Duncan research files of
Mary Ann (Duncan) Dobson
the Genealogy Bug
Last revised October 30, 2014
|
|
Duncan research files of |
1830 Marion Co. MO Census (from Vivian Biddle 1982)
Pg.28 Benjamin Duncan 2000,01 - 0000,1
(MAD: Benjamin Duncan mar. Lucinda Berkeley
7/25/1822 Montgomery Co. MD)
30 William Duncan 0010,01 - 0
(MAD: 1840 Lewis Co. MO census)
1840 Marion Co. MO Census (from Vivian Biddle 1982)
Union Twp.
Pg.56 Benjamin Duncan 0020,101 - 0000,01
1850 Marion Co. MO Census (part also from Vivian Biddle 1982)
Hannibal
Pg.325, #966-1004, Hugh MEREDITH 44 PA physician $0
Anna D. 37 Con. (CT)
Charles 17 PA
John D. 12, Henry H. 10 MO
Anna R. 6, Hugh E. 2 MO
Ann ROSE 58 S.Car.
(MAD: Mrs. Ann Rose, daughter of John Duncan d.1831 Charleston Co. SC)
Warren Twp.
Pg.339, #1154-1196, Robert DUNCAN 25 PA cooper $0
Elizabeth 23 KY
Sarah 5, Margaret 3, Thomas 1 MO
(MAD: Robert W. Duncan mar. Elizabeth Garner 9/21/1843; 1860 Pike Co. MO census; 1870 Madison Co. MO census)
Union Twp.
Pg.353, #1336-1386, Benjamin DUNCAN 52 VA potter $1000
Mary J. 30 VA
John REED 60 VA laborer
John C. DUNCAN 21 VA potter
(MAD: Benjamin Duncan mar. Mary Neal 2/1/1848; par. Charles Duncan & Susan Mason of Loudon Co. VA)
1860 Marion Co. MO Census
Hannibal Ward 3
Pg.823, #1261-1349, A.B. DUNCAN (m) 47 KY teamster $1200-$300
Delia 47 KY
Garnett M. 6, Martha F. 2 KY
Pamelia SAMS 15 MO
James DUNCAN 16 KY corn laborer
Matilda 14, William 12 KY
(MAD: Austin Duncan, son of Taliaferro who died 1849 Henry Co. KY)
Round Grove Twp.
Pg.929, #351-343, John C. DUNCAN 31 VA farmer $1800-$1100
Mary 29 MO
Lucinda 5, Susan C. 2 MO
Samuel McCHRISTY 24 MO farm laborer
(MAD: John C. Duncan mar. Mary McCristie 11/29/1853)
1870 Marion Co. MO Census (pg.693 also from Kathy Cawley 2/2002)
Liberty Twp., P.O. Palmyra
Pg.616, #3-4, CHANDLER, Taylor (m) 60 KY farmer $8000-$3000
Eveline 45 KY keeping house
Robert 18 MO at school
Mary E. 17 MO at home
Kagan (f) 15, Virginia (f) 14 MO at home
Ella B. 12, Taylor (m) 8 MO at home
MYERS, Frederick 27 MO farm laborer $0-$0, parents of foreign birth
DUNCAN, Mary 15 MO BLACK domestic servant
Pg.629, #176-184, SITES, John 70 KY farmer $16,000-$1,500
Cormorth? (f) 27 MO keeping house
DUNCAN, David 50 MO BLACK without occupation
John 19 MO BLACK farm laborer
Sinah (f) 18 MO BLACK domestic servant
HOWERS, Mary L. 20 MO (white) without occupation $0-$2500
Amanda 11 MO at home $0-$2800
Pg.631, #192-200, BOSLEY, John 53 KY farmer $3500-$17,000
Sarah H. 44 MO keeping house
DUNCAN, Sallie 20 MO (white) domestic servant
SMITH, Columbus (m) 19 MO (white) farm laborer
Round Grove Twp., P.O. Palmyra
Pg.693, #23-23, DUNCAN, John C. 42 VA farmer $2000-$1200
Mary 39 MO keeping house
Leah L. (f) 15, Susan 11 MO attended school
Robert 9 MO attended school
Benjamin 5 MO attended school
Mary E. 3, Martha 7/12 MO b.Nov.
