Analyzing an associate network and an indirect evidence network to discover Martha “Patsy” (McNabb) Wynkoop’s father and to explore his pedigree

Discovering who an ancestor or research subject associated with can lead to genealogical relatives and a better understanding of the research subject. Genealogists can learn from informal business organization networks to navigate a genealogical associate network. There may also be a network of interrelated evidence, especially of indirect evidence. Research that combines associate network analysis and evidence network analysis may be useful in solving difficult genealogical problems. Applying associate network and evidence network methodologies, as well as the Genealogical Proof Standard, this article uses indirect evidence to discover the father of Martha “Patsy” (McNabb) Wynkoop. The two candidates, James and William McNabb, both living in Loudoun County at the time of Martha’s birth, are discussed. Research on James’ associates enables backtracking an associate network to Chester County, Pennsylvania. Three Loudoun County William McNabbs are identified and separated. After discussing conflicting information, Martha McNabb’s father is identified as James. Data gathered during the search help identify his father and grandfather. Introduction This is a case study that shows the interaction between associate network analysis and indirect evidence web tracing to solve a genealogical problem for which no known direct evidence exists. Sources such as wills, final probate distributions, land sales after a man’s death, and birth and baptism records are commonly used as direct evidence to prove paternity. But for Martha “Patsy” (McNabb) Wynkoop, no such sources have been found. Tracing associates and indirect evidence networks can uncover multiple like-named people, and help separate them. Similarly, these methods may be required to avoid splitting one person into two. Both challenges arise during a search for Patsy McNabb’s father.


Introduction
Patsy's husband, Jacob Wynkoop, died in Morgan County, Ohio before 8 February 1842. 15 Estate documents name his widow as Martha. 16 (Patsy is a common diminutive for Martha.) Among the assets listed in Jacob Wynkoop's estate was a three-quarter-acre tract in Morgan Township, Morgan County. 17 It was there that Martha Wyncoop was listed with most of her children and grandchildren in the 1850 census. 18 Mark Wyncoop, thirty-three years old, was listed first in the household after Martha, and it is reasonable to believe that he was the boy counted in the 1820 Loudoun County census. He was the only Wynkoop child who appears in the 1850 census not named in Jacob Wynkoop's estate records, and this indicates that he was a child of Martha but not of Jacob. 19 This is strengthened by an 1849 infirmary record referring to Mark's unnamed mother. 20 The 1850 census reports Martha's age as fifty-five, which calculates to a birth year of 1794-95. 21 No record of an earlier marriage of Martha McNabb has been found, nor does Martha appear in Loudoun County base-born records.

Introduction to the search for Martha's father
In 1794 and 1795, the time when Martha was evidently born, the only adult male McNabbs known to have been living in Loudoun County were James and William. This is a conclusion reached after a reasonably exhaustive search of tax, militia, probate, marriage, church, deed, and other records, including court minute and order books, for those years and the years preceding and following. It is therefore reasonable to think that one of them was Martha's father. After outlining what is known about each of them, a discussion of the evidence will conclude which one was her father.

James McNabb in Loudoun County, Virginia
James McNabb appears in the 1786 Loudoun County tithable list as sixteen or older and less than twenty-one. 31 That calculates to a birth-year range of 1765-70. He appears in the 1787 personal property tax list as at least twenty-one, and so was born no later than 1766. 32 Combining the two sources narrows the birth-year range to 1765-66. He appears in the 1810 census as forty-five or older, and so was born no later than 1765. 33 Assuming all three sources are accurate, he was born in 1765. Thus, he was about thirty years old when Patsy was born, and about thirty-four when Harriet was born.
He appears in the 1783-86 tithable lists, all in the sixteen to twenty age range and all with William McNabb, presumably in the same household because they were counted on the same line entries. 34 A birth year of 1765 is consistent with these tithable records if his birth month and day came after the effective date of the annual tithables. In 1785, James Hagerman was taxed together with them. 35 James McNabb appears in the 1787-1804, 1806-07, and 1809-12 personal property tax lists, all as twenty-one or older. 36 (He was not found in the 1805 personal property tax list. The 1808 personal property tax was not collected.) He was fined for not appearing for militia service in 1801-02 and 1805-08. 37 He appears in other Loudoun County records, as follows: • 1785 -attended the Quaker wedding of Ann Sinclear and Samuel Gregg. 38 • 1787 -attended the Quaker wedding of Phebe Sinkler * and Thomas Smith. 39 • 1788 -sued (together with William McNabb) by Robert Carter for payment of a debt due 22 May 1788. 40 * I will use the more frequent spelling of Sinkler though many variants appear in records, including Sinklar, Sinclear, and the more familiar Sinclair and St. Clair.

