Back
Chapter from a Kenyon College Term Paper:
for the course "Between Europe & America"
Family Social History
By
George N Holloway
April 29, 1977
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Maternal Ancestors
Much more is known about my mother's ancestors than
about my father's. One reason is that more research has gone into my
mother's side. This research has confirmed some information and unearthed some more.
Much of what is known about my father's side is very dubious and has yet to be proven.
The family tree of my mother contains ancestors born in England, Sweden and
Germany. Her father is descended from Germans and her mother from Swedish and
English immigrants. My mother, Lisabeth Marie Feind, was born in Mitchell,
Dakota in 1926. How her ancestors arrived in South Dakota in the late 19th
century fits in well with the generalization the the "old" immigrants and the
English settlers tended to spread out away from the centers of commerce, the ports,
the cities into the wilderness, farmland, Indian territory. Coming to America
they arrived in centers located in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Massachusetts. They
found their home in very small towns or simply in a group of farms. But in their
behavior runs another pattern in connection with the direction and timing of this
movement. That is, this part of the family almost without exception showed
1) a desire to move west, and 2) a desire to move as far westward as was possible
given the transportation at the time in which they lived. This tendency to settle
at the end of the road (Indian path) or railroad line is evident with each of the
three ethnic groups to some degree.
Back to Table of Contents
I. English
I am the great-great-great-grandson of Irwin Harris Granger, who
represents the sixth generation in the direct line of descendants of Launcelot
Granger. Very little is known about the background of the 17th century English
immigrant besides what can be inferred from his name. "Granger" means barn or
granary [1]
and is usually associated with English farmers. Thus having no
information on this family of Grangers in England before the 17th century
(or afterwards), except that they were originally farmers we can only conclude
that the
"Grangers had no family pride, grand traditions, or true blood to import into
the land of their adoption."
In America they would have to "make their way without favor or aid."[2]
We would not expect Launcelot to be from a rich family background since
these people generally did not emigrate by their own choice. For the
same reason we would not expect him to be extremely poor. But there is
reason to believe that Launcelot came to America unwillingly and without
regard for his family status in England. He could have come from a very
rich family. And he was probably not from the poorest of origins since he was
fairly well off in the New World.
We do not know the names of his parents, when or where he was born in England,
nor when he came to the colonies. There is no record of him ever existing until
1647 when he is found to have sued a man in Essex County, Massachusetts. The
suit was in his own name so, if he was old enough to sue, he was born no later
than 1626.[3] The first record that James N. Granger cites in his 1895 genealogy
of the family is a list of all "freeman" to be paying taxes in Ipswich, Essex
County in 1648. This is according to the contributor of the list, the first
record of all (162) freemen in Ipswich. Each "ynhabitant" (no mention of freemen,
church members, or voters is made in the whole record) was expected to
"subscribe" a particular sum of money to be paid to Major Denison "in way of
gratuitye to encourage him in his military helpfulness unto them". This shows
the concern of people in Ipswich over possible Indian attacks. Launcelot is
listed as being assessed four shillings which is a greater sum than most of the
subscriptions listed.[4] This record also indicated that Launcelot was 21 by 1648.
James N. Granger does not believe that Launcelot was a freeman since there is no
evidence that he was a church member. "Church of England men and other 'children
of Satan' must pay their dues to the colony sa well as the orthodox."[5] It is safe
to assume that Launcelot was never a church member while he was living near the
coast. Ipswich was incorporated in 1634 and since then its land was owned only
by freemen by decree of the General Court of the colony in 1630, which until
1691 prevented anyone who was not a church member to be elected freemen (and
thus own land).[6] No record has been found to show that Launcelot owned land,
held office, or voted in Ipswich. Nor did he own land in Newbury to which place
(see map) he moved in 1654 after he married Joanna Adams of that town. There,
he leased the land, Kent's Island, that he lived on.[7] The complete list of Newbury
church members exists, and between 1654 and 1700 Launcelot is not listed.[8] This
does not mean that he was part of a minority at Newbury, but it does mean that
he was looked down upon. Many colonists could not agree completely with Puritan
doctrines and "by the 1670's at least half (estimates run as high as four-fifths)
of the residents of Massachusetts Bay were unregenerate, which meant... they
could not vote in civil elections".[9] The only records of Launcelot at Newbury are
the lease of Kent's Island and his "signature and remarks on an undated protest"
regarding a counter petition to a petition presented by one John Emory to the
General Court. Launcelot said that "he was deluded by" the petition which
concerned the payment of rates or taxes by 68 people of Newbury.[10]
Why did Launcelot come to the colonies? Since he was not a church member
while on the coast, any religious reasons should be discarded. If he came over
to obtain land he was very patient; he apparently did not own any land before
1674, the year he was granted land in western Massachusetts. Moreover, he seems
to have had the money to own land if he wanted to while on the coast. He leased
a whole island which cost him a good sum of money. In Ipswich he paid a
disproportionately high tax but could not own land. If he wanted to own land he
had enough money to move where he could own land; yet he renewed the seven year
lease twice. If land and religion were not the reasons behind his emigration,
what was? There is a fairy tale-type story about Launcelot which neatly answers
this question. The story is in written form[11] and James N. Granger quotes it
word for word:
"Launcelot Granger was born in the west of England, and, when a lad of
twelve or fourteen years of age, he was stolen from his mother (his
father being dead) and brought to Plymouth in Massachusetts, where he
was sold (apprenticed) to serve two years for his passage. He had served
on the ship as a cabin boy.