GARDENER, Charles 23 MO (white) farm laborer $0-$200
(MAD: Robert age 9, not age 7, but left edge of digit faint)
South River Twp., P.O. Palmyra
Pg.713, #55-55, DUNCAN, Hubbard 36 IL farmer $2500-$600
Louisa C. 22 IL keeping house
George A. 3 IL at home
Ada E. 2/12 b.Apr. MO at home
(MAD: 1860 Adams Co. IL census as H.H. Duncan with "J.B." (Gavin Bennett) Duncan)
Union Twp., P.O. Palmyra
Pg.735, #205-205, JOHNSON, Henry 35 MO BLACK laborer $0-$0
Dora 28 MO BLACK keeping house
DUNCAN, Maria 14 MO BLACK "without occupation"
JOHNSON, Anna 2 MO BLACK at home
Go to the Marion Co. MO Land Records
"Reports of cases determined in the Supreme Court of the state of Missouri from July 1848 to October 1849" by Louis Houck, Consellor at law, Vol.XII, pgs.67 to 71; ("Missouri Reports") Vol.12, pgs.106 to 112 (California State Law Library, Sacramento, 1/2004)
RALPH SMITH et al. v. ISAAC, WILLIAM et al. (of color.); Supreme Court of Missouri, 12 Mo. 106; July, 1848, Decided.
Appeal from Marion Circuit Court. (MAD: Counsel's arguments omitted here)
(opinion) NAPTON, J. This was a bill to set aside a conveyance alleged to have been made fraudulently. The facts upon which it was based, were these: By the will of Jacob Myers, executed in 1834, his slaves, William, Isaac, Jack, and ten others were liberated, and made the devisees of all his lands, except his town lots in Tully, and forty acres in the northeast quarter of section 26, township 62, range 6. These last were devised to his nephew, Robert M. Easton, and the said Easton and William Duncan (who was son-in-law of Easton) were made trustees for the negroes. This will provided, that in case Jack, one of the liberated slaves, should wish to sell the lands and remove to other lands, the trustees should sell, and with the proceeds purchase other lands for the negroes, where Jack might prefer to live. The real-estate bequeathed, consisted of about 464 acres of land, lying in the bottom of the river Mississippi, adjoining the town of Tully. On the 3rd of August, 1836, Jack signed a written paper, which stated that he (Jack) had made arrangements with Thomas Gray for the sale of the estate devised by Myers to his negroes, and desired the trustees to convey to said Gray. On the 3rd of September, 1836, Easton and Duncan conveyed to Gray for the consideration $1,900. Within a week after this conveyance, it was agreed between Gray and Duncan, that the former should convey to the latter, upon the consideration of $2,600; but afterwards, and on the 4th of October, 1836, at the request of Duncan, the conveyance was made to Easton, who thereupon paid the seven hundred dollars (the advance in the sale from Gray) to Gray. Easton took possession, made improvements upon the land, and continued in possession up to the filing of the bill, excepting about 28 acres, which he sold to White, one of the defendants.
In October, 1840, this bill was filed. Six of the negroes, beneficiaries under the will of Myers, are the complainants, making the trustees, Duncan and Easton, and White, the purchaser of 28 acres, and the seven runaway negroes, including Jack, defendants. The bill charges that the conveyances from the trustees to Gray, and from Gray to Easton, were fraudulent, and the result of a preconcerted arrangement; that the land was sold for less than half its value, and that Jack's signature to the written paper, requesting the trustees to sell, was procured by imposition upon his ignorance or imbecility.
The answer of Jack details the particulars of the transaction so far as he was concerned, and intimates that he was under duress, or misled and deceived, in signing the paper addressed to the trustees. He insists on the fraud, and makes his answer a cross-bill. The answer of the other negroes, defendants, admit the charges of the bill, and pray relief.
Easton's answer denies all fraud, and relies chiefly upon the written order of Jack, who, he seems to think, was authorized by the will to control him as trustee. Duncan's answer is substantially the same with Easton's. White answered and insisted that he was a bona fide purchaser, for valuable consideration, without notice.
At the June term, 1844, of the Circuit Court of Lewis county, the death of Easton was suggested, and a bill of revivor filed against his heirs. The heirs filed their answer, adopting that of their ancestor, Easton. Replications were filed.
