2nd Rockbridge Arty.-CSA

John was the only known of Thomas Chenoweth, and Rachel Ann Swane who married in Ross Co., OH. He first shows up in Gilmer Co., WV. He is in Kentucky in 1880 and Rockbridge Co., VA in 1900 and 1910 with his last wife Sarah Elizabeth Moore who he married in 1882. They had a daughter Sarah Margaret. John's life is a subject of much research. He often went by spelled his name Chenowith. He is thought to have married at least 17 times. 7 Children have been identified as his:

By Henrietta Chenoweth: Rufus [Henrietta lived in Knox Co., TN the d/o Richard Chenoweth and Ellen Hammer]

By Ruth MIckle: Thomas, Rueben, John, Jr., and Rachel. {This family lived in Adams Co., IN}

By Margaret Williamson: James [This family lived in Pope Co., AR]

By Sarah Elizabeth Moore: Sarah [this family lived in Rockingham Co., VA.

The locations are part of John's pattern. He was always moving on to another place with marriages in Ohio, Kentucky, Illinois, Tennessee, Georgia, Maryland, Indiana, Kansas, Arkansas and West Virginia, in multiple counties in many of them.

Below are three articles written about him in the Chenoweth news letter, in an attempt to understand him.

John P. Chenowith - an enigma - December 2004

There are three mentions in the Harris book of a John P. Chenoweth who is not identified within the main body of the family line. There are also multiple listings of marriages of a John P. Chenoweth to various partners in various places from the 1840s to the 1880s. In all three instances this John used the spelling of "Chenowith". Little of these records give a good indication of just who John P. Chenoweth was. Was it one man, or more? It is an open question.
Within the main text of the Harris book (page 259) we are introduced to a John P. Chenowith who just after the 1850 Census, on November 20, 1850, married Henrietta Chenoweth, a daughter of Richard Chenoweth in Knox Co., TN. Henrietta and John had one son Rufus and John left. No information about him is known. But this pattern is not an isolated instance. Henrietta remarried to Allen Dalrimple in 1860. The family genealogy work of Bartley Russell McBath claims that John was from Kentucky and that he and Henrietta went to Alabama. Certainly Henrietta's sister, Anna Mariah went to Alabama, but we have no record evidence of Henrietta being there. Rufus states he was born in Tennessee and Henrietta later remarried in Knox Co. Peter Chenoweth has found evidence of a John Chenault and a son Rufus in Alabama. The Chanault family has been confused with the Chenoweth family on more than one occasion, and the Chanault family was Kentucky based. The underlying truth is unclear and elusive.

On page 620, in the unknown sections, Harris describes another John P. Chenowith who was born in Ross Co., OH in 1822. His father was Thomas, his mother Rachel Ann Swane. It is not clear who this Thomas was. It is possible he was the son of Richard Chenoweth, son of Thomas(2) who lived in Pike Co., OH. He also could be a brother to my ancestor, Henry S. Thomas never made it to the 1850 Census. It appears that he may have left Ohio for what is now West Virginia at some point, for at least his son shows up there. John P. Chenowith married in Braxton Co., WV on June 11, 1859 to Ruth Mickle. He was 36 years of age at the time of his marriage, so it is not known whether he was married before or not. He is found in the 1860 Census of Gilmer Co. and had 4 children. John is listed as a minister. He is said to have served in the Civil War. Ruth died in 1866 and the family does not appear again in a Census until 1900. At that point John is in Rockbridge Co., VA with another wife, Sarah Elizabeth Moore, whom he married on November 16, 1882 in West Virginia. His son, John P. Chenowith, Jr is married and living in Wells Co., IN.

On pages 611-612, again in the unknown sections, Harris describes the family of James Garrison Chenowith of Arkansas. This is a large group of descendant families today. James was born July 20, 1873 in Pope Co., AR. We first find him in a marriage record on September 20, 1892 in Pope Co., AR when he married Elizabeth "Lizzie" Judkins. They had 8 children and never left Pope Co. Pete has found the family in the 1900, 1910, 1920 and 1930 Census in Gum Log, Pope Co., AR. He was the son of John P. Chenowith and Margaret Williamson. Harris gives "D" as John's middle initial. Others say his middle name was Prickett, which evokes the possibility of a tie to the Thomas(2) line and his wife, Mary Prickett. Again nothing is known of this John other than he is said to have left his wife Margaret before James was born.

One would expect to find James Garrison in the 1880 Census at age 7. I have looked in vain to locate a boy in Arkansas name James Chenoweth of that age and have only run across the record below which may be James and his mother Margaret. The question becomes, did she remarry to a Virdin? My assumption here is that the 7-year old son is James Garrison Chenowith.