"He afterwards married a lady named
Adams, and settled east of Boston, where he lived till he had two
children.
"Being the oldest of his family he returned
England to obtain his inheritance..."
Launcelot and Joanna had eleven children born to them at Newbury. He
would have left before November of 1658 when his third child, George,
was born. His second child, Thomas, is in the line through which the story
was received, while George is in the line I am descended from (See Granger
Genealogy). To continue the story, he supposedly met two highway
robbers as he was walking toward his family home in England. Not giving
them his money without a fight, he fought them off, killing one with his
quarter staff.
"When he arrived at the next village he made oath to what he had done,
before a magistrate, and was suffered to proceed on his journey. The
inhabitants of the village found the man who was slain to be one of their
"honest" citizens.
"When he arrived at his mother's house he found his
younger brother in possession of his estate, and very much displeased to
see him, and, it is supposed, hired assassins to dispatch him..."
When these three assassins turned on Launcelot, he killed two of them with
his quarter staff, scaring off the other one. After being absolved from all
guilt by the magistrate, he went back to America, "meeting difficulties in
obtaining his inheritance".[12]
James N. Granger believes that at least the first part of this story is
true. He believes that his being kidnapped as a boy and brought to America
to be sold as an apprentice "is fully within the bounds of possibility and
reason", based on an examination of apprentice laws and similar incidents in
New England. In addition, this story is confirmed by other members in different
branches of the family.[13] That he was brought as a boy to Plymouth is also
supported by the fact that "Although the surname occurs early in that colony,
no relationship to Launcelot is evidenced or hinted in Plymouth Colony Records".[14]
Therefore, since Launcelot came over apparently alone and without any religious
reason, this story provides a good explanation of why this Englishman in the
17th century would be living in a colony controlled by people so "bitter in
their hatred of those outside their church organizations; they refused to
associate with them."[15]
Despite this, Launcelot married Joanna the daughter of Robert Adams, a
"Puritan of the strictest kind". James N. Granger says that a marriage between
a Puritan and a non-Puritan would be allowed if the bridegroom was rich.[16] This
is another indication that Launcelot was a fairly wealthy man. Robert Adams
was born and married in England. They came with their two children to Salem
in 1638 and moved to Newbury in 1640. He was a farmer and a tailor, had nine
children in all, was a man of "good estate" (he left 140 acres valued at 600
pounds when he died in 1682), and he was a leading church member. Being a
magistrate he married his 20 year old daughter to Launcelot in January, 1654.
The Adams homestead was situated just 2000 feet away from Kent's Island where
his daughter and son-in-law lived for the next twenty years.[17]
Mr. Adams must have approved of the marriage.
Launcelot leased Kent's Island in the same month that he was married. Yet
another indication of the wealth of Launcelot is that these 258 acres were
the "choicest" of land near the coast, and the house that he leased was the
best that could be had in colonial Massachusetts in the 1650's. The house
had just been built by the landlord, Mr. Kent. It was two-storied with an
attic. The ground floor consisted of two large (about 20 feet square) rooms,
the kitchen and the company room, three fireplaces inside a large chimney, a
bedroom, a lean-to, and a pantry.[18] The house was constructed with large oak
timbers, some 16 inches in diameter. The house was protected against indians
with bricks between the inner and outer shells of the walls. Along with the
house, Launcelot leased 16 cows and four oxen. The total cost of leasing the
island, house and livestock was 46 pounds a year, for seven years.[19] Launcelot
continued the lease until 1674 when he moved west. What he did to be able to
pay the lease and support his large family is not certain. It is assumed,
though, that he farmed while in the Bay Colony.
So, Launcelot Granger seems to have been taken to America as a boy, presumably
without any money, and seems to have become wealthy enough to be among those
paying higher taxes in Ipswich in 1648, to marry the daughter of a devout
Puritan in 1654, to support eleven children, and to live in a higher class
house and lease a nice, large island near the coast for over twenty years.