At the hearing, the material evidence was in substance this: Munday, a witness for the complainants, was acquainted with all the parties, and proved the signature of Jack to the paper heretofore alluded to, upon which the parties relied for authority to sell. He had a conversation with Easton shortly after Easton had purchased, which he thus details: "Easton, I am afraid you have got into difficulty about that land, and you and your children will be lawing about it." Easton thought not. "You ought to help the old woman, Sally, who is sick and destitute," &c. Easton replied that Myers did wrong in giving the property to the negroes, and "damn them, I intend to cheat them out of everything they have." This witness also heard Gray about the time of his purchase, say that he was not going to settle on the land, that he had bought on speculation, and had nearly completed an arrangement, by which he would make six or seven hundred dollars. Gray did not explain with whom this arrangement was made, but from the laugh of Gray at the time of the remark, the witness understood him to mean Duncan.
Several witnesses testified as to the value of the land in 1836. They varied in their estimates from eight to twenty dollars per acre. It appeared that land of like quality and in the same vicinity had brought as high as twenty-five dollars per acre. One witness had offered Jack $2,300 in cash for the land, but Jack, upon consultation with Easton, had declined selling. Easton's improvements consisted of a barn, smoke-house, fencing, horse mill, and distillery, which cost him about $2,130, but were worth at the trial only $930. Easton added sixty or seventy acres to the inclosed land, and cultivated about one hundred and thirty acres -- seventy acres of which had been inclosed and in cultivation before he took possession. The average rent for this land was $1.00 or $1.25 per acre.
At the March term, 1847, of the Marion Circuit Court, to which court the cause had been previously removed, a final decree was rendered. All questions as to proper parties, their appearance and mode of defense, were raised, and by consent a decree was entered on the merits. The court pronounced the sales of Duncan and Easton fraudulent and void, and declared the land still subject to the trust, excepting the twenty-eight acres which had been conveyed to White. The bill was dismissed as to White, and his title declared valid. The court further decreed that the complainants recover $398.66 from the estate of Easton, that being the purchase-money with interest of the land sold to White. The further sum of $1,398 was also given for the rents and profits. The court directed new trustees to carry into execution the will of Myers, in relation to the trust lands.
The general principles by which the conduct of trustees ought to be regulated are highly equitable, and obviously based upon sound sense, ordinary prudence and good faith. The general rule is, that a party cannot purchase on his own account that which his duty or trust requires him to sell on account of another. He cannot be both buyer and seller. Nor can he do indirectly what the law prohibits him from doing directly. A purchase per interpositam personam, by a trustee or agent, of the particular property of which he has the sale, carries fraud on its face.
It is unnecessary to examine the subject further here; the application of general principles alone will be sufficient to settle the merits of this controversy. The admitted facts of this case, aside from the testimony of any witness, are such as to carry conviction of some gross unfairness, unless satisfactorily accounted for by the trustees. The sale of this valuable tract of land, apparently without any notice, and certainly without any effort to invite competition, upon the bare request of the cestui que trusts, against the consequences of whose ignorance and improvidence these trustees were expressly appointed the protectors; the gross inadequacy of the price being clearly less than one-half and probably less than one-third of the amount which a sale at auction upon the usual credit would have commanded; the absence of all the customary precautions to secure the purchase-money, no notes or money being taken, nor any security required from the vendee; the subsequent transfer from this vendee to one of the trustees, within a week after the sale, and at an advance of seven hundred dollars, and the second transfer immediately thereafter to the principal acting trustee, are circumstances carrying on their face such palpable marks of fraud and bad faith, that nothing short of the most clear and satisfactory explanations could account for. But the trustees make no attempt at explanation. Their answers contain general denials of fraud, and their sole reliance for a justification of their conduct is in the paper writing signed by Jack. They would have us believe that they were mere instruments of Jack, subject to his absolute control, and bound by the will of Myers to obey his dictates, however unreasonable. If the trustees really entertained such an opinion, it was a remarkable instance of fatuity. The testator seems to have been aware of the helpless condition of that class of individuals to whom he was extending his bounty; he knew that their ignorance and proverbial improvidence, together with their degraded condition in society, subjected them to imposition from such of their superiors in condition and intelligence as had sufficient knavery to take advantage of their situation. He, therefore, interposed agents, or trustees, to protect them against their own imbecility, as well as against the knavery of others. It is true, that he left to these freedmen, or to one of the most intelligent of their number, the right of selecting their place of residence -- of continuing to occupy the lands bequeathed to them, or of selling and investing the proceeds in other lands. But further than this, the trustees were not restricted. The time, mode and terms of sale were left to their discretion; nothing was said in the will in relation to these matters, but they were left to be governed by those principles of common honesty which would teach them that they were to exercise ordinary prudence, and take such steps as, without accident, would secure a fair price for the land. The idea that the mere directions of Jack were sufficient to compel them to take an inadequate price, or to sell to an irresponsible buyer, or to sell for cash when a credit sale would be most advantageous, or to sell without notice, privately, to any person whom Jack might designate, receives no countenance from any provision of the will. Such an interpretation would not be likely to suggest itself to any mind imbued with ordinary sagacity, unless where the "wish was father to the thought."
