Thomas may not have had a prior wife, but he is old enough, and it's one way to account for the two girls born 1815-25.  Unless, of course, Lucretia is fibbing about her age and she's the one with the two daughters from a prior marriage.

— born in Washtenaw Co., MI
8.  Helen Maria HOSKINS, b. 18 Jul 1836, Lima; d. 3 Aug 1892, Lansing, Ingham Co., MI; m. 15 Nov 1859, Washtenaw Co., MI, Melvin Durfee OSBAND (b. 1829/30, PA)
9.  Mary May HOSKINS, b. 1845/6, Scio; m. Fred L. BARKER (b. 1841/2, MI)

Orlando is said to be born in Stillwater, Saratoga Co., though there's no question Thomas & Lucretia were living in Greenwich by at least 1830, if not 1824.  Washington Co. and Saratoga Co. are adjacent, and it may very well be that Lucretia went home to be with her mother when she birthed her children; and that may be what has given rise to the assertion that Orlando was born in Stillwater.

1.  Marriage Record:

2.  1820 Census Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com, Image #9 of 11; extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

1820

NY

Saratoga Co.

Stillwater

Roll M33_79

p. 109

Ln. 10

Thomas Hoskins

011201-11301-0-300

These data indicate:

No. & Sex	Age Class	Therefore Born	Individuals Inferred
1 male	10-15	1804-1810	=
1 male	16-18	1801-1804	= Elijah (b. 1803/4)
1 male	19-25*	1794-1801	= Thomas Jr. (b. 1797)
1 male	45 or over	in or bef. 1775	= Thomas Sr.
1 female	9 or under	1810-1820	=
1 female	10-15	1804-1810	=
3 females	16-25	1794-1804	=
1 female	45 or over	in or bef. 1775	= Mary
3	persons engaged in agriculture
*In the 1820 Census, the third column is age class 16-18 and the fourth column is age class 16-25, which means any individual in column three is duplicated in column four.  So, for an accurate representation of the household, the number in column three should be subtracted from the number in column four. If, after the subtraction, any individuals remain in column four, then they have to be age 19-25, thus creating a "new," more precise age class.

The head-of-household is appears to be our subject's father.  The question is whether Thomas Jr. is married at this point.  He might be, he might not be; and, if he's not, then the eldest girl in his household in 1830 (the one b. 1815-20) may be his sister.  But Mary is too old to have had a daughter b. 1820-25, so the younger one cannot be Thomas's sister.  Also in Stillwater:  Thomas's father-in-law, Julius BARTLETT.

3.  1830 Census Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com, Image #39 of 40; extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

1830

NY

Washington Co.

Greenwich

Roll 111

p. 170

Ln. 24

Thomas Haskins

100 001 - 211 001

These data indicate:

No. & Sex	Age Class	Therefore Born	Individuals Inferred
1 male	4 or under	1825-1830	= Charles (b. 1826/7)
1 male	30-39	1790-1800	= Thomas (b. 1797)
2 females	4 or under	1825-1830	= Daughter C = Harriet (b. 1825/6)
1 female	5-9	1820-1825	= Daughter B
1 female	10-14	1815-1820	= Daughter A
1 female	30-39	1790-1800	= Lucretia (b. 1803)

Thomas may have had a prior wife, and the elder two daughters may be hers.  Otherwise, they're not his daughters.  Is Lucretia in the wrong age class?  Or did she fib about her age as she got older?  (Most women did.)

4.  1840 Census Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com, Image #70-71 of 138 — numerical data pages precede name pages; extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

1840

MI

Washtenaw Co.

Roll 211

pp. 57A-57B

Ln. 6

Thos Hopkins

111 000 100 - 101 001

0000001

These data indicate:

No. & Sex	Age Class	Therefore Born	Individuals Inferred
1 male	4 or under	1835-1840	= Son A
1 male	5-9	1830-1835	= Orlando (b. 1832/3)
1 male	10-14	1825-1830	= Charles (b. 1828/9)
1 male	40-49	1790-1800	= Thomas (b. 1797)
1 female	4 or under	1835-1840	= Helen (b. 1836)
1 female	10-14	1825-1830	= Harriet (b. 1825/6)
1 female	30-39	1800-1810	= Lucretia (b. 1803)
1	learned professionals and engineers

5.  1850 Census Every-Name-Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com, Image #21 of 39):  Scio, Washtenaw Co., MI, Roll M432_364, p. 334B, 2327/2327, enumerated 14 Oct 1850, official enumeration date 1 Jun 1850 (extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

Thos Haskins	55	M		Farmer	1200	N York
Lucretia Do	47	F				Conn
Orlando  Do	17	M		Miller		N York
Helen    Do	14	F				Mich
Mary     Do	4	F				do

Listed four households from their married daughter, Harriet (HOSKINS) SEYMOUR.

