Chapter 6: Nathan & Elizabeth’s Known Descendants

  

     Nathan and Elizabeth Sharp Harrell’s children were 3^rd Generation Hertford County Harrells—still a generation about which very little is known. In Nathan and Elizabeth’s case, however, we know a little more than in most cases. We know something about four of their oldest children.

 

            In chapter 4, I noted a land purchase Nathan made in Bertie County in 1793, and that he still owned the land on the Chowan River at his death in 1802. The Bertie County land was divided among several of his heirs in 1818. It appears the division of this land was based on Nathan’s will. The Bertie County Court appointed  Commissioners to establish an equal division into four parcels of 32 acres each to be drawn by four of Nathan’s heirs. James and Celia Harrell Morgan drew lot number 1; Starkey S. Harrell drew lot number 2; George and Sarah Bond drew lot number 3; and William and Nancy Harrell Smith Yancey drew lot number four.[1] (Nancy’s first husband was William Smith; her husband at the time of the land division was James Yancey.) 

 

Benjamin B. Winborne in his history of Hertford County identified their second son, and two oldest daughters. [2] He stated that Nathan married Elizabeth Sharp a daughter of the wealthy and prominent Starkey Sharp of Hertford County. Winborne goes on to describe Nathan and Elizabeth’s family as consisting of a daughter, Nancy Harrell, who married Dr. William Smith, and a son, Starkey Sharp Harrell, who married Elizabeth Simons, and another daughter named Sally who married G. H. Bond. There is no mention of younger children.      From these two sources, then, we know Nathan and Elizabeth’s second son was Starkey Sharp Harrell, and their three oldest daughters were Nancy Harrell Smith Yancey, Sarah Harrell Bond, and Celia Harrell Morgan.

 

The censuses tell us there is more to know about their children, however. The 1790 census shows Nathan’s household as follows:

 

1790 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

It is safe to assume Nathan is the male over 16 years of age, but we do not known much about the ages of his two sons, assuming they are his sons and not nephews. They could range in age from one to fifteen. We know from later censuses that their son, Starkey S. Harrell, was born in 1786, which means he was four years old in 1790—he was probably the younger of the two males listed as under 16 years of age. The information about Nathan’s wife and daughters is even less precise—again I am assuming two of the females were his daughters. The information from the second U. S. census is a bit more precise, but not by much. By 1800 Nathan’s household looked like this: 

 [page 190]

1800 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

            From the 1800 census, we know a little more about their two oldest sons. One is listed as under 16, and the other as over 16, which means in 1790 one was under 6 and the other was over 6 years of age. This strongly suggests that Starkey was their second son, because he was under six years of age in 1790. Their first son was born after 1775 and before 1785. (I have not been able to identify son number one from among the Hertford County Harrells in the 1810 census.) The 1800 census also makes it clear that Nathan and Elizabeth had two additional sons born after the 1790 census, but before mid-1800. The probable identity of these younger sons has been discussed in chapter four (see Table 18, page 146). In this chapter, we are only concerned with their known son—Starkey Sharp Harrell.

 

According to the 1800 census, one of their two oldest daughters was also under six, and the other over six but under 16 years of age in 1790. By this census, Nathan and Elizabeth had four daughters. Thus by 1800, it appears Nathan and Elizabeth had four daughters and four sons—only four of whom have been identified, and they are the focus of this chapter. Their names were Starkey, Nancy, Sarah, and Celia.

 

Nancy Harrell Smith Yancey (b. c. 1790)—3^rd Generation

 

            Nancy Harrell married William Lay Smith from Connecticut around 1810. Not a lot is known about Nancy’s first husband, William L. Smith. He typically gets only the briefest of mentions by historian—probably because of his origins. For instance, the historian John W. Moore wrote, when speaking of Nancy and William’s son, William N. H. Smith, “His father was a Northern man who lived and died in Murfreesboro. By his mother, he descended from the Sharpes and Harrells of Mill Neck.”[3] 

 

William died in Murfreesboro, Hertford County in 1813. Nancy married again between 1814 and 1820. She married James Yancey, who was in Caswell Co. in 1810 with his first family: one male between the ages of 16 and 26, and his wife—James was between the ages of 26 and 45 (over 35).

