Census Record Sunday - My Uncle, The Walking Dead

Neil Brown Jr
(possibly in baseball uniform)

I've blogged about Neil Brown Jr before. He was the son of Neil/Neal and Nancy "Annie" Brown nee McCoy. He married Bridget Brown (yes, same surname, but no known connection yet) on July 10, 1908 according to my cousin, Nancy O'Donoghue, but that date is unconfirmed and Nancy has passed so I'll have to do some of my own research on that one. They had 11 known children: Nancy, Eleanor, Mary, Neil III, James, Rita, Eugene, Paul, John, Joan, and Charles. This was also information given to me from Nancy and corroborated by census records, death certificates, tombstones, and obituaries. In that previous post on Neil Brown Jr. I transcribed his obituary. It was from The Plain Speaker, Saturday, October 30th 1937.

I've found the death certificate for Neil Jr on Ancestry quite easily as well (below). The information on it is quite clear and it was given by his wife, Bridget. His parents are correct. His address looks good. My Neil died on October 30th 1937 and was buried in St. Gabriel's Roman Catholic Cemetery on November 2nd of that year. I have no doubt in my genealogical mind.

Death Certificate - Neil Brown living on South Wyoming Street, Hazleton, PA

Date and Cause of Death and Autopsy Performed

So why is he with his family in the 1940 US Federal Census? Seriously. He's there so help me reason this out. It was brought to my attention in an email recently. I had posted a memorial for Neil Jr. and linked him to family on FindAGrave. I was contacted by a fellow genealogist whose daughter-in-law turns out to be a distant cousin of mine through this line just the other week. We've talked before, but in this email she let me know that she noticed something "off". She pointed out that he was in the 1940 census so perhaps the death certificate wasn't for our Neil. The thing is the death certificate is most definitely for our Neil...but the census would appear to be too.  All the names are right on the certificate (you can see additional images from the death certificate at the bottom of this post)...and in the census.

1940 U.S Federal Census - Neil Brown household, S. Wyoming Street

Now help me through this one. I had heard recently that if no one was home when the census taker came that they could ask a neighbor for information. Could the census taker merely have asked who Bridget's husband was and made the assumption that he was alive? Or is it more likely that this Neil  was really her son? If it was her son they got the rest of the information wrong. Thoughts? In the 1940 US Census the census taker was supposed to mark an "x" with a circle around it to indicate who gave the information. Now that mark after their daughter, Nancy's, name could be that or it could be just a middle initial if no one from the family gave the information. What you can also see from the census (here) is that zombie-Neil wasn't employed and wasn't looking for work. A good thing too because he would have looked terrible after that autopsy! It does list Bridget as having an "other" source of income...but her income is listed as $0. Gosh I'm so confused.

Here's a clip from the U.S. City Directory collection. It's Hazleton, Pennsylvania in 1935 and there are THREE Neil/Neal Browns all living in or South Wyoming Street. While there are multiple Neil/Neal Browns in my tree there should only be two alive and old enough to be in a directory. They all live in the same or a nearby home though. So there's that to add to the confusion.

1935 Hazleton - US City Directory

Could there really have been another family living on Wyoming Street in Hazleton, Pennsylvania that had not only a husband and wife team of Neil and Bridget, but also had the kids with the same names? Even with taking Irish naming conventions into consideration that's a bit hard to swallow. For sanity's sake I'll be posting the obituaries I have for his family in upcoming posts. Perhaps something will appear there that hasn't been considered, but by first glance at all the ones I have they just confirm that this is the right Neil.

All I can say is that I'd love some input on this. The link to the obituary on Neil is in the first paragraph if anyone would like to take a look. This death certificate is for our Neil. I'm positive. The obituary is for my Neil. Again...positive...it confirms everything in the death certificate. The census should be my Neil's family, but he most certainly should not be listed there. Can anyone bring some sanity to this or do I call in Rick Grimes?

The zombie, Neil Brown Jr, is my 2nd great uncle.