Without reverting to the details of the bill of exceptions, it will be seen from the general sketch of the evidence which we have given in the statement, that its tendency is rather to confirm the suspicions arising from the intrinsic character of the transaction, than to exculpate the trustees. It is therefore unnecessary that we should make any particular comments on the testimony. Nor do we deem it necessary to express any opinion upon the alleged contradiction in the answers of the trustees, or upon the weight to which Jack's answer is entitled. A minute investigation of these points would only lead to a confirmation of the opinion already entertained of the merits of the decree.
There are some particulars, however, in which we think the decree erroneous. One of these is probably an inadvertence in drawing up the decree. The forty acres of land devised to Easton, is embraced in the descriptive list given in the decree of the lands devised to the negroes. Although this mistake might not prove fatal to the title of Easton's heirs, it being the obvious intent of the decree only to pass the title of the lands devised to the negroes, it is better that the decree be corrected in this respect.
The decree for $1,398 for rents and profits against Easton's estate, we also think erroneous. The evidence shows that Easton added about seventy acres to the farm. Whether this was timbered or prairie land, is not stated. If the former, the expense of clearing and fencing it must greatly exceed the amount of the annual rents for ten years; if prairie land, the expense of breaking and fencing ought to set-off its estimated rent. The other improvements are estimated by a witness at $1,800 or $1,900. Their present value is supposed by the same witness to be something less than a thousand dollars. Now the annual rent of the land may be set down at an average of $1.25 per acre, which would make the total rent of the seventy acres (in cultivation when Easton bought) about $875. Equity does not require that any penalty should be visited upon Easton's heirs for the improper conduct of their ancestor, but that a fair and equitable pecuniary compensation should be decreed to the complainants for actual losses. This is effected, in our opinion, by the decree for the land and the purchase-money and interest of the twenty-eight acres sold to White. The improvements should be allowed a set-off against the rents and profits. As it will be necessary to appoint trustees to carry into execution the will, in respect to the trust property, we shall remand the case, in order that the decree may be amended in the particulars suggested. The other Judges concurring the decree of the Circuit Court is reversed, and the cause remanded.
Go to the Marion Co. MO Court Records Part 2
ROSE v. BATES; Supreme Court of Missouri; 12 Mo. 30; July, 1848, Decided. (MAD: see also Bucks Co. PA and Charleston Co. SC)
Pension Index Card File, alphabetical; of the Veterans Administrative Contact and Administration Services, Admin. Operations Services, 1861-1934; Duff to A-J Duncan (negative FHL film 540,888, some cards very faint); Joseph Duncan to Dunn (positive FHL film 540,889, some cards very dark)
Cataloged under Civil War, 1861-1865, pensions, indexes; does not say if Confederate or Federal, but probably Federal. Negative film, some cards much too faint or dark to read, some cards blurred or faded, particularly the service unit and the dates of application. Most of the very faint or dark cards were in a slightly different format, with space for years enlisted and discharged which were sometimes filled in. Many of these were for service in later years, although one or two were for service ca 1866.
Name of soldier, alias, name of dependent widow or minor, service (military unit or units), date of filing, class (invalid or widow or minor or other), Application #, Certificate #, state from which filed (sometimes blank), attorney (sometimes blank, MAD: did not usually copy), remarks. Sometimes the "Invalid" or "Widow" class had an "s" added to it before the application #; occasionally the area for the service information included a circled "S". The minor's name was frequently that of the guardian rather than the minor.
