantial evidence to back up the Science.

It's nice to finally meet you uncle Charles!