THE JOURNAL OF GENEALOGY AND FAMILY HISTORY
• 1792 -fathered a base-born child with Margaret Weeks, a single woman. 41 (The male child was born on 21 March 1792.) • 1798 -attested the age of Ann McNabb of Shelburne Parish, who married John Seares. 42 • 1799 -witnessed for Laurence King, a plaintiff in a debt case against Simon Triplett, later one of James McNabb's commanding officers in the militia. 43 • 1801 -sold some possessions to pay off debt. 44 • 1801-03 -was constable. 45 • 1802 -executed a bond to Peter Stump for a debt to the estate of James Grigsby and for hiring a slave. 46 • 1802 -witnessed Robert Sears selling a horse and farm items. 47 • 1803 -John Kendrick was ordered to pay him for being a witness against James Swarts. 48 • 1808-27 -requested and was granted an injunction against Peter Stump and then John Stump, successor executors of the estate of James  50 • 1809 -became a co-debtor with John Sears on a note payable to Rachel Wilkison. 51 • 1810 -appeared in the U.S. census. 52 • 1814 -sued by Benjamin Hagerman, son of James Hagerman, for non-payment of a debt. 53 • 1814 -gave a deposition in a will contest case. 54 • 1820 -appeared in the U.S. census. 55 A thorough search and analysis of data give no indication that there was more than one James McNabb in Loudoun County between 1783 and 1827. Three of his signatures are extant: subscribed on his request for the injunction against James Grigsby's executor (1808); 56 on the note payable co-signed by John Sears (1809) 57 (the note was executed in Loudoun County, Virginia, and brought to Ohio); and on his deposition in the will contest case (1814). 58 The signatures are in the same hand. It should be noted that the U.S. censuses for Virginia for 1790 and 1800 are not extant.  74 William Sinkler is named as the bride's father in the account of the marriage arrangements (therefore, Esther and James Sinkler were siblings). John and Jane Fincher, as well as Francis Fincher, had assisted in taking Esther Sinkler from her home without her parents' permission, and helped to arrange the wedding for which they were reprimanded by the Friends' Monthly Meeting. 75

THE JOURNAL OF GENEALOGY AND FAMILY HISTORY
in 1733 not long before the McNabb-Sinkler elopement. 76 John McNabb was taxed in West Caln Township in 1734. 77 He experienced financial difficulties, and requested assistance from the Quakers in 1738. 78 He and his family moved to Philadelphia in 1748. 79 William Sinkler also temporarily transferred to Philadelphia, 80 Figure 1 shows some of the interconnections of the eight marriages from 1708/09 to 1787 in Pennsylvania and Virginia. Although the upshot of this intertwining is genealogical, it follows the pattern frequently observed in businesses, in which sub-networks interact to reveal a powerful informal network in and around which much that occurs in the business world revolves.
Besides the eight marriages, other evidence of the Chester County-Loudoun County network is:

William McNabb(s)
William McNabb was cited by the Bradford Monthly Meeting for having "carnal knowledge before marriage" with the woman he eventually married. ("William McNabb disowned for marriage out to one not in unity with us, &c." The "&c." was that he had relations with his wife before marriage.) 90 This was first noted on 13 November 1761, perhaps after the birth of a child or at a clear sign of pregnancy. 91 98 He lived on a Loudoun County plantation in the early 1770s, and is mentioned in road order records from 1772-75, including belonging to a road route viewing group in 1774. 99 As noted earlier, neither the 1790 nor the 1800 U.S. censuses for Virginia have survived. Events mentioning William McNabb are listed in chronological order: • 1761 -cited for pre-marital relations (Chester County). 100 • 1762 -disowned by Bradford Monthly Meeting. 101 • 1771 -mercantile debt due. 102 • 1772 -appointed to view planned road. 103 • 1773 -road work planned near his plantation. 104 • 1774 -ordered to view road. 105 • 1775 -a road was planned through his plantation. 106 • 1775 -bought horses and spoons. 107 • 1786 -sued by Robert Carter. 108 • 1788 -sued by James Dougherty. 109 • 1788 -sued by Robert Carter. 110 • 1788 -sold farm items and household items to Simon Triplett. 111 • 1792 -cared for James' base-born child. 112 • 1800 -gave deposition that a horse bit Gideon Cummings when Cummings was a boy. 113 • 1810 -census. 114 • 1810-11 -moved to Ohio. 115 • 1819 -gave deposition regarding James Hagerman's Revolutionary War service. 116 • 1810-20 -became indebted to Thomas Sears (Belmont County, Ohio). 117 118 • 1827 -patented Brookfield Township land. 119 • 1832 -was sick. 120 • 1832-35 -died. 121 An important question to answer when considering these events, transactions, and appearances is whether they should be attributed to one man or to two. Table 1 compares these two possibilities. The second column shows the age of William for selected events, assuming one William participated in all of the itemized events. Columns three and four show ages of two men, assuming one was born c.1740 and the other c.1761.
Several points appear to support believing that these records might pertain to two separate people.
1. It seems more reasonable that a man would serve in the militia at age forty-eight than at sixty-nine. Though the age range for participation in militia service varied over the years, under the U.S. Militia Act of 1792 the age range was eighteen or older and under forty-five. 122 If this Act were adhered to, William McNabb would not have been born before 1764 because he was required to appear for service in 1809. However, earlier Virginia laws required militia service up until a man turned fifty, so if those earlier laws were followed in 1809, it is possible that William was as old as forty-nine and thus born no earlier than 1759. 123 As mentioned, according to the 1810 U.S. census he was forty-five years old or more, thus born no later than 1765. 124 He was at least twenty-one in the 1786 tithables list, thus born no later than 1765. 125 Combining these sources, he may have been born in the range 1759-64, say c.1761. One might speculate that if there were a child conceived by William McNabb in 1761 in Chester County, the child may have been named William after his father. If so, a birth year of c.1761 fits.
2. It seems more likely that the father of four children under ten years old as indicated in the 1810 U.S. census was forty-nine than seventy.
3. James McNabb attested the age of Ann McNabb in 1798 as she was about to marry John Sears. 126 This might make one believe either that James was her father or that her father had died prior to her marriage. Ann must have been at least twenty-one to marry by attestation rather than by consent. 127 Yet she must have been quite young, say twenty-one, to require age attestation. Thus, Ann's birth year was c.1777. It is unlikely that James was Ann's father because he would have been about twelve years old at the time of her birth. Another reason to believe this is that James McNabb was always listed living with William McNabb through 1791. James was first listed in a separate household in 1792, the year of Salathiel's birth, suggesting that Salathiel was his first-born child; that is, that he founded a separate household to raise his family. These reasons lead one to believe that James was not Ann's father. A William, whether one born c.1740 or one born c.1761, was alive in 1798, based on more than several records already cited. But no William attested to Ann's age, perhaps suggesting that an older William, Ann's father,  128 Although this document is undated, some events in it help narrow the year range when data for the report were gathered.
• Sinclair died about fifteen years earlier. 129 He died in 1792. 130 That results in a report year estimate of 1807.
• Thomas Winn was said to have moved to Kentucky fourteen years earlier. 131 Reportedly, he moved there in 1784, resulting in a report year of 1798. 132 • Moses Hall Jr. was said to have moved to Redstone, Pennsylvania eighteen years earlier. 133 Reportedly, he moved there in 1785, resulting in a report year of 1803. 134 • Edmund J. Lee was born in 1772 so reached the age of twenty-one in 1793. 135 William McNabb was alive in Loudoun County at the time Edmund J. Lee gathered data for his mercantile debt report. Based on the events listed above, one may narrow the year range when data for the report were gathered to between 1793 and 1807. Thus the William who incurred a debt due in 1771, and hence was born no later than 1750, was still living in Loudoun County at least as late as 1793 and probably 1802. The identity of this William McNabb with the one in Ohio is also established. The 1809 militia fine incurred by William McNabb was uncollectible in 1811 because he had "remd [removed] to the Ohio." 136 Thus, William McNabb moved to Ohio in 1810 (after being tabulated in the census) or 1811. While in Belmont County, Ohio, he became indebted to Thomas Sears, reportedly related to John Sears. 137 He also gave a deposition there in 1819, solemnly affirming (thereby perhaps indicating Quaker beliefs, in contrast with another deponent, Anthony Ethell, who "made oath") that according to "the best of his recollection," James Hagerman, with whom he had lived in 1785 and who reportedly married Abigail McNabb in about 1785, had enlisted in 1775 for service in the Revolutionary War. 138 Interestingly, the justice of the peace who certified the deposition was named William Sinclair. According to an affidavit filed in Belmont County by Mahlon Hatcher in 1832, William McNabb, the 1819 deponent, was "now of Morgan County." 139 Also in 1832, John Sears referred to William McNabb as living but sick. 140