The military unit was frequently the Company Letter, the Regiment Number, sometimes US Vet Vol Inf. (US Veteran Volunteer Infantry), L.A. (Light Artillery), H.A. (Heavy Artillery), US C Inf (US Colored? Infantry), Cav. (Cavalry), Mil. Guards, V.R.C. (?Volunteer Reserve Corps?), etc. Sometimes there were several service units given.
Cards appear to be arranged by the last name, first name, middle initial if any, and state (including "US") of service.
Duncan, Hubbard, widow Duncan, Louisa C.; G 148 Ill. Inf.; 1890 March 5, Invalid Appl. #759328, Cert. #808656, Kans.; 1905 Nov. 21, Widow Appl. #838262, Cert. #607113, Kans.; remarks XC2676527. (MAD: 1850-1860 Adams Co. IL, b.1836 IL, 1870-1880 Marion Co. MO; ?? 1900 Reno Co. KS as Henry Duncan)
Shelby Co. MO Deed (SLC 7/22/2014; have JPG images)
B-327: 23 Oct. 1840, Robt. W. Duncan of Marion Co. MO to Thomas B. Mayes of Shelby Co. MO, for $10.75 paid, sell real estate and lands, Lot No.1 Block 23 in town of Shelbyville, Shelby Co., with appurtenances, warrant title. /s/ Robt. W. Duncan. Ack. 23 Oct. 1840 by Robt. W. Duncan before Thos. J. Baunds, Clerk of Schuyler Co. MO Circuit Court. Filed for record 22 July 1841. (FHL film 981,996)
St.Louis [MO] Probate Court Digitization Project, 1802-1900; Case Number #1982, Filed 1845, Microfilm Reel C 27547 (Internet images, 12/2004; MAD's extract)
http://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/stlprobate/ A collaborative project of the Missouri State Archives, a division of the Office of the Secretary of State, and the St. Louis Probate Court.
#1982. DUNCAN, SUSANNA
Will of Susanna Duncan of St.Louis County, State of Missouri, desire just debts be paid and funeral expenses out of proceeds and debts due to my estate; to my brother Henry Duncan all my right to ... one horse, also my interest in the cattle; my slave Burr at my decease to serve my sister Catharine Duncan five years, then be free; my slave Lewis at my death to serve my sister Catharine Duncan nine years and 4 months and then be liberated. My slave David at my death to serve my sister Catharine Duncan 12 years, then be free; my sister Catharine Duncan to provide the "nesaries" of life for my brother George Duncan now living in the State of Virginia Loudoun Co. I desire my sister Catharine Duncan to pay my brother Henry Duncan $50 a year for 5 years and if my sister should die before then, my estate shall be bound to pay him the $50 a year for the 5 years and if he should die before the expiration of that time the paying seases. I desire that if my sister Catharine Duncan should die before the expiration of the time that the above mentioned blacks has to serve, that the proceeds of their labour shall be (too dark) if it be nesesary and the law requires it, to assist in (bottom line too dark) (next page) for their liberation then the proffits arising from their labour for the length of time that they may have to serve is to be divided equally between my brother George Duncan in Virginia, my brother Charles Duncan in Ohio, my brother Benjamin Duncan in Missouri, my brother Henry Duncan in Missouri and my nephew Coleman Duncan, a son of my brother William's and also in the State of Missouri, and in the event of the death of any of the above mentioned persons it is to be "dived" among those of the above mentioned that may [be] living at the time. I wish my nephew Coleman Duncan to be my executor and my sister Catharine Duncan to be his security. This 10th March 1843. /s/ Susanne Duncan. P.S. I wish my nephew Coleman Duncan a son of my brother William's to have one horse at my death, namely a dark bay horse. /s/ SD. Wit. Mahala Branery?, George Hume. 24 Oct. 1844, proved by George Hume.
Documents include receipts from Henry Duncan and Catharine Duncan.
(MAD: George Duncan of Loudoun Co. VA, Charles Duncan of Meigs Co. OH, Benjamin Duncan of Marion Co. MO, Henry Duncan of St.Louis MO; children of Charles Duncan died 1807 Loudoun Co. VA & Susan Mason.)