Neil's Wife and Occupation

Neil's Parents and Burial

Thriller Thursday - Wrapping Up the Villers Trial, Part 6

The Jamestown Weekly Alert,
20JAN1898, pg1

We are getting there. This is the last Charlie-Brown-teacher-talking post. At least I hope it is. The clipping today continues to talk about circumstantial evidence and the role it can play in a case. Now, I'm no lawyer and I've always heard that convicting someone on circumstantial evidence is a no-no, but perhaps that was just an ideal rather than a legal reality. Apparently you can.

"The Conclusion Not Forced.

'Circumstantial evidence, therefore, is found on experience and observed facts and coincidences establishing a connection between the known and proved facts and the fact sought to be proved. From this view it is manifest that great care and caution should be used in drawing inferences from proved facts. It must be a fair and natural and not a forced and artificial conclusion; the inferences to be drawn from the facts must be a reasonable and natural one and of a moral certainty and certain one. It is not sufficient that it is a probable one; it must be reasonably and morally certain. The next consideration is that each fact which is necessary to the conclusion must be distinctly and independently proved by competent evidence. It may and often does happen that in making out a case on circumstantial evidence many facts are given in evidence not because they are necessary to the conclusion sough to be proved but to show that they rebut, not control presumption.

The several circumstances upon which the conclusion depends must be fully established by proof. They are facts from which the main fact is to be inferred; and they are to be proved by competent evidence and by the same weight and force of evidence as if each one were itself the main fact in issue.

Also that all the facts proved must be consistent with each other and with the main fact sought to be proved; that the circumstances taken together should be of a conclusive nature and tendency leading to a wholly satisfactory conclusion and producing in fact a reasonable and moral certainty that the accused and no (sic) else committed the offense charged. It is essential, therefore, that the circumstances taken as a whole and giving them their reasonable and just weight and no more should to a moral certainty include every other hypothesis.

The Jamestown Weekly Alert,
20JAN1898, pg1

The guilt of the accused may be established from circumstantial evidence alone, provided you first have all direct proof beyond a reasonable doubt that August Tromer was killed as charged in the information and provided the facts established by circumstantial evidence are inconsistent with any other view than the the defendant's guilt. To find the accused guilty on circumstantial evidence the facts proved must be wholly inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and incapable of explanation upon any other reasonable hypothesis than that he is guilty.

Three verdicts were given the jury. One finding the prisoner guilty and fixing the punishment at death; another finding him guilty, but placing the penalty at life imprisonment; and the third finding the prisoner innocent."

So we've reached the point where the judge's instructions have been given fully to the jury and he made it pretty clear that you can convict on circumstantial evidence. We already know that he was found guilty so now I'll have to wonder if the reason the death penalty wasn't handed down by the jury was because of the circumstantial nature of the case. Saying that someone is guilty and putting them in jail is much different than saying they are guilty and executing them. Perhaps one of the future posts will deal with the jury. We'll find out together.

Memorial Monday - IAFF Fallen Fire Fighter Memorial 1919-1920

IAFF FFFM Panel 1919-1920

This panel continues the names of those members of the IAFF who died in 1919 and continues into 1920:

"Edward F. Nealis - L94  NY
Charles B. Franssen - L94  NY
Louis Kieger - L21  MN
William Roland - L282  NY
Walter Musgrove - L734  MD
Roman W. Ritters - L112  CA
Archibald MacIntyre - L288  ON
Jacob Loeb - L345  KY
John J. Green - L22  PA
Thomas Innes - L22  PA
Thomas Kelly - L22  PA
Harry LeGrand - L22  PA
Albert Stevenson - L22  PA
Charles Zorr - L22  PA
Hugh Murray - L2  IL
Paul Polatti - L1  PA
Joseph McDonough - L94  NY
Francis H. McCormick - L43  OR
Daniel Rogers - L734  MD
Thomas Tuite - L2  IL
August Danczyk - L2  IL
George S. Wiest - L22  PA
Michael J. Mahon - L950  MA

IAFF FFFM Panel 1919-1920

John Burke - L2  IL
August H. Schafer - L416  IN
Peter Coughlan - L27  WA
John Baynes - L2  IL
John DeBreau - Le  IL

