| Notes |
- !NOTES:I don't know that John Pack is the father of the children I have listed, but he is old enough, and was in the right area to be their father. There really aren't any other choices that I'm aware of.;
!CENSUS:1790 Lincoln Co., NC, Eighth Company p. 119
Jno Pack age 16+ (bef 1774)
1-1-1-0-0
My analysis (who each person *might* be)
1m 16+ (before 1774) John Pack (1760/70)
1m -16 (1774/1790).. Son?
1f no age (bef 1790) Wife?
* Two houses from Peter Rhodes who married Betsy Pack this county 1785;
!CENSUS:1800 Rutherford Co., NC p. 135
John Pack age 26-44 (1755/1774)
31010-10010-0-0
* Benjamin Pack (1755/74) also listed same page.
My analysis (who each person *might* be)
1m 26-44 (1755/1774) John Pack (1760/70)
1m 10-15 (1784/1790) Son?
3m 0-9 (1790/1800).. 1. Son?
.................... 2. Son?
.................... 3. Son?
1f 26-44 (1755/1774) Wife?
1f 0-9 (1790/1800).. Daughter?
!CENSUS:1810 x
* Probably in Tennessee. 1810 census lost for that state.
* No Pack in Rutherford.
* No John Pack elsewhere who seems to be same man.
* Harrison Co., KY John Pack 10101-23211-0-0, not a good match.
* Sumter, Clarendon SC John Pack 00100-00000. Not a good match.
* Monroe Co., VA John Pack 200010-20110-0-2. Not a good match;
!MARRIAGE BOND:23 Aug 1810 Rutherford Co., NC
John Pack & Sally Allison, John Allison, bm.
* For some reason the transcribed version lists him as "Jack" Pack, but the marriage bond clearly shows "John" Pack twice and signed the same way;
!CENSUS:1820 Rutherford Co., NC p. 382
Jno Pack Snr age 45+ (bef 1775)
320001-11010-0-0
My analysis (who each person *might* be)
1m 45+ (before 1775) John Pack (1760/70)
2m 10-15 (1804/1810) 1. Son?
.................... 2. Son?
3 m 0-9 (1810/1820). 1. Son?
.................... 2. Son?
.................... 3. Son?
1f 26-44 (1775/1794) 2nd wife? (1780/90)
1f 10-15 (1804/1810) Daughter?
1f 0-9 (1810/1820).. Lucy Pack (c1817) dau
!CENSUS:1830 McMinn Co., TN p. 192
John Pack age 60-69 (1760/1770)
0212000001-0101001
My analysis (who each person *might* be)
1m 60-69 (1760/1770) John Pack (1760/70)
2m 15-19 (1810/1815) Son?
.................... 2. Son?
1m 10-14 (1815/1820) Son?
2m 5-9 (1820/1825).. Son?
.................... 2. Jackson Pack (c1822) son
1f 40-49 (1780/1790) Wife?
1f 15-19 (1810/1815) Lucy Pack (c1817) dau
1f 5-9 (1820/1825).. Nancy Pack (c1825) dau
!CENSUS:1840 Rutherford Co., NC p 323
John Pack age 60-69 (1770/80)
000110001-00011001
My analysis (who each person *might* be)
1m 60-69 (1770/1780) John Pack (1760/70)
1m 20-29 (1810/1820) Son?
1m 15-19 (1820/1825) Jackson Pack (c1822) son
1f 50-59 (1780/1790) Sarah Ellison Pack (c1790) 2nd wife
1f 20-29 (1810/1820) Lucy Pack (c1817) dau
1f 15-19 (1820/1825) Nancy Pack (c1825) dau
!NOTES:The children I have listed for John Pack are those that I'm very confident are actually siblings. I'm also *reasonably* sure they are John Pack's children, but could be wrong;
!NOTES:Why do I believe they are siblings? Here's a summary.
1. Samuel Pack (c1790-aft 1870).
2. Jeremiah Pack (c1796)
3. Jane Pack (c1803-aft 1860) m James Henderson.
4. Thomas Pack (c1804-aft 1870).
5. Unknown Pack who married Rebecca Henderson.
6. William Pack (1810/20).
Reason 1. Samuel Pack was bondsman for Jane Pack's 1818 marriage in Sumner Co., TN, which was a long way from home. It makes sense for him to perform this duty if he was her older brother.
Reason 2. Thomas Pack was near Jane Pack Henderson over many years in different counties. She named one of her sons Thomas, perhaps in his honor.
Reason 3. Rebecca Henderson was a sister of James Henderson, Jane Pack's husband. It was common for siblings to marry siblings, though of course that isn't enough to prove that Rebecca's Mr. Pack was actually a sibling of Jane, Samuel, and Thomas, but I suspect so at the moment.
Reason 4. Jeremiah Pack was in Rutherford NC, Sumner TN, McMinn Co., TN with Thomas Pack, James Henderson and William Henderson, as well as John Pack Sr in 1830, and in 1850 Cherokee Co., NC near Thomas Pack.
Reason 5. William was in McMinn Co., TN in 1840, though after his possible siblings had all left.;
|
1770 - Aft 1840 (> 71 years)