Mason Co. KY Deed (FHL film 281,812)
59-112/113: 20 Dec. 1849, Margaret Duncan of City of Hannibal, State of Missouri, for good cause, appoint Everett Stillwell of Mason Co. KY my attorney in fact to sell 50 acres of land more or less in Mason Co. KY and execute a deed. /s/ Margaret Duncan. Ack. 20 Dec. 1849 in City of Hannibal, MO, before Geo. H. Shields, Mayor. Recorded Mason Co. KY 2 Jan. 1850. [MAD: Hannibal, Marion Co. MO] (FHL film 281,812)
Loudoun Co. VA Deed (FHL film 32,332)
4I-259: 14 July 1836, Benjamin Duncan and Lucinda T. his wife of Marion Co. MO, appoint Henry Shacklett and Susan Berkley of Loudoun Co. VA attorneys to sell land called Jones tract, 219-1/3 acres which was left to Lucinda T. Duncan by George Berkley of Loudoun Co. VA, and also receive Lucinda's share of estate. Reg. Marion Co. MO.
1884 "History of Marion County, Missouri ... : together with a condensed history of Missouri, the city of St. Louis, a reliable and detailed history of Marion County" by E.F. Perkins (Los Angeles Public Library book 977.81 M34Hi; and FHL film 823,589)
Pg.759; Round Grove Township: JUDGE JOHN C. DUNCAN was born April 14, 1829, in Loudon Co. VA, a son of Benjamin and Lucinda T. (Berkley) Duncan, of Virginia. Benjamin Duncan moved to Palmyra in the fall of 1829, and started a pottery, in which business he engaged until his death, in 1857. Mr. J.C. Duncan was educated in the subscription schools of Marion county, and learned his father's trade, which he followed until 1852. He then went to California and engaged for a short time in mining. Returned home in July, 1853, and was married November 29, of that year, to Miss Mary McChristy, daughter of William and Leah (White) McChristy, of Kentucky. To this union ... Mr. Duncan is the survivor of a family of two children; his brother, Henry Edgar, died at Santa Fe, New Mexico, January 12, 1846.
Pg.909: MILTON BRADLEY ... born October 13, 1811, in Scott Co. where he grew to manhood. He is the son of Stephen and Margaret (Duncan) Bradley. His father was a Kentuckian, and his mother a native of Scotland. When 16 he learned the trade of cabinet maker. In 1830 he came to Marion county, and settled at Palmyra; one year later his father followed him, and died in Palmyra in 1835, with cholera, his brother, Daniel Bradley, dying the same day. In 1836 Mr. Bradley moved to Randolph Co. MO, where he lived eleven years. He then returned to Marion county, where he has since resided, engaged in farming and working at his trade. In 1837 he was married to Miss Mary A. Johnson, of Randolph county. Mr. and Mrs. Bradley are members of the Christian church -- he for twenty years, and she for forty. ....
1884 "History of Randolph and Macon Counties, Missouri, Together with a condensed history of Missouri; a reliable and detailed history of Randolph and Macon counties; their pioneer record, resources, biographical sketches of prominent citizens; general and local statistics of great value; incidents and reminiscences" by National Historical (Los Angeles Public Library book 977.81 R19Hi)
Pg.672-3, Randolph Co.: RICHARD G. DUNCAN (Of R.G. Duncan & Bro., Dealers in General Merchandise, P.O., Yates). Richard G. Duncan, postmaster at Yates, ... is a native of Kentucky, born in Grayson (MAD: Hardin) Co., May 26, 1843. When he was nine years of age he came with his parents, William S. and M.E. (Thomas) Duncan to Marion Co. MO, where they settled in 1852, near Middle Grove. The father died there in 1856, and they returned to Kentucky (the mother and her family, including Richard G.) immediately after the father's death. There the mother subsequently married Rev. Ezra Ward, a prominent Presbyterian minister. But he also died in 1863. Richard G. in the meantime had learned the saddler's trade, and he came to Missouri the year following his stepfather's death. He located at Paris, in Monroe County, and worked there for two years ... He came to this county in 1870, and secured a farm near Yates, ... In the meantime, in 1870, his mother came from Kentucky and made her home with him. ... His brother, Thomas J., ... On the 29th of May, 1866, Mr. Duncan was married to Miss Laura E. Penn, a daughter of W.N. Penn, a prominent citizen of Monroe County. She died February 3, 1868. No children survive their marriage. ....
