Select Page

Just a few “misstatements”

The truth can be so inconvenient at times.

And in The Legal Genealogist‘s family, well…

Let’s just say that our family motto is: we never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Apparently, we also never let the truth get in the way of something we wanted.

Case in point: the Southern Claims Commission filing of my Alabama Battles family in 1874.

The story is all there in black and white: in the fall of 1864 when Sherman’s Army came through northeastern Alabama, his soldiers took a number of things from the farm on which William Battles and his wife Anna lived. Under federal law, Union loyalists who lost items to the Union Army during the war could be compensated afterwards, and the Southern Claims Commission oversaw the process.1

In William’s initial application in 1871, he said the soldiers had taken 400 bundles of fodder, 150 bushels of corn, two horses, 16 hogs, dried fruit, bacon, syrup and meal, with a total value of $809.20.2

After William’s death, when Anna was continuing the fight, she said the soldiers took that property while the Battles family watched — she gave details such as “It was taken in the daytime for we were not disturbed at night.”3

And in support of her mother’s application, Charlsy Battles testified under oath before John W. Ramsey, the Special Commissioner hearing the claim.

SCC deposition

The deposition taken by Ramsey records that the witness said:

My name is Charlsy Battles my age is thirty Eight. I reside with my mother the claimant … In the last of October 1864 a part of the cavalry of General Sherman’s came to the house where my father mother and myself and a younger sister lived and took and carried off nearly all the fodder we had … corn from the crib … horses … fattening hogs … stock hogs … dried apples and peaches … molasses … bushels of meal …4

There’s just one problem.

I don’t think the witness was Charlsy — or as it was usually spelled Charlsie — Battles.

And here’s why.

According to the 1850 census, Charlsie was the youngest of the Battles children, age eight on that census so born around 1842.5 According to the 1860 census Charlsie was still enumerated as the youngest child in the household, age 15, so born around 1845.6 She was recorded as age 27 in 1870, so born around 1843,7 age 33 in 1880, so born around 1847,8 in 1900 as age 64, born April 1836,9 in 1910 as age 67, so born around 1843,10 and as age 72 at her death in 1916, or about around 1844.11

Doing the math as of the time of the statement — tossing out the 1900 outlier — would put Charlsie at roughly age 28-30. And Anna, in her own 1874 statement, listed Charlsie as the youngest of her surviving children and age 28.12

But in the statement, the witness says she is age 38.13

Looking again at the census records, Charlsie had been married for 34 years by 1900, so she married about 1866.14 On the 1870 census, she is recorded with her husband, F. M. Davis, and three children.15 On the 1880 census, she is recorded with her husband Franklin Davis and five children.16 In 1900, she’s recorded with her husband Francis M. Davis and three children still at home.17 In 1910, she’s enumerated with her husband Frank M. Davis and a grandson.18

Yet this witness in the statement itself gives her surname as Battles, not as Davis, and says she lives at home with her mother.19

In every record that can be found, Charlsie is the youngest of the Battles children. She’s the youngest listed on two census records and in Anna’s own deposition.

But this witness told the Southern Claims Commission examiner a different story: that in 1864 she lived at home with her parents “and a younger sister.20

So if the witness wasn’t Charlsie Battles, who was she?

I have a theory: I think the witness was Charlsie’s older sister Julia, pretending to be her younger sister.

Julia is the much more likely candidate to have been the right age and living with her mother at the time of the statement. Anna in her deposition gave Julia’s age as 38 and said only she and Julia were then living on the homestead.21 Julia had married before 1860,22 but was widowed soon thereafter — she’s recorded in her own name in the 1866 Alabama State Census immediately following her parents23 — so it makes sense that she’d have been living in 1874 with her then-also-widowed mother.

Julia’s also the only likely candidate for a Battles daughter to have been living with her parents in 1864 who had a younger sister living at home then too. The real Charlsie had no younger siblings at all — and all of the other older Battles daughters were long married and in their own households.

And there is a reason why Julia would not have been an acceptable witness to the Southern Claims Commission in her own name: Julia Battles Hale. That’s because the Hale part of her name came from her husband, Elias L Hale — a husband who died while on active duty in the 19th Alabama Infantry, in the service of the Confederacy,24 likely at the Battle of Chickamauga.

The widow of a Confederate simply wouldn’t have been a credible witness in a proceeding before a commission where a prerequisite to the benefit was proof of loyalty to the union.

No, I don’t think this was simply a mistake. The Battles family was well aware that proof of loyalty was essential to this claim. William and later Anna both conceded that they had sent six sons into the Confederate Army, but argued that the sons either were older, out of the house and out from under their parents’ control, or had been misled by hotheads in the community into disobeying their parents’ wishes.25

And while it’s true that this witness signed with a mark, I don’t think the commission representative simply recorded the name wrong. It’s listed twice: once in the narrative and then again at the signature block. Moreover, because this witness signed with a mark, the statement likely would have been read back to her before she signed.