From all this one can see that Launcelot was wealthy at a time when not many
colonists were. In the middle of the 17th century immigration to the colonies
had ceased because Puritans had gained political control in England. The
Massachusetts colonies had already become overcrowded by 1640. The great surplus
production continued after people stopped coming to America and thus resulted in
a great decrease in prices. The depression thus created did not seem to injure
Launcelot, possibly because he did not own any land, or buildings that could
have depreciated in value.
That he wanted to own land by the 1670's could be the primary reason he left
Kent's Island to live in the Connecticut River valley. The decision to move
with his wife and ten children (John, the eldest, had moved earlier) was probably
based on many factors, including a desire to own land, all of which seemed to
climax in the early 1670's at Newbury. About this time the Connecticut River valley
was being settled. Word got around that the land was much more suited to farming
than that near the coast. On September 14, 1674, Launcelot was granted 60 acres
of land in Suffield, a town south of Springfield on the western bank of the river,
a part of the wilderness that was just being settled (see Map A). Major John Pynchon,
the son of the pioneer who settled Springfield, petitioned the General Court in
1670 for a plantation west of the river. The General Court ordered that, of the
seven square miles to be settled, 500 acres be reserved for the Court's own use
and that no more than 80 acres of land be granted to any one person until five
years had gone by and twenty families had settled there.[20]
Major Pynchon decided to grant the lands according "to the rank and estates of
the applicants". The grants were of 80 acres to the wealthiest persons, and of
40 acres to the lowest of rank and wealth. Grants in between were of 60 or 50
acres. That Launcelot received a 60 acre grant is one more indication of his
relatively high position in America. His sons Thomas and George received 40
acres each even though George was only 14 years old.[21]
In the 1670's land was hard to find near the coast; many colonists looked to the
Connecticut River valley and its milder climate and richer soil. In 1673, a road
through the wilderness, the Bay Path, was laid out from Boston to Springfield.
This road was opened in 1674, and its construction may have influenced Launcelot's
decision to buy land in that year. It would have been difficult to bring a large
family and belongings west on Indian paths. The road made it possible for a
family to reach Springfield in 14 days.[22]
Another reason why Launcelot may have chosen to buy land in Suffield was the
temporary exemption from paying rates which the settlers received then. On
June 3, 1674, just three months before Launcelot received his grant, those
organizing the town asked that the exemption continue for seven years, "it being
a very woody place and difficult to winne." The court, when it considered the
request, shortened the term of the exemption to just four years.[23]
A final reason which I could find to explain Launcelot's brave venture into
the wilderness concerned the religious bigotry at Newbury. Reverend Thomas Parker
settled at Ipswich in 1634 and the next year helped to found the town of
Newbury. Rev. Parker assumed sole control of the town government as well as the
church. The towns people disagreed repeatedly with this situation, advocating
majority rule. It is a fair assumption that Launcelot was on the side of the
towns people since, even though he could not participate in the politics of the
town, he must have been continually upset with the treatment his family
received as a result of this tyrannic rule; Parker held all inhabitants to
strict adherence to the Puritannical laws; "one tything man was appointed to
each ten families, and their duty was to see that their charges violated no law,
spiritual or civil". Seemingly harmless things such as lighthearted proverbs and
silk bonnets were outlawed. In 1671, the town attempted once again to get rid
of their minister but the General Court's decision was again in favor of Rev.
Parker.[24] Launcelot and his family might have moved partly because they wanted
more control over their own lives. An "able minister" was also required in
Suffield in order for the grants to be valid, and his name was Rev. Younglove,
who like Rev. Parker "antagonized his congregation against him". But this
minister died soon after the Suffield people voted to petition the General Court
against him. Three years after his death in 1690, Launcelot's son George married
his daughter Lydia Younglove.[25]
In Suffield, Launcelot was a freeman, voted, and was elected for several terms
to the important office of "measurer of Land to be Lay'd out in Suffield".[26]
Here he had, for the first time in America, some say in what happened to him and his
family. He died there in 1689. Therefore, the advantages in moving to Suffield
in 1674 which might have influenced Launcelot were
1) the chance to own land,
2) the freedom from Puritannical bigotry that existed in Newbury for so long,
3) the benefits of farming and living in the valley of the Connecticut River,
4) the opening up of a road to the valley in 1674, and
5) the benefits of settling in Suffield in 1674 such as exemption from payment
of taxes and, more important, the democratic type of government that existed there.
There were disadvantages besides those connected with leaving the nice
accommodations at Kent's Island. Launcelot learned of one soon after he arrived
in Suffield. King Philip's War forced all the inhabitants out of the town.