William (born 1795-1801)
There was a third William McNabb in Loudoun County, who in at least some records is distinguished by the middle initial H. One such record is of William H. McNabb buying a stove and pipe in Loudoun County in 1823. 152 It has already been documented that the two William McNabbs just discussed (father and son born c.1740 and c.1777, respectively) were in Morgan County by that time. Thus, at least as of 1823, the third William McNabb can be separated from the others both by his middle initial (in some cases) and by where he resided at various times. He has not been found in the 1820 census. He was likely still living in Loudoun County in 1830. At that time, a William McNabb, aged thirty to forty, with no middle initial, lived in Cameron Township (he lived in the vicinity of a Swarts and a Hagerman). 153 That calculates to a birth year of 1789-1800, and this is a third factor that can be used to distinguish him from the other William McNabbs. He appears in Morgan County, Ohio census records in 1840 (in Morgan Township, with no initial H., aged forty to fifty, and so born 1789-1800), listed immediately next to Jacob (and presumably Martha) Wynkoop, suggesting a possible familial relationship. 154 He appears there in 1850 (in Malta, with no middle initial, aged fifty-three, so born 1796-97), and in 1860 (in Manchester Township, with the initial H., aged sixty-five, and so born 1794-95). 155 He was also tabulated in 1880 in Manchester Township with the middle initial H., aged seventy-nine, and so born 1800-01. 156