In other words, it sure looks to me like this is another case where my family simply didn’t let the truth get in the way of a good story.26

I love my family.


Cite/link to this post: Judy G. Russell, “And nothing but the truth …,” The Legal Genealogist (https://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog : posted 27 Mar 2021).

SOURCES

  1. See generally “Southern Claims Commission Case Files,” Research Our Records, U.S. National Archives, Archives.gov (https://www.archives.gov/ : accessed 27 Mar 2021).
  2. Petition of William Battles, 20 April 1871; William Battles, dec’d, v. United States, Court of Claims, Dec. term 1887–1888, Case No. 967-Congressional; Congressional Jurisdiction Case Records; Records of the United States Court of Claims, Record Group 123; National Archives, Washington, D.C.
  3. Ibid., Deposition of Anna Battles, 1 June 1874, Depositions pages 5-8.
  4. Ibid., Deposition of Charlsy Battles, 1 June 1874, Depositions pages 12-14.
  5. 1850 U.S. census, Cherokee County, Alabama, 27th District, population schedule, p. 270 (penned), dwelling/family 1052, Charlsey Battles; digital image, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021); citing National Archive microfilm publication M432, roll 3.
  6. 1860 U.S. census, Cherokee County, Alabama, Division 1, population schedule, p. 315 (stamped), dwelling/family 825, Charlsie M Battles; digital image, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021); citing National Archive microfilm publication M653, roll 5.
  7. 1870 U.S. census, Cherokee County, Alabama, population schedule, Township 10 Range 8, p. 270B (stamped), dwelling 60, family 54, Charlsey M Davis; digital image, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021); imaged from NARA microfilm M593, roll 7.
  8. 1880 U.S. census, Cherokee County, Alabama, population schedule, Township 10 Range 8, Beat 9, enumeration district (ED) 23, p. 17 (penned), dwelling 131, family 133, Charlsie Davis; digital image, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021); imaged from NARA microfilm T9, roll 6.
  9. 1900 U.S. census, Cherokee County, Alabama, population schedule, Brindley, enumeration district (ED) 124, p. 138B (stamped), dwelling/family 108, Charlsie M Davis; digital image, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021); imaged from NARA microfilm T623, roll 7.
  10. 1910 U.S. census, Dekalb County, Alabama, population schedule, Brindley, enumeration district (ED) 35, p. 99B (stamped), dwelling 148, family 149, Charlcie M Davis; digital image, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021); imaged from NARA microfilm T624, roll 10.
  11. “Alabama, Deaths and Burials Index, 1881-1974,” entry for Charlsies Davis, 12 Jan 1916; database, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021).
  12. Deposition of Anna Battles, 1 June 1874, William Battles, dec’d, v. United States, NARA RG 123.
  13. Ibid., Deposition of Charlsy Battles, 1 June 1874.
  14. 1900 U.S. census, Cherokee Co., Ala., pop. sched., Brindley, ED 124, p. 138B (stamped), dwelling/family 108, Charlsie M Davis.
  15. 1870 U.S. census, Cherokee Co., Ala., pop. sched., T10 R8, p. 270B (stamped), dwell. 60, fam. 54, F.M. and Charlsey M Davis.
  16. 1880 U.S. census, Cherokee Co., Ala., pop. sched., T10 R8, ED 23, p. 17 (penned), dwell. 131, fam. 133, Franklin and Charlsie Davis.
  17. 1900 U.S. census, Cherokee Co., Ala., pop. sched., Brindley, ED 124, p. 138B (stamped), dwell./fam. 108, Francis M. and Charlsie M Davis.
  18. 1910 U.S. census, Dekalb Co., Ala., pop. sched., Brindley, ED 35, p. 99B (stamped), dwell. 148, fam. 149, Frank M. and Charlcie M Davis.
  19. Deposition of Charlsy Battles, 1 June 1874, William Battles, dec’d, v. United States, NARA RG 123.
  20. Ibid.
  21. Deposition of Anna Battles, 1 June 1874, William Battles, dec’d, v. United States, NARA RG 123.
  22. 1860 U.S. census, Cherokee County, Alabama, Leesburg, population schedule, p. 97 (stamped), dwelling/family 66, Elias and Julia Hale household; digital image, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021); citing National Archive microfilm publication M653, roll 5.
  23. 1866 Alabama State Census, Cherokee County, Alabama, white population schedule, Beat 11, p. 57 (penned), Julia Hale; digital image, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : accessed 27 Mar 2021); imaged from Alabama Department of Archives & History microfilm.
  24. See “Alabama, Confederate Pension Applications, ca. 1880-1930’s,” widow’s application of Julia Hale, 16 Apr 1887FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org : accessed 17 Mar 2021).
  25. See Deposition of Anna Battles, 1 June 1874, William Battles, dec’d, v. United States, NARA RG 123.
  26. And no, before you ask, they didn’t succeed with the Southern Claims Commission: claim denied.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email