Launcelot fled to Westfield which is further west but was being fortified rather
than evacuated. An Indian fight occurred there on October 27, 1675, which killed
three men, and seriously wounded Launcelot in the leg. He was said to have been
extremely lame for the rest of his life.[27]
After he died his family began to spread out from Suffield. Of his children
living in the town, Thomas was the oldest and he became very involved in civil
matters. He was selectman in 1694 and in 1722 he was given the second pew as his
seat in the meetinghouse; seats were granted by the town officers according to
estate, age, office, and "place of improvement made", showing that he was highly
regarded by the community. In 1715, he finished a bridge which he had engineered
himself.[28]
In contrast to Thomas, Launcelot's third son presented difficulties to the town.
In 1691, the Court records that, "George Granger of Suffield being presented to
this court for neglecting publick worship of God, etc., petitioning this court
pleading his sickness, weakness, and want of clothes this cold winter, this court
ordered that the worshipful Col. Pynchon sen for him, before him, and admonish
him."[29] In 1693, he married Lydia Younglove and they had ten children, the last born
in 1715. In 1716, the town records show that his wife had become a public charge.
In 1717, the town sued George for expenses t keep up his wife. Soon afterward
George moved a few miles west to Turkey Hills parish in Simsbury, Conn.[30]
George's ninth child Daniel was born in 1710 and was married to Elizabeth Old
of Westfield, Mass., where he lived when his first son Zaccheus was born in 1734.
Daniel was a drummer in the Revolutionary Army as an old man. Before the war he
moved to Skenesborough, which became Whitehall, New York. This town was founded
in 1761. Other families of the children of George also moved into New York at
this time. George, Jr., married three times, living in Simsbury CT, Westfield
MA, and West Granville NY. He had seven children by each wife in each of the
three towns. Zaccheus had ten children, the fifth being David, born in 1779.
David lived at Pike, Wyoming County, in western New York state, as did other
members of the family of Zaccheus. The third son of Zaccheus, Peter, was among
a group of less than ten men from Whitehall who founded Pike in 1805 (or 1806).
The land was purchased from the Holland Land Company.[31]
David followed his brother Peter to Pike, arriving there before 1812 when it is
discovered that he paid highway taxes for Greater Nunda (which then included Pike).
[32]
Many branches of the Granger family moved west, but this branch seems to have
been the one which led the others and which went farthest west. Daniel is believed
to be the first Granger to have settled west of New England.[33] This was before the
rush for land which occurred after the Revolution. By 1840 there were 2,000
people at Pike.[34] Other Grangers followed their aunts, uncles and cousins into
the more attractive farmland of western New York; many of them must have been
surprised when they saw the Genesee valley, an unforested plain that did not
require clearing.[35] As another example of this magnetism, Gideon Granger (1767-1822)
and his son Francis (1792-1860) were both born in Suffield and descended from
Launcelot. Gideon was Postmaster-General for 13 years under Presidents Jefferson
and Madison. He retired to Canandaigua in Western New York very near where
other Grangers had settled.[36] Still another example is my ancestor Irwin Harris
Granger, who settled on a farm near Oberlin, Ohio in 1854, but decided seven
years later to follow his eldest son Hiram and eldest daughter Orilla to Le Center,
Minnesota.
Irwin Harris Granger married Mary Jane Graves in 1827. Her mother was Sabra
Roundy, a descendent of Philip Roundy who came to Salem from England (see Roundy),
The Roundys in America are contemporary with the Grangers. Philip
seems to have been English, even though "Roundy" has French origins, coming to
Salem between 1628 and 1640. As with Launcelot there is no record of when Philip
came or from where.[37] But whereas Launcelot moved west with his family, Philip
died in Salem in 1678, and only after three generations did the family move west.
Philip is more representative of a settler in Puritan Massachusetts. Capt. Collins
argues that he had come to this country, (unlike Launcelot) "with others (Puritans)
with whom he and his family were so closely associated."[38] He married Ann Bush in
Salem in 1671, but she was his second wife. Mark, wounded in King Philip's War,
and Robert were sons by his first wife. Robert lived in Salem until 1685 the year
he sold his one acre lot.[39] In October of 1698 he bought a piece of land, a house
and a barn for 180 pounds in Beverly, a town very near Salem (see Map). The record
of the sale identifies him as "Robert Roundy of Beverly, yeoman". But it seems
that he became a "coaster" (a carrier of goods and people along the coast, a
common occupation since travel was easier by sea than be land between the colonies).
