Samuel Walker TALIAFERRO & Sarah McClung MOORE

Table of Contents

Diana, Goddess of the Hunt — for Ancestors!

Every-Name Index

Samuel Walker TALIAFERRO
Sarah McClung MOORE

Husband: Samuel Walker TALIAFERRO
Birth: 19 Jul 1798
Death: 1879
Father: C. Francis TALIAFERRO
Mother: Letitia "Letty" HUGHES

Marriage: 24 Jun 1829, Todd Co., KY

Wife: Sarah McClung "Sallie" MOORE
Birth: 1804
Father: David MOORE
Mother: Janet McCLUNG

Children — born in Todd Co., KY:

1. David Moore TALIAFERRO, b. 27 Mar 1830
2. Francis "Frank" TALIAFERRO, b. 1832/3
3. Leroy TALIAFERRO, b. 1834/5
4. Isabella Letitia TALIAFERRO, b. 30 Jan 1841
5. Samuel Walker TALIAFERRO, Jr., b. 1842/3
6. Sarah McClung "Sally/Sallie" TALIAFERRO, b. 1844/5/6/7

Keywords for search engines: genealogy; USA, US, United States, Kentucky

Sources:

1. Jordan R. Dodd, ed. 1993. Kentucky Marriages: Early to 1850. Liahona Research, Orem, UT (Broderbund CD-229):

Talliaferro, Samuel Moore, Sallie 24 Jun 1829 Todd Co.

2. 1830 Census Index and Digital Images (online at Ancestry.com; Image #48-49 of 68; extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

1830 KY Todd Co. pp. 381B-382A Samuel Taliferro 100 001 000 - 000 010 001 112 000 - 621 300

These data indicate:

No., Race, Gender Age Class Therefore Born Individuals Inferred

1 white male 4 or under 1825-1830 = David (b. 1830)

1 white male 30-39 1790-1800 = Samuel (b. 1798)

1 white female 20-29 1800-1810 = Sarah (b. 1804)

1 white female 60-69 1760-1770 = mother or mother-in-law

1 male slave 9 or under 1820-1830 = ?

1 male slave 10-23 1806-1820 = ?

2 male slaves 24-35 1794-1806 = ? ?

6 female slaves 9 or under 1820-1830 = ? ? ? ? ? ?

2 female slaves 10-23 1806-1820 = ? ?

1 female slave 24-35 1794-11806 = ?

3 female slaves 36-54 1775-1794 = ? ? ? ?

3. 1840 Census Index and Digital Images (online at Ancestry.com; Image #65-66 of 71; extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

1840 KY Todd Co. Todd City pp. 270B-271A Taliferro S.W. 210 000 100 - 000 011 000 010 042 200 - 353 200 0/13/00000

These data indicate:es

No. & Sex Age Class Therefore Born Individuals Inferred

2 white males 4 or under 1835-1840 = Leroy (b. 1835)
= Frank (b. 1832/3)

1 white male 5-9 1830-1835 = David (b. 1830)

1 white male 40-49 1790-1800 = Samuel (b. 1798)

1 white female 20-29 1810-1820 = ?

1 white female 30-39 1800-1810 = Sarah (b. 1804)

1 white female 80-89 1750-1760 = mother or mother-in-law

4 male slaves 10-23 1816-1830 = ?

2 male slaves 24-35 1804-1816 = ?

2 male slaves 36-54 1785-1804 = ?

3 female slaves 9 or under 1830-1840 = ?

5 female slaves 10-23 1816-1830 = ?

3 female slaves 24-35 1804-1816 = ?

2 female slaves 36-54 1785-1804 = ?

13 persons employed in agriculture

The ages aren't entirely consistent with 1850, but there's no doubt these are our subjects. List is alphabetical, so no neighborhood reconstruction if possible.

4. 1850 Census Index/Images (online at Ancestry.com; Image #81 of 90): District No. 2, Todd Co., KY, p. 285A, 537/537, enumerated 9 Sep 1850 (extracted by Diana Gale Matthiesen):

Samuel Talefaero 54 M 4000 Va

Sarah      " 45 F "

David      " 20 M Student Ky

Frank      " 17 M none "

LeRoy      " 15 M "

Isabella   " 9 F "

Samuel     " 7 M "

Sarah      " 5 F "

Contact Home
Page Table of
Contents DNA
Hub Biddle
DNA Carrico
DNA Corbin
DNA Cupp
DNA Danish
DNA Ely
DNA Lyon(s)
DNA Rasey
DNA Reason
DNA Rose
DNA Straub
DNA Pedigree
Charts Census
Records Every-Name
Indices

Everything I have is online at this web site. I have no further information, so please don't write asking me if I do.
On the other hand, if you feel I've made an error, please don't hesitate to notify me, but in which case,
please include a link to the page you are referencing.
There are over 18,000 pages on this web site, and I simply don't remember every page, much less every person on every page.

"The Cloud" is double-speak for "dumb terminal on a main frame." Been there; done that. Never again.
You are giving away not only your privacy, but control of your data, your apps, and your computer to a corporation. Is that really where you want to go?
The IT guys on the big iron hated the Personal Computer because it gave users freedom and power; now they've conned you into being back under their control.

Table of Contents

Every-Name Index