 [page 191]

 

By 1820, Nancy Harrell Smith Yancey’s son, William Nathan Harrell Smith, was 7 years old, and he was undoubtedly one of the 3 males under the age of ten in their household. The other two were probably from James’ first marriage. Nancy and James Yancey had a son, but not until 1825.

 

1820 census entry, Caswell Co., N. C.

 

            In 1830, Nancy was back in Hertford County, and again a widow. The census shows 20 people in her household which included seven slaves. By my calculations, Nancy was about 40 years of age. She was the woman in the 30-40 age group. This information puts her birth year between 1790 and 1800. Considering that she had her first son in 1811, I suppose her birth year was very close to 1790, and she was probably Nathan and Elizabeth’s oldest daughter.

[page 192] 

 

1830 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

There is a good possibility the woman in the 50-60 age group was her mother, Elizabeth Sharp Harrell Gordon, who would have been about 62 or younger in 1830 and who was alive until 1840. Nancy’s mother, Elizabeth, dropped from sight after the 1820 census—which means she was living in a household headed by someone else.

Nancy Harrell Smith Yancey’s Children

 

            My best information indicates that Nancy had two sons and probably one daughter who survived to adulthood. Her first son, William Nathan Harrell Smith, was with William Lay Smith; her second son, Antonio Pond Yancey, was with James Yancey; and her probable daughter (b. 1820-1825) was with James Yancey.

 

            I know nothing at all about Nancy’s probable daughter (b. 1820-1825); and I know little of her son, Antonio P. Yancey; but there is a good deal of information about her son, William Nathan Harrell Smith. Nancy’s first son, John Lay Smith lived less than one year and nothing much is known of him.

 

William Nathan Harrell Smith (born in 1812)—4^th Generation

 

     William was born in Hertford County and spent most of his life there. He finished his studies at Yale College and returned to Hertford County in 1834. Soon after his return, he was elected to the North Carolina House of Representatives. In 1835, the new State Constitution reduced Hertford County’s representation to one member—it was William N. H. Smith. He also continued to study and passed the Bar Examination in 1839. When he was not practicing law in Murfreesboro, he apparently spent a great deal of time in politics. He was County Representative to the General Assembly of North Carolina in 1840; and Solicitor of the First District (composed of 6 counties) 1849-1859.

[page 193] 

William N. H. apparently married before 1840. According to the census, his wife’s name was Mary O.; it was probably Mary Olivia, the county historian, Winborne, referred to her as Olivia Harrell.

 

The 1850 census shows William and Mary with 2 sons, and William’s younger brother, Antonio, in their household.

 

1850 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

            In 1860, William and Mary with two of their children were living in the town of Murfreesboro. Their son, James, who would have been 20 years of age in 1860, was not living in his parent’s household, but William and Mary apparently had a new two year old son at the time.

 

1860 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

As one might expect, they were quite comfortable financially, with $6,500 worth of real estate, and with personal property valued at $26,538—the latter, of course, was for the most part reflecting the value of the slaves they possessed.

 

            William was elected to the United States House of Representatives just about the time North Carolina withdrew from the Union, and he was then elected to represent his district in the Confederate Congress.[4]

 

            After the War, William N. H. Smith was elected to represent his County in the North Carolina, General Assembly 1865-1866; and later he was appointed Chief Justice of the State of North Carolina from January 1878 until his death in November of 1889.[5]

 

William Nathan Harrell and Mary Smith’s Children

  

James Smith (b. 1840)—5^th Generation

William M. Smith (b. 1847)—5^th Generation

Edward C. Smith (b. 1858)—5^th Generation

 

Antonio Pond Yancey (b. 1825)—4^th Generation

 