He died in Beverly in 1715. At that time his buildings and lands were valued at
350 pounds.[40]
His grandson, also named Robert, was born in Beverly in 1704. He was a weaver
and decided to move away from the coast to Connecticut. He started a family in
Windham; his son John was one of the first settler in Rockingham, Vermont. John's
son, Capt. John Roundy, Jr., was a Connecticut volunteer discharged in 1775 when
the regiment was discontinued. John and his family took an oath agreeable to the
Constitution" of Vermont on March 3, 1778.[41] This constitution, adopted less than
a year previous, July 1777, was the first to provide manhood suffrage.[42] The family
were citizens of the town and seems to have been very respectable while in Vermont,
being remembered for among other things their Connecticut "ideals and methods"
which they brought to the state.[43] Thus they appear to be more free-thinking than
most people at this time in Vermont. On a more concrete foundation, they were
very active in religious and town matters. John was moderator for four yearly
town meetings, selectman two years, and representative of Rockingham to the
Vermont legislature five consecutive years; all of these offices held between
1780 and 1790. Capt. Roundy was selectman with his father in 1787, and the next
year.[44] Back in June 1789, John was among the main body of 16 men who were
"constituted as a Regular Baptist Church". John, Jr. was also affiliated with
this, the First Baptist Church of Rockingham. The town subsequently voted to
share a "proportionate amount of time" in the old meetinghouse with the
Congregationalists.[45]
Sabra, Captain Roundy's daughter, married Selah Graves in the First Church of
Rockingham on April 6, 1794.[46] They lived at Pike until 1854. Their daughter
Mary Jane married Irwin Harris Granger who, as mentioned, bought a farm near
Oberlin. The Grangers' two older children moved to Le Sueur Center, Minnesota
in 1857, one year before Minnesota was admitted to the Union. On the first
day of June, 1861, Mr. Granger "became very much discontented to live with part
of his family so far away and persuaded our grandmother" (my great-great aunt)
to move with their other children, Sarah, William and Sabra Roundy Granger,
selling the Ohio farm.[47] This fits in with the pattern of migration already
described. So far in this history, all ancestors have been descended from
colonial New England families.[48] Getting old, Irwin Harris Granger died in 1864
soon after he built the first frame house in Le Sueur County". He is also
credited with "driving the first span of horses to enter Le Sueur County, as
far as was known".[49] It is interesting that this family from Massachusetts should
repeatedly move from growing towns and settle in areas of wilderness. Sarah,
one of Irwin's daughters said of her brother's life in Minnesota after they
arrived, 'I thought it would be bad but not as bad as this".[50] They, or course,
met other pioneers in this country. Charles Nelson Perry was Sabra Roundy
Granger Bowen's second husband. He was a cabinetmaker and had been an early
settler of "Cleveland village" in Ohio and a surveyor.[51]
Back to Table of Contents
II. Swedish
Minnesota is where the New Englanders finally settled. The family did move
further west into South Dakota but this can be attributed to the Germans and
Swedes who arrived in Wisconsin and Minnesota in the 19th century.
John Seastrand came to America in 1869 at the age of 27. He settled first in
Vasa, Minnesota. In 1853 some Swedish immigrants led by Hans Mattson founded a
town in the wilderness which was meant to be a Swedish settlement, named after
a Swedish king. Mattson himself became one of the reasons why so many Swedes
settled in the state; there were 3,680 living in the state in 1860, 39,000 in
1880.[52] He personally encouraged many of his fellow countrymen to emigrate. The
influence of Hans Mattson on John Seastrand and others like him should not be
underestimated. Seastrand came to this country in September, after he had served
one term in the Swedish Army.[53] The Army was one reason why Hans Mattson left Sweden:
"... knowing that the chances for advancement in the Swedish Army during times
of peace were at this time very slim for young men not favored with titles of
nobility, and also being tired of monotonous garrison duty, my friend Eustrom
and myself soon resolved to leave the service and try our luck in a country
where inherited names and titles were not necessary conditions of success."[54]
In 1868 Mattson went to Sweden to recruit emigrants.[55] From 1867 to 1871 Mattson
was, among other things, a land agent for the Lake Superior and Mississippi
Railroad. He was probably responsible for advertisements like this one
circulated among the Swedish:
"3000 Laborers Wanted... Mechanics are needed at Duluth! Wages to Masons and
Plasterers, $4.80 per day... 10,000 emigrants... June 14, 1869... Lake Superior
and Mississippi R.R."