1878 "US Biographical Dictionary & Portrait Gallery of Emminent Self-Made Men, Missouri Volume" pub. by US Biographical Pub. Co. (Los Angeles Public Library book R977.8 U61; FHL film 1,425,620 item 1)
Pg.647: RICHARD P. GILES, Shelbina. Richard P. Giles was born June 20, 1846, in Hardin Co. KY. His father, Granville T. Giles, was a native of Wythe Co. VA, and followed through life the profession of medicine. He settled in 1848 in Monroe Co. MO, and afterwards located at Palmyra, Marion county. His mother, whose maiden name was Rosanna Duncan, was a native of Kentucky, a daughter of Housen Duncan, farmer. Richard P. Giles was reared on the family farm in Monroe Co. MO. ....
"The Book of Missourians : the achievements and personnel of notable living men and women of Missouri in the opening decade of the twentieth century" ed. by M.L. Van Nada; pub. Chicago: T.J. Steele & Co., 1906, 483 pgs. (LH10659, HeritageQuest images 5/2007; FHL film 1,651,390)
Pg.181: MALCOLM LATIMER WOOD, cashier of the Bank of Palmyra, Mo., born August 2, 1861, in Shelbina, Mo., son of David and Fanny (Duncan) Wood. Educated in the public schools of Shelby county, Mo. ... (MAD: Palmyra, Marion Co. MO)
"Quincy and Adams County [IL] history and representative men" by Henry Bornmann; ed. by David F. Wilcox; pub. Chicago: Lewis Pub. Co., 1919, 1676 pgs. (LH13147, HeritageQuest images 4/2007; FHL book 977.344 D3w v.1&2 and films 924,750 item 2 and 924,751 item 1)
Pg.883: JOHN A. STILLWELL, president of the Electric Wheel Company, Quincy, Illinois, was born at Hannibal in Marion County, Missouri, January 23, 1861. His parents were Brison and Margaret (Duncan) Stillwell, both of whom were born in Kentucky, probably being of Scotch parentage. For many years the father was in the pork packing business. His death occurred in 1876, six children surviving him and four of these still living. The mother died in 1916. The only son, John A. Stillwell, ... married in December, 1893, to Miss Elizabeth M. Newcomb, and they have three children, ... (MAD: see Clark and Mason Co. KY)
Some early Duncans in Marion Co. MO:
William Duncan, 1827, on Marion Co. MO tax list (pg.51, Vol.7, 4/1970, "MO Pioneers," FHL book 977.8 D2h, from Evelyn Sigler and Denzil Mauldin 1984)
Carey Duncan, 1827, non-resident of Marion Co. on list of Real Property charged with taxes. (pg.52, Vol.7, 4/1970, "MO Pioneers," FHL book 977.8 D2h, from Evelyn Sigler and Denzil Mauldin 1984) (MAD: see Lincoln Co. MO)
William Dunkin, 24 Nov. 1831, mar. Rhoda Easton. (MAD: 1840 Lewis Co. MO census, she in 1850 Lewis Co. MO census)
Mason Duncan, 28 June 1833, had died of cholera in Palmyra; from issue of "Missouri Gazette" or "Missouri Republican" (pg.49, "Death Records of MO Men from Newspapers, 1808-1854" by George P. Wilson; FHL book 977.8 V4w; from Vivian Ruegge 1984)
Margaret Duncan, 24 April 1850, mar. Bryson Stilwell.
Benjamin Duncan, 7 Aug. 1851; John Reed, age ca 60y, died at residence of Benjamin Duncan, had lived Marion Co. MO 16-17 years, from Fauquier Co. VA where there may be relatives; from issue of Palmyra, MO, "Whig." (pg.70, Vol.28, 9/1975, "MO Pioneers," FHL book 977.8 D2h, from Denzil Mauldin 1984)
Sarah C. Duncan, 2 March 1852, of Lincoln Co., mar. Richard A. Stone of Marion Co.; from Lincoln Co. MO Marriage Book B, 1842-1859 (pg.20, Vol.29, 12/1975, "MO Pioneers," FHL book 977.8 D2h, from Evelyn Sigler and Denzil Mauldin 1984)
George C. Duncan, 6 May 1855, mar. Lucretia Kinch.
END
Return to Index to Duncan Research Files in Missouri
Return to The Genealogy Bug's Home Page