(Note: If you like background music
Click Here and select 'open'. If not, don't click.)
A previous Controversy article in this series concerned Rev. Samuel Albro and
his wife Alice (Rogers or Waite.) Confusion radiates from a point, so we
should not be surprised that there is controversy concerning Samuel & Alice's
son Samuel (Samuel II) who married Patience Bull. Frank J. Doherty's book,
Settlers of the Beekman Patent, Dutchess County, New York
, Vol. II, ABBOT to BURCH, Pleasant Valley, NY, 1993, Chapter 10: The Albro
Family, pp.100-107, claims that this Samuel Albro was born 12 October 1729,
that he married Patience Bull in Beekman, and that she was the daughter of
Timothy and Patience (Page) Bull of Beekman. The cited references are
One Line of Descent from John Albro of Portsmouth
by Imogene Zook Beck;
A Line of Descent from John Albro of Portsmouth, Rhode Island
by Alden G. Beaman, Ph.D., R.I. Genealogical Register, Vol.1, No.1, p.33f; and
"Early Rhode Island Settlers in Du(t)chess County, New York", from
History of Duchess County
by James H. Smith, Syracuse, NY, R.I. Genealogical Register, Vol.10, 1987.
However, the latter two references do not mention Samuel Albro or Patience Bull.
Rev. Samuel Albro was born on 10 October 1716 (Martha A. Benns, Notes on
the Albro Family, Rhode Island Historical Society, 1942, p.11) and married
Alice about 1738 (LDS Ancestral file familyid=13487770, AFN:HZPJ-6W &
2473-4XX.) Alice was born 1719. This is incompatible with the birth of their son
Samuel being in 1729. Martha Benns' Notes as well as Vital Records
of Rhode Island, 1636-1850: a family register for the people by James Newell
Arnold (1844-1927) have Samuel II born 12 October 1749, Arnold giving the place as
Exeter, Washington, Rhode Island (cited in LDS IGI batch C501931.) Samuel
reportedly died 4 December 1817 according to LDS PRF CD#26, Pin
#361976, submitted by Roy L. Birch, San Diego, CA. Patience Bull was born 13 Jun
1745 and died 13 March 1818, according to LDS PRF CD#26 Pin #399083 and CD#31
Pin #229351, also submitted by Roy L. Birch. The marriage of Samuel II and
Patience was some time between 1770 and 1774, and the place of marriage was
given as "Of, Exeter, Washington, Rhode Island" (IGI film 2034726.)
Timothy Bull, son of John and Mary (Closson) Bull, was born in 1718 in
Jamestown, Newport, RI, and died in 1810 in Danby, Vermont. He married
Patience Page (b. abt. 1720, Of, Westerly, RI) abt. 1739, all according to LDS
Ancestral file familyid=5379134, AFN:LLHG-SG & LLHG-TM. The marriage is
claimed to have occurred in <jamestown>, Newport, RI (LDS IGI file
online, no file number given) or S. Kingstown, Washington, RI (LDS IGI film
6142820 and 1760987.) They had six recorded children, born 1741, 1742, 1743,
1745, 1747 and 1748; none was named Patience. The one born abt.1745 was
Williamson Bull. Phebe Elizabeth Bull, b.1743, died 1790, is buried in Scottini
Cemetery, Danby, VT.
Contrariwise, Patience Bull is claimed to be the daughter of Ephraim and
Patience (Rodman) Bull by Martha A. Benns in her Notes, and by
Thomas Rodman in his
Descendants of John Rodman
,
http://www.afn.org/~afn24696/RODMAN/rodman.htm
. Patience Rodman was supposedly
born 22 March 1710 and married Ephraim Bull 28 Sep 1726. This marriage is
supported by the will of Thomas Rodman, R.I. Genealogical Register, V. 14,
Abstracts of South Kingstown Wills
, p.97. Ephraim and Patience had eight reported children, the last named being
Patience Bull, born 13 August 1745. The LDS PRF records submitted by Roy L.
Birch agree with the Ephraim/Patience parent identifications, but as mentioned
above, give Patience Bull's date of birth as 13 June instead of 13 August. It
is possible that the latter date is a christening, but it is more likely, as recently
pointed out by Julie Kidd, that the June date is according to the Julian calendar
and the August date is more appropriate for 1745 (the Julian calendar took effect
in the colonies in 1752.)
What are we looking at here? If all we had was a book that appears to contain
a few misquotes, we could simply dismiss it and get on with our lives. But
what we have is a multi-volume, ongoing, major work that cites what look like
highly authoritative references, yet in regard to this couple, seems to be a
collection of near-random guesses. Bad guesses at that! What we have is the
reality that the author of an extensive reference work can not possibly
validate the accuracy of every cited reference. We have the reality that
whatever gets published, thereby tends to be believed, and will probably be
cited in later documents as established fact. Yet publication implies nothing
about the truth of what is published. It is simply our credulity, our human
nature that tends to make us accept what we read as fact. We have to remember
that statements unsupported by evidence, do not themselves become evidence by
virtue of being printed in a book or magazine article!