            Antonio P. Yancey was Nancy Harrell Smith Yancey’s son by her second husband and consequently, William N. H. Smith’s half brother. Like his older half brother, Antonio studied law at Yale College. According to the historian, John W. Moore, Antonio became a solicitor in Murfreesboro soon after he graduated from Yale—around the year 1847.[6] He practiced law with his brother in Murfreesboro for several years and was living in his brother’s household in 1850. In August of 1851, Antonio P. Yancey retired from the office of County Attorney because of his failing health. He died at a young age, in his late 20s, and was described as a “...nice and cultured young man.”[7] His brother, William N. H. Smith, qualified as administrator of his affairs in the February Term of 1855.[8]

 

Sarah “Sally” Harrell Bond (b. 1784-1790)—3^rd Generation

 

Sarah was identified as a daughter of Nathan and Elizabeth in the same Bertie County deed as her brother and sisters, Starkey, Nancy, and Celia. The Bertie County deed and Winborne’s history of Hertford County also identified Sarah’s husband as George H. Bond. (See notes numbers 1 and 2 in this chapter.)

 

There were two George Bonds in Beaufort County in 1810, but the younger of the two was more than likely Sarah’s husband. Their census entry was as follows.

 [page 195]

1810 census entry, Beaufort Co., N. C.

 

I have no record of her returning to Hertford County. Sarah and George Bond had one son who was born between 1800 and 1810—there well may have been more children later.

 

Celia Harrell Morgan (b. 1791-1794)—3^rd Generation

 

            Celia and her husband were identified as James and Celia Morgan in Nathan Harrell’s Bertie County land division (see note number 2 in this chapter).

 

Celia does not appear to have been with her mother, Elizabeth Gordon, in the 1810 census when she would have been 16 to 19 years old.  I did not find her with her future husband, James Morgan, either. There was a James Morgan in Hertford County, but he was a bit too old to be Celia’s husband. The 1810 entry for James Morgan listed him as over 45 years of age, and his wife as over 26. (The age category for James is very difficult to read from the microfilm, but based on his age in the 1820 and 1830 censuses, I think he should have been in the 26-45 age category in 1810, and Celia would not have been over 20 years of age.)

 

            By 1820, there is a census entry that has James and his wife in age categories more appropriate for Celia’s estimated age. James should have been age 30-40, Celia should have been 26-30. She was age 26 to 45 in 1820, and 30 to 40 in 1830, so we can put her age at between 26 and 30 in 1820, which gives a birth year of between 1791 and 1794.

 

1820 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

            In 1820, Celia was 26 to 29 years of age. She and/or James may have had siblings living with them. It is possible that the four youngsters under the age of ten were Celia’s children—maybe even the male 10-15 years old. The latter would be possible if he had been closer to ten than fifteen years old. By 1830, Celia was 36-39 years old, and it is very likely all four young people under the age of 20 were Celia and James Morgan’s children.

 [page 196]

  

1830 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

James and/or Celia Morgan were not in the N. C. 1850 census.

 

Age Categories of Celia Harrell and James Morgan’s Children

 

Based on the 1820 and 1830 censuses, James and Celia’s children were in the following age categories:

 

                                                birth year                               

Son # 1                                   1805-1810

Son # 2                                   1816-1820

Son # 3                                   1821-1825

Daughter # 1                         1811-1820

Daughter # 2                         1811-1815

Daughter # 3                         1816-1820

 

Starkey Sharp Harrell Sr. (born 1786)—3^rd Generation

 

            Starkey Sharp Harrell was the first son of Nathan and Elizabeth Sharp Harrell (not necessarily Nathan’s first, however). He was born in 1786 in Hertford County and died there in 1830[9]—he was the first in a series of  Starkey  Harrells.

 

1810 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

                                                               

Starkey married Elizabeth Simons around 1806. Elizabeth was between 20 and 26 years of age in 1810. The other two females in the age category 16 to 26 were probably sisters or cousins. Starkey and Elizabeth had one son by 1810 who was born between 1800 and early 1810.

 

Starkey’s father, Nathan, died in 1802, but at least part of his estate was still being settled in 1818 (see the above mentioned land division for Nathan in Bertie County). Starkey’s wealth increased noticeably between 1810 and 1820.

 [page 197]

            By 1820, Starkey Sharp Harrell’s family had continued to grow. He and Elizabeth had two new daughters and a new son—they would have a young Starkey Sharp Harrell in 1827.