This was only three months before John Seastrand came to Goodhue County (See
Map B). The emigrants
who settled on the lands of the company received free transportation along the
railroad from Duluth to St. Paul, about 120 miles (most immigrants came to the
area via steamer on the Great Lakes, Duluth being the westernmost Great Lake port).[56]
John worked as a stone mason for five years, before he was appointed to the
Red Wing police force (1876). Only a year after his arrival he moved from Vasa
to Red Wing, a larger town on the Mississippi River. His home was located in the
city right, on the river where it took a wide bend. Here he became well respected,
being listed in the town records as holding the office of City Marshall 1879-1886,
Health commissioner 1879-1882, Chief of Police 1887-1890, Constable 1894. He also
became co-partner in a real estate firm on Main Street. In 1894 the city's population
was about 8,000.[57]
Seastrand may have other reasons for leaving. He came from Jonkoping, Sweden,
a lakeside fishing village that was quickly becoming industrial in the southern
part of the country. From 1867 to 1869 there were serious crop failures in Sweden
and, with over population a problem, an agricultural depression loomed over
the country.[58] Seastrand and most of the Swedes in Minnesota fit the general
political pattern of the Scandinavian immigrants. He was a member of the
Scandinavia Benevolent Society and apparently a Republican since his funeral
notice appeared in the daily Republican newspaper of the city.[59] Mattson was
a Republican even though he "received much assistance" from the Democratic Party.[60]
Back to Table of Contents
III. German
John Seastrand is the only immigrant ancestor of mine that I know of who showed
a strong attachment to his native land. He was not a farmer and lived in
moderately populated towns with other Swedes. He immediately settled down and did
not shift around like the English did. He became politically active like many of
the English did. The Germans, after some shifting, eventually did settle down
but not in a previously settled area; they chose their homes away from the towns
and the politics. These Germans, while living in isolated locations began to
lose much of their "Germanness". There is no evidence of any ethnic attachment
to Germany or community (except language) such as the Swedes showed. One reason
may be the fact that my German ancestors came from very different parts of Germany,
Wurttemberg and Pomerania. But little could be found on their life in Germany.
In the German genealogy (See
Feind,
Robish and
Keller)
four different individuals or groups came to America:
First, Michael Keller who apparently came over alone; next is the Robish family,
J. George and his wife Elizabeth Banker; then the Feinds, Julius and his wife
(their baby girl and an older sister of Julius also emigrated), and finally the
Haag family, including Johann George, his wife and their children. The Haags
and Michael Keller were from Wurttemberg (a region of Southwest Germany). The
Feinds appear to be descended from the Pomerania region in Northeast Germany
(near Poland). We do not know what part of the country the Robish family came
from. [From research since this paper was written, the Robishes may have come from
Bavaria.]
J. George Robish was a farmer born in Germany in 1813. "He migrated to America
about 1840, and located about a mile and a half east of what is now Jefferson City
(Wisconsin), there being then two small shanties on the present town site". He
lived in a log cabin. When his oldest son enlisted during the Civil War, he moved
into Jefferson to start a mercantile business (he also operated a meat market),
not being able to farm by himself.[61] His son John (born in America in 1848; note
anglicized name) started farming in 1869 and worked on his father's farm from
1871 to 1876, when he bought a meat market in Jefferson City. In 1883 he left
for Hamlin County, South Dakota, filing a home claim and a tree claim.[62] Timber
claims were one reason why so many settlers were suddenly attracted to this area
at this time. In 1878 Congress passed a law "to encourage the growth of timber
on the wester prairies... any person who would plant protect, and keep in a
healthy growing condition ten acres of timber, might secure title to a quarter
section".[63] Of course, the Homestead Act of 1862 was the primary reason why this
land was going fast. But it was not until after 1878 that this part of the
prairie could be farmed profitably; since in that year the Winona and St. Peter
branch of the Chicago and Northwestern railroad was rebuilt so that its terminus
was at Watertown, S.D., approximately 20 miles from where John Robish filed his
claims. Another railroad (Wisconsin, Minnesota and Pacific Railway Co.) had its
western end at Watertown by 1884.[64] The settlers needed transportation to their
homesteads as well as transportation out to the grain markets. The railroad
fulfilled this need.
John Robish was a Republican and a member and trustee of the Evangelical
Association.[65] He married Catherine Keller in 1869. Her father was Michael
Leonhard Keller, born in Wurttemberg in 1812 (or 1813). He came to America about
1833 and spent seven years as a blacksmith in New York and Ohio. After a year
back in Germany, he farmed in Jefferson Co., Wisconsin until 1889 when he moved
to Hamlin Co., S.D. His sons Charles and George J. had come there in 1883,
when the Robishes and Kellers formed the "nucleus" of a church congregation
which grew to become a part of the Dakota Conference of the Evengelical
Association in only a year or so.[66] There was still no church building until
1898 when George Keller donated land for the building which is still used today.
Soon after these Germans came to South Dakota, George established on his land a
store and post office which was identified as Kellerton.[67] George was an itinerant
minister serving the church he belonged to and others nearby.[68]
Michael Keller married Rosina Haag in Wisconsin. The Haag family is also from
Wurttemberg. Johann George was born in 1788 and he and his sons were cabinetmakers
who had traveled to many European cities to learn this trade. They followed
their second son, Johann Adam, to Milwaukee, in 1846 and settled among other people
from the same part of Germany. They "bought land there, farmed, sold cord wood,
made coffins, traded with friendly Winnebago Indians." In 1868 Johann led the
family to Sumner, Iowa to settle there.[69] Rosina was the fifth child of Johann
George, being born in Germany in 1826.