Who was Martha "Patsy" (McNabb) Wynkoop's father?
There are other reasons to conclude that James McNabb was Martha's father. The 1810 census data enable identifying James as the probable father. He, but not William McNabb (born c.1740), had females in his household (presumably his daughters) whose ages fit the range for Martha and Harriet (Table 2).
In 1810, Patsy would have been fifteen or sixteen years old, and Harriet would have been eleven. Thus, both should have been counted in the column for females 11-16. James had two females in his household in that age range, while William had none. This combines indirect evidence (James) with negative evidence (William) to support the identification, and provides further support for concluding that Martha "Patsy" and Harriet were sisters.
Although William moved to Ohio in 1810 or 1811, James remained in Loudoun County where he was enumerated in 1820. He may have died there in about 1827 when the legal case of long duration involving an alleged debt due to the estate of James Grigsby was finally dissolved. 160 He does not appear in the Loudoun County U.S. census of 1830.
Because Patsy married in Loudoun County in early 1820, and she and her husband, Jacob Wynkoop, remained there until 1830, she stayed in the same location as James, and did not move with William to Ohio until three years after James apparently died. Similarly, Harriet McNabb was separately enumerated alone in Loudoun County in 1820. James McNabb appears in Shelburne Parish of Loudoun County, and Harriett McNabb appears on the pair of pages prior as does Jacob Winecupp. 161 William McNabb (born c.1777) was in Morgan County, Manchester Township in 1820, 162 and he and his father reportedly voted there in 1822. 163 In about 1826, William (born c.1777) moved to Brookfield Township which borders Manchester Township to the east. 164 John Sears signed the patent application for (probably the elder) William McNabb for Brookfield Township land in 1827 (by then, William Sr. was about eighty-seven, and perhaps unable to travel to the land office) 165 and the younger William was tabulated there in the 1830 census. 166 Thus, the  175 Rachel Wilkinson, "formerly Hanks," was removed from Quaker membership in February 1792 because she had married "out of unity" but especially because she had lived with her husband ("disreputably") prior to their marriage. 176 As mentioned earlier, James McNabb was also associated with the Quakers though there is no known evidence that he was ever a member. He witnessed two Quaker weddings, one in 1785 177 and the other in 1787. 178 Thus, both James McNabb and Rachel Wilkinson had ties to the Quakers.
In 1809, Rachel Wilkerson loaned $44 to John Seares and Jas McNabb. 179 The note, dated 9 December 1809, was executed in Loudoun County, and witnessed by network member Jno Combs who was tabulated one line before Rachel Wilkerson in the 1810 census. 180 Each of the debtors was responsible for the entire debt ("we bind ourselves, our heirs, etc., jointly severally and firmly") if either could not repay. The note was due on 25 December 1810. 181 In this instance, a financial transaction was executed among associates, an example of a family network and an informal business network coinciding. In 1814, Rachel Wilkinson was deposed as a witness in a contested will case that concluded in 1820 in Loudoun County. 182 The case involved the will of Alexander McMullen whom some alleged was not mentally capable of understanding his will made in his old age. 183 Alexander's wife, Elizabeth, was Rachel's sister. 184 199 He also served on a jury there. 200 He died there, probably in 1780. 201 Joseph and Evan may have been brothers. Joseph immigrated in 1737 from Ballynacree, County Antrim, Ireland. 202 Evan immigrated in 1736 from the same place. 203 (Also, Evan Wilkinson witnessed the 1740 marriage of Joseph Wilkinson and Elizabeth Fisher. 204 ) Earlier, Evan Wilkinson was named for not repaying a debt to William Sinkler. 205 Evan witnessed the will of George Sinkler (of West Caln Township) in Chester County. 206 Thus, the Wilkinsons were part of the large family network. Other events and transactions brought them together:

Relation of James, William, and John McNabb
• They were co-defendants in a debt suit. 211 • William temporarily cared for James' base-born child before responsibility was given to James by the court. 212 • They were both fined in 1801 for not appearing for militia service. 213 • When an 1831 suit was brought against John Sears on a debt for a Loudoun County note (the co-debtor was James McNabb, then deceased); Sears wanted to call William as a material witness. 214 The accumulation of evidence suggests that William was James' father. Also, Chester County evidence suggests that William's parents were

THE JOURNAL OF GENEALOGY AND FAMILY HISTORY
attendance at the two Loudoun County Quaker weddings, and ending with the likely descendancy from John to William to James McNabb. Figure 3 shows the ancestral linkages in a partial family tree. It should be noted that the James McNabb who appears in Chester County tax records (1747-50, and 1762) is clearly a different person -he was an adult in Pennsylvania before Patsy's father was born. 216

Conclusion
There is no known direct evidence naming James McNabb as the father of Martha "Patsy" McNabb or for that matter of any child other than base-born son, Salathiel, born in 1792 from a liaison with Margaret Weeks. 217 Even so, a web of indirect evidence and network analysis form a convincing argument that James, not William, was Martha's father. Network analysis is informed by applying lessons learned from informal networks that exist in business organizations. An added benefit is that by carefully working through the web of indirect evidence it is possible to reconstruct relations and separate identities of three William McNabbs in Loudoun County, and to trace the networked families back to Chester County, Pennsylvania. From there, one is able to combine other indirect evidence to show that William McNabb was likely James McNabb's father, and that John McNabb was likely William McNabb's father. This problem was solved by tracing both an associate network and an evidence network. Learning why that person was associated with the research subject or ancestor, and tracing evidence related to the associate, ultimately expands to become an associate network and an evidence network. The two methods work together to unfold a narrative including close relations across time and different geographic locations.