1920

Walter E. Reinheimer - L333  OH
Martin J. Haley - L282  NY
Warren Willis - L29  WA
Phillip P. Wagner - L860  PA
John Hade - L73  MO
Peter Buckley - L48  OH
Raymond Norris - L48  OH
Adolph Schonecker - L48  OH
Edward J. Vahling - L48  OH
Oscar H. Sohar - L786  CT
William Egenriether - L73  MO
Joseph Wittgenstein - L73  MO
Charles B. Summers - L34  AR
Thomas F. Brennan - L94  NY
Michael Karkel - L94  NY
James Brennan - L94  NY
Frank A. J. Callmeyer - L94  NY
James J. Hughes - L94  NY
Samuel Brown - L94  NY

Edward Jones - L1  PA
Harry L. Reese - L60  PA
Joseph Walsh - L48  OH
Henry A. Trull - L1116  MA
Charles Lacasse - L27  WA
Herman Grundlach - L1  PA
Charles Parks - L734  MD
Frank Keim - L48  OH
Charles W. Wilson - L101  MN
Owen Williams - L798  CA
Millford Dorff - L22  PA
Eugene Ost - L73  MO
Asa H. Hancock - L1645  UT
Harry Wilson - L94  NY
Edward Schwartzkopf - L22  PA
Harry Wilfrin - L22  PA
Fred Hotel - L48  OH
Joseph Schott - L48  OH
Lee West - L48  OH
Albert P. Schoenig - L48  OH
Denis Donovan - L94  NY
Dennis Martin - L1  PA
William Coe - L527  ON"

May they never be forgotten.

Thriller Thursday - Wrapping Up the Villers Trial, Part 5

The Jamestown Weekly Alert,
20JAN1898, pg1

OK. Sadly this is more on defining evidence from a quick glance. Let's get this out of the way. Perhaps when I'm done transcribing it we'll discover something new...

"What is Circumstantial Evidence?

The evidence offered by the state tending to connect Mr. Villers with the offense charged is what is known as circumstantial evidence. It therefore becomes important to inform you what circumstantial evidence is and to point out the distinction between that and direct evidence in order to give you an idea of the mode in which judicial investigation is to be pursued by the aid of circumstantial evidence. I cannot do better than to quote from the charge of an eminent jurist:

The distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence is this: Direct or positive evidence is when a witness can be called to testify of the precise fact which is a subject of issue on trial. That is, in cases of homicide that the party accused caused the death of the deceased. Whatever may be the kind or force of the evidence this is the act to be proved. But suppose no person was present on the occassion (sic) of the death and of course that no one can be called to testify about it, is it wholly unsusceptible of legal proof? Experience has shown that circumstantial evidence may be offered in such cases; that is, that a body of facts may be proved of so conclusive a character as to warrant and form the belief of the fact quite as strong and certain as that on which discreet men are accostomed (sic) to act in relation to their most important concerns. It would be injurious to the best interests of society if such proof could not avail in judicial proceedings. If it was necessary always to have direct evidence how many criminal acts committed in the community, destructive of its peace and subversive of its order and security would go wholly undetected and unpunished.

The Jamestown Weekly Alert,
20JAN1898, pg1

The necessity therefor of resorting to circumstantial evidence finds a safe and reliable proceeding as obvious as absolute. Crimes are secret. Most men conscious of criminal, and who purpose the execution of criminal acts, seek the security of secresy (sic) and darkness. It is necessary, therefor, to use all other modes of evidence beside that of direct testimony provided such evidence may be relied on as leading to safe and satisfactory conclusions and thus a beneficent providence, the laws of nature and the relations of things to each other are so linked and combined together that a medium of proof is other thereby furnished leading to inferences and conclusions as strong as those rising from direct testimony. Perhaps strong circumstantial evidence in cases of crimes like this committed for the main part in secret is the most satisfactory of any other to draw the conclusion of guilt; for a man may be seduced to perjury by many base motives to which the secret nature of the offense may sometimes afford the temptation; but it can scarcely happen that many circumstances especially if they be of such over which the successor should have no control forming together links of the transaction should all unfortunately concur to fix the presumption of guilt on an individual and yet such a conclusion be erroneous. But in the case of circumstantial evidence where no witnesses can testify directly to the fact to be proved it is arrived at by a series of other facts which by experience have been found so associated with the facts in question that in the relation of cause and effect they lead to a satisfactory and certain conclusion."