6.  1860 Census Every-Name-Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com, Image #27 of 46):  Dexter P.O., Scio Twp., Washtenaw Co., MI, Roll M653_563, p. 442, PN 150, 1110/1101, enumerated 6 Aug 1860, official enumeration date 1 Jun 1870 (extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

Thomas Haskins	62	M	W	Farmer	4000	800	NY
Lucretia  "	57	F	W	Keeping house			Conn
Mary      "	13	F	W				Mich

7.  1870 Census Every-Name-Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com, Image #135 of 156):  Lansing P.O., City of Lansing (Ward 4), Ingham Co., MI, Roll M593_675, p. 156A, PN 9, enumerated 23 Jul 1870, official enumeration date 1 Jun 1870 (extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

1870:  for an explanation of the column headings, please see What the Numbers in the Federal Census Mean (missing columns contained no data).
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	19
71	81	Hoskins Thomas	72	M	W	Farmer		1000	New York	/	/
		_______ Lucretia	67	F	W	Keeping house	1400		Connecticut
		_______ Mary	23	F	W	Teaching school		175	Michigan

The tick in Column 11 means Thomas's father was foreign-born.

8.  1880 Census Every-Name-Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com, Image #4 of 4):  Frederic, Crawford Co., MI, Roll T9_577, p. D, PN 13, SD 2, ED 57, enumerated 11 Jun 1880, official enumeration date 1 Jun 1880 (extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

1880:  for an explanation of the column headings, please see What the Numbers in the Federal Census Mean (missing columns contained no data).
1	2	3	4	5	6	8	10	11	13	24	25	26
113	111	Barker Fred L	W	M	38		/		Surveyor	MI	MI	Eng
		______ May M	W	F	33	Wife	/		Keeping House	MI	NY	CT
		Haskins Lucretia	W	F	76	Mother in Law		/		CT	CT	CT

9.  1890 Census:  the 1890 Census Population Schedules were destroyed.

10.  1900 Census Every-Name-Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com):  not found.

11.  Michigan Department of Community Health.  GenDIS: Genealogical Death Indexing System, 1867-1897 (online at the Michigan State Goverment web site):

Name:	HOSKINS, THOMAS
Date of Death:	16-Jul-1876
Ledger Page:	247
Record Number:	925
Place of Death:	Lansing
County of Death:	Ingham
Sex:	Male
Race:	WHITE
Marital Status:	Married
Age:	78 years 10 months 1 day
Cause of Death:	OLD AGE
Birthplace:	NEW YORK
Occupation:	PHYSICIAN
Father's Name:	Hoskins, THOMAS
Father's Residence:
Mother's Name:	HOSKINS, MARY
Mother's Residence:
Date of Record:	22-Aug-1877

Lucretia not found.  Good grief, does that mean she died between 1897 and 1900?  She would have been over 90 years old!

12.  Birthdate calculated using Ben Buckner's Birthdate Calculator.

Name	Deathdate	Age at Death	Result
Thomas HOSKINS	16 Jul 1876	1d 10m 78y	15 Sep 1797
(Calculated birthdates should always be prefaced with "ca." — you can't be certain the person who calculated their age did it correctly.)

13.  Excerpts from The Avalanche, a newpaper published in Grayling, Crawford Co., MI (online at Lewis R. Ward's "Ward Family Web Site"; dates at the end of each excerpt are the publication dates):

-PIONEER SKETCHES. BIOGRAPHICAL. Mrs. Lucretia B. HOSKINS, of Frederic, was the daughter of Julias BARTLETT, of New London Co., Conn., where she was born July 11, 1803, in a tavern kept by her father and famous in that section for the hospitality it afforded.  While she was yet a little girl the famly moved onto one of the large Van Renselear farms near Albany, N.Y., which was leased for a term of years, and from the profits of which a farm was bought at Stillwater, Saratoga Co., N.Y.  In the meantime the little Miss had grown into a buxom lass, full of health and spirit and returned to the old Connecticut home to complete her education by a two years course in the high schools of that place. In 1824 an arrow from the "Blind God" impaled her heart with that of Dr. Thos. HOSKINS, and they began their happy wedded life at Greenwich N.Y., where they remained for twelve years and then emigrated to the woods of Michigan, stopping a few months at Lima, Washtenaw Co., and for two years at Marion, in Livingston Co., then to Scio, Washtenaw Co. where for 28 years, or till 1866, they lived honored and respected and for ten succeeding years at Lansing when the doctor yielded to the grim foe with whom he had so often battled in his professional life, and the now aged mother was left five children of the eleven she had borne, all happily married.  Charles, the eldest, died in 1878 leaving Mrs. Harriet SEYMOUR, of Titusville, Pa., Orlando, at Vineland, N.J., Mrs. M.D. OSBAND and Mrs. F.L. BARKER at that time of Lansing, but now residing at Frederic, in this county.  Mrs. BARKER resided with her mother for a year, and on her decision to come to Northern Michigan the mother was induced to accompany her and has since been a member of Mr. BARKER's family, passing her declining years in perfect rest so well deserved by one whose life had been one of untiring industry. Her 85th birthday was passed last month and yet she is erect as a girl, reads much of the time, though with the aid of glasses.  Her hearing is unimpaired and she converses freely of current events, though her memory of the distant is not perfect.  She has been from early life an honored member of the M.E. church to which she is greatly attached. Mrs. HOSKINS is, we believe, the oldest person in Crawford county and having been here eleven years may well be called a pioneer. (23 Aug 1888)

Based on the censuses, Charles was not the eldest, his sister Harriet was; and he died in 1879, not 1878.

14.  WorldConnect / Ancestry World Trees (online at RootsWeb.com/Ancestry.com).