Julius Feind came to America to farm near Jefferson, Wisconsin around the year
1873. His daughter Augusta was born in Germany. But his son Edward was born in
Wisconsin. Edward came to Hamlin County in order to work for John Robish who
probably knew him in Jefferson. Augusta married Charles Wendling who owned land
adjacent to the Robish farm and to a man named Wolfmeyer, who married a member of
the Keller family and eventually sold his land to Edward.[70] Therefore in the area
around what is known as Kellerton, there was a rectangular piece of land divided
into four quarters each owned by a member of this extended family. (See Diagram 1 Kellerton Land Ownership).
Language and customs at first were probably very important to these people.
They spoke German but did not try desperately to hold onto their language. Michael
and Rosina Haag Keller each have tombstones in the Kellerton Church cemetery which
have German inscriptions. Julius Feind spoke just a little English and wrote
letters in German to his son, Edward. Edward and Rosa Robish Feind had eleven
children and it seems that the whole family "knew German pretty well". But
the family was bilingual since Rosa taught school in English. German was
spoken with only a little English by the two oldest sons John and Ernest, my
grandfather, but when they went to public school the family began to use English
almost exclusively.[71] Education of the children represented the most experience
these people had had with American ideals and language. That they were able to
adjust so quickly and completely to the English language is illustrative of
the overall German experience in America. At first language (and custom) was
very important, much more so than politics. They spread out in farms thus
discouraging or else showing the lack of a need for German "benevolent" societies.
These four groups of German immigrant lived together in the absence of any
outside American influence in South Dakota for a few decades at the turn of the
century. These people have become so well assimilated into American society that
despite 1) the fact that Ernest Nelson Feind (born S.D. 1898) lives with us in
Philadelphia, 2) being one quarter German, and 3) the irrelevant fact that we
lived in a section of the city called Germantown since 1958, I know almost
nothing of German customs, present or past, not to mention the language.
Yet this is the only change I can see in the history of these German relatives
until the generation of my parents. While ethnicity and language have declined
greatly in importance, their dedication to both religion and farming has not. My
grandfather is a minister, having come east to study theology at Princeton. Other
members of the family are ministers, also. The post office and store are gone
but the Kellerton Church remains. Across the gravel road, Edward's farm is still
farmed by two of his children. Most of his children live and farm in Hamlin
County. Of course, my mother represents the first generation in her family
which has lived in a major American city, has not farmed, and has settled a great
distance east of her place of birth. Thus, as far as my family is concerned,
the "giant migration" of Germans, Swedes and Englishmen in America is over.
Back to Table of Contents
Much of this paper is based on information collected by my grandmothers Rose M.
Holloway and Leila M. Feind, and added to by my mother, Lisabeth M. Holloway, who
has visited most of the towns in which our relatives have lived in order to gain
most of the factual information used in this paper. I accompanied her on a trip
to Upstate New York (Pike).
Footnotes
1James N. Granger, Launcelot Granger of Newbury, Mass,
and Suffield, Conn. A genealogical History, Hartford, Conn., 1895, p. 11
2Ibid., p. 20
3Communicated by Peter G. Van der Poel, M.A., Ruxton, Md.
"Notes on the origin of Launcelot Granger", The American Genealogist, vol 29(4),
Oct. 1953, p. 246; from Quarterly Courts of Essex Co., Mass. 1:130.
4James N. Granger, op cit., p. 34; from
Mass. General and Historical Registervol II, p. 50,
contributed by Mr. Luther Wait who assumes the list is that of all freemen in the town.
5Ibid., p. 35
6Ibid., pp. 32-33
7Ibid., p. 42
8Ibid., p. 44
9John A. Garraty, The American Nation (2nd ed.), Harper and
Row Publishers, N.Y., 1966, p. 85 of volume I.
10James N. Granger, op cit., p. 41
11On pp. 25-26 of his genealogy, James N. Granger gives the source of
this story. It was written down by Ebenezer Granger (1781-1822), a lawyer, whose aunt, Sarah Granger
Harmon, told it to him. Sarah was a granddaughter of Thomas, the second son of Launcelot. She was
born in 1731 only a year after Thomas died and 42 years after Launelot died. James N. Granger
says Ebenezer wrote the story down "at the time" he heard it from Sarah.