At least three descendants in this line, Jerry Don Chenowith of Texas; Bob Luningham of Arizona; and David James Chenowith of California, have related family recollections of John P. that "he was a wanderer and may have had a dozen or more children by various wives. That he was in at least TN, AR, MO, and KS." Bob's account added "My grandfather never knew his father as he left his wife, my great grandmother before my grandfather was born. The word we had was that he was from St Louis, MO, was a lawyer, and was killed in an automobile accident in St Louis in 1921." These stories lend credence to a belief that all these instances of John P. may be the same person. It would explain why there is no consistent Census record of the man.
There are other records of marriages of a John P. Chenowith, some have circumstances that fit the pieces above. Including the marriages above the list looks like this:

• John P. Chenowith m: Sarah Stultz on April 16, 1843 in Highland Co., OH
• John P. Chenowith m: Maria Dines on July 13, 1843 in Pickaway, OH
• John P. Chenowith m: Mary Elizabeth Howard on September 26, 1845 in Hardin Co., KY
• John P. Chenowith m: Susannah Huff on June 30, 1847 in Clark Co., IL
• J.P. Chenowith m: Lucy J. Lumsden on February 20, 1848 in Sumner Co., TN
• John P. Chenowith m: Henrietta Chenoweth on November 20, 1850 in Knox Co., TN
• John P. Chenowith m: Martha J. Armstrong on April 10, 1852 in Butts, GA
• John P. Chenowith m: Mary Ann Snyder on March 22, 1856 in Harford Co., MD
• John P. Chenowith m: Ruth Mickle on June 11, 1859 in Braxton Co., WV (had son Ruben)
• John P. Chenowith m: Mrs. Harriet Leonard on January 23, 1867 in Miami, IN
• John P. Chenowith m: Judith ? on November 25, 1869 in Adams Co., IN
• John P. Chenowith m: Mrs. Rachel Disbrow on November 25, 1869-December 22, 1870 in Neosho, KS (John was born in 1822)
• John P. Chenowith m: Margaret Williamson (parents of James Garrison) about 1872
• John P. Chenowith m: Mary Francis Wilkerson on July 28, 1879 in Muhlenburg Co., KY
• John P. Chenowith m: Sarah Elizabeth Moore on November 16, 1882 in West Virginia

This is a singular, stunning list. There John P. Chenoweths within the main database body, but most of these can be accounted for and do not fit these marriages. Now these all may not be the same person, but certainly there are not that many unknown John P. Chenowiths running around the countryside. Many of these have to be the same person. There are some interesting things that can be drawn from this. The John P. who married Mary Howard was a minister from Ohio who lived in the St. Louis area of Missouri. Two years before John P. Chenowith married Henrietta in Knox Co., TN, a John P. married in Sumner Co., TN. The wife of this marriage would remarry to George W. Pryor. There is a gap in the marriages that corresponds the Census listing in 1860 and the marriage to Ruth Mickle until her death in 1866. The string ends with the final marriage of John P. to Sarah Moore who he is found with 18 years later in Virginia in the 1900 Census.

Though this enigma may never be solved it is interesting that two of these three lines mentioned in the Harris book stemming from the marriages to Henrietta Chenoweth, Ruth Mickle and Margaret Williamson have male lines that exist in modern times. This may lend itself to a DNA matching if volunteers can be found. The results could confirm the theory being advanced that this is the activity of one unusual man. Unfortunately the male line of Henrietta's son Rufus appears to have died out.

The bigamist, John P. Chenowith, revisited - Dec 2005

In December of 2004, I wrote an article that summarized various families and marriages attributed to John P. Chenowith. My theory was that this was one person who traveled the county, marrying women and making a hasty exit. This September, as part of her research on the Pryor family, Cornelia Masters of Tennessee contacted me. Lucy J. Lumsden Chenowith had married her ancestor George Pryor on May 18, 1859 in Sumner Co., TN. Eleven years earlier Lucy had married John P. Chenowith in this same county. Cornelia had found that John P. Chenowith was charged with polygamy in the marriage of Mary Elizabeth Howard Hardin Co KY. In the marriage to Lucy J Lumsden 2-20-1848 in Sumner Co TN he was convicted of bigamy and served 2 years in TN State Prison (Case #7683). He went in 6-28-1848 and was discharged 6-26-1850. Located in TN Convicts Ledger #86:996 - this also states that he was a preacher and was born in Ohio and that his conduct in prison was “tolerable only”.