 

1820 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

Starkey Harrell Sr. died in early 1830, at the age of 44. Starkey Sharp Harrell’s widow, Elizabeth, was head of the household for the 1830 census. By that time, the children still with Elizabeth were: Starkey S. Jr. age 3, and the daughter age 15-19 who was probably Mary, age 17 in 1830. The latter could have been daughter, Nancy, but that would mean Mary was married at age 17 or younger which was not common.

 

1830 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

            After the 1830 census, Elizabeth was still partly provided for by Starkey S. Harrell’s estate, as evident in the notations of the account settlements which show “Cash paid the widow her years provisions $339, and interest on the same to Nov. 28—1831  $13.50.” Also on November 28, 1831, there was a similar entry indicating another payment with interest in the amount of $245.60.[10]

 

            As far as I know, Starkey and Elizabeth had three children who survived to adulthood. They were Mary, Nancy, and Starkey Sharp Harrell Junior. Starkey Jr. was probably about 10 years old when his father died. His mother, Elizabeth Simons Harrell, was 42 years of age when Starkey Sr. died in 1830, and probably remarried within a couple of years. When she did, she married Harris Vaughan.

 

            The connections among Starkey S. Harrell Sr., Elizabeth Simons Harrell Vaughan, and Harris Vaughan are clarified on Elizabeth’s tomb stone which reads:[11]

 [page 198]

  

 

Starkey S. and Elizabeth Harrell’s Children

 

            The following age categories for Starkey and Elizabeth’s children are based on the information in the 1810, 1820, and 1830 censuses.

 

                                                 age in             age in               age in

                        birth year         1810               1820                 1830

Son # 1                   1804-1810                 0-10                       10-16                       gone

Son # 2                   1810-1820                                                 0-10                       gone

Son # 3                   1825-1830                                                                                 0-5  (Starkey Jr., b. 1828)

Daughter # 1         1804-1810                                               10-16                       gone

Daughter # 2         1810-1820                                                 0-10                       gone  (Nancy, b. 1811-1815)

Daughter # 3         1810-1815                                                 0-10                       15-20 (Mary, b. 1813)

           

We know two of Starkey S. Harrell Sr., and Elizabeth Simons Harrell’s daughters were named Mary and Nancy, and their youngest son was Starkey S. Harrell Junior. There is a good possibility their Son # 1 was John (b. 1804-1810). John first appeared as a head of household in 1830 with an amount of wealth characteristic of Starkey Harrell’s family, and he was living with his new wife just three dwellings from Starkey’s widow in 1830. (For more information on John [b. 1804-1810] see the section on “The Unattached 4^th Generation Harrells” in chapter five.)The problem is, John (b. 1804-1810) is just as good a fit in David Harrell Sr.’s family (see chapter 11). Unfortunately, John and Harriet Harrell, along with their children, will remain unattached until private evidence is found that will allows me to place him with Starkey Sr. or David Senior.

 

Mary Harrell Jernigan (b. 1813)—4^th Generation

 

            Mary Harrell married Lemuel R. Jernigan sometime during the mid-1830s. At an early age, Lemuel R. Jernigan was elected Public Register 1831-1843. He was then elected a County Trustee in 1844 until 1854.

 [page 199]

 

1850 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

           

Mary’s younger brother, Starkey Harrell Jr., was living with her and Lemuel in 1850—Starkey was already a merchant. Mary and Lemuel had accumulated real estate valued at $6,775, and judging by the amount of wealth they left their children some years later, they became much more prosperous.

 

1860 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

            Lemuel and Mary’s oldest son, John H. Jernigan, had finished his studies and was an attorney by 1860. He was still living at home with his parents and his younger brother and sister at that time.

[page 200] 

            Lemuel R. Jernigan died on December 6, 1866.[12] His widow, Mary Harrell Jernigan, was still in the county with their youngest son, Thomas R., who had also become an attorney by that time, and daughter, Mary H. “Mollie,” for the 1870 census.

 

1870 census entry, Hertford Co., N. C.

 

Mary Harrell & Lemuel Jernigan’s Children