12Ibid., pp. 26-27
13Ibid., p. 28
14The American Genealogist, op cit., p. 245
15James N. Granger, op cit., p. 29
16Ibid., p. 29
17Ibid., pp. 36-37. Another possible theory: Launcelot is said
to have been a stockily built man of medium full height and good with a quarterstaff.
Perhaps Mr. Adams saw him as a source of protection against Indians.
18Ibid., pp. 39-40
19Ibid., pp. 38-39
20Ibid., p. 45
21Ibid., pp. 46-47
22Ibid., p. 49
23Ibid., p. 46
24Ibid., pp. 42-44
25Ibid., pp. 61-62
26Ibid., p. 52; from records of first town meeting, Suffield,
3/9/1681-2.
27Ibid., p. 51; from records of Rev. Taylor of Westfield,
confirmed by family historian Drake.
28Ibid., p. 60; from records, Suffield town meeting on
9/21/1722. The town gave him six shillings for the six years of work he put into the
bridge.
29Ibid., p. 52; from Court records of 1691.
30Ibid., pp. 62-63; from town records of meetings of
11/29/1716 and 6/19/1717.
31H. Wells Hand, 1808-1908: Centennial History of the Town of Nunda,
Rochester (N.Y.) Herald Press, 1908, p. 131
32Ibid., pp. 108-109
33James N. Granger, op cit., p. 53
34Hand, op cit., p. 109
35Neil Adams McNall, An Agricultural History of the Genesee Valley
1790-1860, Univ. of Pa. Press, Phila., 1952, pp. 7-8
36Dictionary of American Biography, "Gideon Granger" and "Francis
Granger". Francis was also appointed to the office of Postmaster General.
37Capt George K. Collins, Genealogy of the Roundy Family in America,
Syracuse Public Library, Local History Dept., 1915, preface.
38Ibid., preface
39Ibid., p. 5
40Essex Historical Collection, 55, "Beverly in 1700", 1919, p. 272
41Everett Edmund Roundy, The Roundy Family in America: From Sixteen Hundreds,
pp. 150-3
42M. B. Jones, Vermont in the Making, Archon Books, 1968, p. 389
43Roundy, op cit., pp. 147-8
44Ibid., p. 153
45Ibid., p. 154
46Rockingham, Vt. Records of the First Church, copied by Thomas Bellows Peck,
Esq., of Walpole, N.H., vol. 56, p. 255
47Transcription of a letter from Mary Perry White (mother's great aunt)
48There is good reason to believe that the Graves family- a third line other than
Granger and Roundy -- has roots in Massachusetts(Hatfield and Hartford; (see Map A) although the exact progression backward
is confused by the existence of a couple of Graves families in or near Rockingham.
49Le Center Leader, 1/15/1931, p. 4
50Transcription op cit.
51St. Peter (Minn.) Herald, 8/26/1910, p. 12
52Yearbook of the Swedish Historical Society of America, vol. X,
1924-5, St. Paul, Minn., p. 89
53History of Goodhue County, Wood, Alley & Co., Red Wing, Minn., 1878, p. 530.
54Roots, Vol. 1, no. 3, "Immigration", Minn. Historical Society, St. Paul, p. 9
55Thomas C. Blegen, Minnesota, A History of the State, Univ. Minn. Press, 1962, p. 305
56Percie V. Hillbrand, The Swedes in America, Lerner Publishing Co., Minneapolis, Minn., p. 21
57Red Wing Directory, Red Wing Publishing Co., 1894
58Hillbrand, op cit., p. 19
59Red Wing Daily Republican, 3/7/1906; the Democratic paper was a weekly.
60Yearbook..., op cit., p. 109
61Memorial and biographical record, an illustrated compendium of
biography, including biographical sketches of hundreds of prominent old settlers and representatives
citizens of South Dakota, Geo. A. Ogle, Chicago, 1898. Transcribed in 1954 by L. M. Holloway,
"John G. Robish", p. 1016 ff.
62H. S. Schell, History of South Dakota, Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, 1961, p. 172
63Ibid., p. 164
64Frank P. Donovan, Jr., Mileposts on the Prairie, Simmons-Boardman, New York, N.Y., 1950, p. 66
65Memorial and biographical record...,, op cit., p. 1016 ff.
66Memorial and biographical record...,, "Charles W. Keller", p. 765
67Alive Feind (ed.), Kellerton United Methodist Church, 90th Anniversary, 1883-1973, "History"
68Tape Recording of Conversation between Ernest, Alice and Walter Feind,
and L. M. Holloway, Phila., Pa., Jan., 1977.
69M. Arthur Haag, Historical Sketch and Genealogy of the John Adam Haag Family,
printed privately, St. Louis, Mo., compiled by L. M. Holloway, June, 1954
70Tape Recording, op cit.
71Ibid.
Back to Table of Contents
Back