This record gives real proof to the theory presented. Not only does it tie two of the marriages together, but it also lends credence to the trail that follows. To start, John P. was a bigamist and apparently the prison term did nothing to deter him, as he would marry Henrietta Chenoweth in November of 1850 in Knox Co., TN. The record tells us he was in prison when the 1850 Census was taken and in Tennessee that year. It only took him 4 months to meet and woo another victim. It shows that he was a traveler as he had married Mary Howard in Hardin Co., KY and an article at the time stated he was a minister from Ohio and that the couple settled in St. Louis. The marriage to Henrietta resulted in a son, Rufus. The Chenoweth family of Knoxville had in their research that John took his bride to Alabama. The next marriage on our list occurs in Georgia. In the 1860 Census we actually find him in Gilmer Co. in present day West Virginia. He had married Ruth Mickle in nearby Braxton Co. The Census tells us there was a son Thomas and that John was a Baptist minister. This is the third record we have that he used the cloak of ministry as a regular part of his philandering. Of course John did not just “love em” and “leave em,” he married them and left them. Maybe it was more a wife in every port, which he would visit while traveling and preaching.

Certainly a real man of the cloth would not be engaging in such activities, but this guise was an enabling mechanism that would get John in a position of trust with his intended prey. Ministers had to be good at preaching and certainly John P. must have had a way with words, quickly talking his way into the heart of some unsuspecting woman and then quickly down the aisle. The Mickle family research tells us that he took Ruth to Indiana and that 3 more children were born. This is the first time the roving minister stuck around for even a few years. The trail I have just mentioned involves 5 marriages in eleven years, and there are 4 more marriages in a 1843-1859 time period that involve a John P. Chenowith, who is not known or found, that we have not yet added into the mix. The eight-year gap in the record of marriages ends in Indiana in 1867, shortly after Ruth had her 4th child. She remarried to a Rueben Lord. John P. appears to have married a Harriet Leonard in Miami Co. in 1867, not far from Adams Co. where he had left Ruth. There is another pattern here as well. Not only would he marry in various areas, but John would take his brides somewhere else. With Mary Howard, they went to Missouri; with Henrietta, they went to Alabama; with Ruth, they went to Indiana.

Another marriage within two years follows in Adams Co. and then Kansas. In 1872 he is in Arkansas and the new bride is Margaret Williamson. This begot James Garrison Chenoweth. Two grandsons of this James recall that their grandfather never knew his father and that he was a wanderer and may have had a dozen or more children by various wives having been in at least TN, AR, MO, and KS. This is another telling confirmation. The Harris book gives us a final marriage to Sarah Elizabeth Moore in West Virginia in 1882. By this time John would have been sixty years old. A daughter was born to them and John settled in with Sarah living to the age of 91. They are found in the 1900 and 1910 Census in Rockbridge Co., VA. After I wrote the previous article, Darrell B. Stalnaker, contacted me about Sarah who had previously been married to Morgan Hamric.

What an amazing story and it is a marvel that given John’s ways, we have found enough traces to piece it together. I have only included in the record below the nine marriages I am confident are part of John’s activities. The list presented in last year’s newsletter cited 15 known records of unknown John P. Chenowiths. At this point, a good share of them seem to be attributable to one individual. The remaining question is who was John? He was born in Ross Co., OH in 1822, the son of a Thomas Chenoweth and Rachel Swane. This information again comes from the Mickle family and the Harris research gives their marriage as February 18, 1822 in that same county. There are two Thomas possibilities and, at this point, arguments could be made for either.
John Chenoweth s/o Thomas who married Rachel Kerr had a son Thomas born January 13, 1782. This is Pete’s choice. We do not know what happened to him. Harris attributes this record found in that area to him: “a judgement against 9 acres was served on Thomas by the sheriff in Feb 1840”. At the time, this John’s son Thomas was the only known possibility. But the father of Thomas and his siblings left Ross Co. about 1818 for Vigo Co., IN. If Thomas were still alive, and yet unmarried, why would he have stayed in Ross Co.? On the plus side, the Arkansas Williamson marriage indicates that the middle name of John P. may have been “Prickett”, perhaps from the grandmother of Thomas. But now a second possibility has emerged. My great great grandfather, Dr. Henry, had a brother named Thomas. Henry married in Ross Co. in 1829 placing the family there. This family had a proclivity for members who would strike out on their own and go their separate ways. The Champaign Co., OH records of the estate of Henry Safley tells us that one of two brothers of Henry, Thomas or James was either alive at that point or had children. One of the earlier possibly marriages of John P. was in 1843 in Pickaway Co., OH. Dr. Henry was living in that county at that time. On the negative side, John P. would have been just 21 years old. All that we know of the brother Thomas is that he was born between 1800 and 1810. The 1822 marriage would mean he would have had to be born about 1800 or 1801 making him the oldest son. These dates are tight but not improbable.

The curious thing is that we have no record of either Thomas in the area other than the aforementioned legal action attributable to the name Thomas only. A Thomas is not listed in the 1830 or 1840 Census in the Scioto Valley area. The relatives of Thomas the son of John had moved on to Indiana, so Thomas would not be housed with them. The murk of early Census work is numbers and guesswork. In 1830, with Henry and his new wife Frances, yet childless and living in Ross Co. the Census lists a large number of people, but what it means is very unclear: ”One male10-15, eight males 20-30, two females 15-20.” In 1843 there is a record in the Springfield area of Missouri of an unknown Thomas Chenoweth. This is where Henry and his brother John W. would settle, John being there in the 1850 Census while Henry was still in Pickaway Co. In 1860 Pete found a record of a Thomas Chenoweth in Gallia Co., OH, born about 1804 in Ohio with a wife Belinda. It is unclear as to who this is. The Thomas of John was born in Maryland and the Thomas of James Frances in Virginia. This remains undetermined. Perhaps someday we will learn more.

A DNA Breakthrough, persistence pays off - Mar 2011

In 2001 Pete Chenoweth, Bill Chinworth and I met in Utah with Relative Genetics to see if the new techniques of DNA would serve us in understanding the genealogy of the Chenoweth family. Since that time we have had a DNA presentation at every reunion, and over the 10 year span since, obtained nearly 30 samples from various branches of the family and other lines. It became apparent to me at that first meeting, for DNA to be a real tool for the family genealogy it would require a large number of samples. Whereas most DNA genealogy usages help sort out strains within a given surname, sorting out various immigrations and groups, since the Chenoweth name in America is basically attributable to one known family (90%+), the Chenoweth name would yield fairly uniform results and it would only be by the mutations that randomly occurred in the 300 years since John Chenoweth that we could possibly gain real knowledge. The undertaking quickly becomes large as enough samples have to be obtained to establish a proper base line to sort out these 1 or sometime 2 mutation samples in order to understand what they mean.

We did have an initial success, in that we were able to isolate the DNA pattern for John Chenoweth the progenitor. This was done when some of our initial samples matched exactly even though we knew they were from different sons of John Chenoweth. A second insight was that Pete’s own sample turned out to be only one mutation off from that of John Chenoweth. That nearly half the samples we have are also off one mutation, albeit different mutations, shows how close Pete’s own line is to that of John. Surprisingly two of the samples we obtained from what we dub “unknown lines” matched 100% with John’s DNA, telling us in all likelihood these lines were, as we suspected with all the unknown lines, indeed part of the descendant family of John Chenoweth. Unfortunately, this DNA result does not tell us how; it only ensures that it is near certain. That is part of the beauty of the genealogy work we have been able to do on the family. The structure has been firmly established. We have a broad, well documented framework we now can use for the family. The DNA project is an attempt to assign values to the known knowledge base.

This December, we obtained a sample from the unknown line of John P. Chenowith, “the marrying man.” It yielded a single mutation that matched a known line we had for Nicholas Ruxton Chenoweth. John certainly was not part of the family of Nicholas. Our present knowledge tells us that John P. was a son of a Thomas Chenoweth who married Rachel Ann Swane on February 18, 1822 in Ross Co., OH. I have often speculated that this Thomas may well be a son of James Francis Chenoweth, a brother to Nicholas Ruxton. The list of children we have from Cora Hiatt lists a son Thomas among the 6 children of James Francis. Documents have confirmed 4 of those children, and tell us that a 5th was alive in the late 1830s. When we were notified of this result, I immediately sought some confirmation by asking a 2nd cousin for a sample in my own line which goes back to James Francis. I don’t know why it took me 10 years to think of this. I had asked my uncle repeatedly without success to help us in providing a sample of the line of Henry S., one of the sons of James Francis. Sadly Harry has since passed away, and limited the line of Henry S. to Albert’s son, Albert William. Voila! The sample I now sought and obtained had that same mutation.

This tells is two things. The mutation occurred with the father of Nicholas Ruxton and James Francis, that being Thomas, the son of the oldest son John. All descendants of this Thomas should carry this mutation. This is the first time we have had enough data to isolate a mutation to where it occurred, in this instance in the 3rd generation. It tells us that John P. was part of this family and our records tell us that Thomas who married Rachel Ann Swane was then indeed the brother to Henry S. and John W. and part of the family of James Francis and his first wife Rebecca Safley. It also tells us one more thing. The Thomas Chenoweth who married Ann Quick in Louisiana, whose DNA matches 100% with that of John, the progenitor, cannot then be the son of the Thomas who married Rachel Ruxton Moore and fathered Nicholas Ruxton, James Francis and John Thomas. More likely this leaves Thomas the son of John(3), himself a son of Thomas(2), as the only candidate we know who could be this Thomas in Louisiana. Unfortunately in this case we do not have a mutation to seize upon and it remains a guess without proof.

The thrust of all this, besides being our largest success in the DNA sampling we have acquired to date, we know now who John P. was and can fold his many descendants from his several children into their rightful place in the tree. This is a validation of the work and theories we have put forth and a celebration of adding to the family knowledge. Now it would be great to have a DNA sample from John P.’s child with Ruth Mickle to help confirm our theory on John’s many marriages.