Do you feel like you were just listening to the teacher on a Charlie Brown cartoon? I felt that way typing this. At one point I completely disengaged the comprehension part of my brain and was essentially just typing letters without grasping their meaning.

Memorial Monday - IAFF Fallen Fire Fighter Memorial 1918-1919

ForIAFF FFFM Panel 1918-1919

For the 1918-1919 transcription I had to use two pictures of the panel. The granite is very shiny, but that also makes it rather reflective so some names can't be seen clearly in the first, but they can in the second picture.

"International Association of Fire Fighters Organized February 28, 1918

1918

John Doyle - L22  PA
Charles C. Merges - L22  PA
Cornelius McGuire - L37  IL
Frank Geschke - L73  MO
Frank W. Hundsdorfer - L5  CO
Frank Weber - L575  MN
Richard S. Frost - L18  BC
Otis Fulton - L18  BC
Colin McKenzie - L18  BC
Donald Morrison - L18  BC
William J. Cameron - L18  BC
James F. Weldon - L825  CT

IAFF FFFM Panel 1918-1919

Thomas F. McDermott - L1116  MA
Patrick Moran - L1116  MA
Edward Smally - L344  MI
John Evers - L357  IN
Roy C. Gundlach - L145  CA
Charles Wing - L841  MA
Alexander Vint - L456  CA
Oliver Ough - L113  ON
John Anderson - L22  PA
Joseph Lund - L730  BC
Frank Campagna - L1784  TN
William H. Richards - L36  DC
Frank O. Markward - L36  DC
William T. Byran - L36  DC
Frederick W. Cheeney - L36  DC
Thomas A. Binaco - L36  DC
Matthew J. Cummings - L94  NY
William Sammon - L344 MI
Richard Dempsey - L2  IL
Maurice O'Dea - L2 IL
Herman Brandt - L366  MI
Thomas H. Mc Andrews - L718  MA
Joseph S. Fitzgerald - L94  NY
John F. Farr - L36  DC
Charles B. Proctor - L36  DC
Anthony J. Berberich - L734  MD
Frederick T. Branan - L734  MD

1919

Charles S. Snyder - L94  NY
Clinton T. Lowes - L416  IN
Oscar Peterson - L2  IL
George Layhe - L718  MA
George J. Scanlon - L94  NY
Joseph G. Schmitt - L94  NY
Timothy P. O'Sullivan - L42  MO
Ben Graham - L45  KY
William E. Schalle - L94  NY
Moses Thompson - L113  ON
James Lindsay - L149  ID
Thomas J. Stevens - L718  MA
Frederick Maas - L2081  NJ
Alfred D. Kundie - L94  NY
Oscar Danford - L249  OH
Robert T. Moorehead - L22  PA
John J. Conlon - L798  CA
Daniel Campion - L21  MN
Asa H. Cooper - L58  TX
Theodore B. Kentzel - L798  CA
Harold Nolan - L475  I
Howard A. Davis - L734  MD
John A. Watson - L734  MD
Patrick J. Lee - L94  NY"

May they never be forgotten.

Black Sheep Sunday - Murder-Suicide Makes Headlines Nationwide

Daily Capital Journal - 16AUG1950, pg2

The not so booming metropolis of Hazleton/West Hazleton made national news when my great uncle's wife was murdered in a bar. The news clipping mistakenly lists the location of the "taproom" as being in Hazleton, but it was West Hazleton. I suppose that's not really a significant error. They're right next to each other. You blink and you've left Hazleton and entered West Hazleton or vice versa.

Here is a clipping distributed through the Associated Press and landed in the Daily Capital Journal in Salem, Oregon.

"Two Killed in Hazleton Bar

Hazleton, Pa., Aug. 16 (AP) - A 60-year-old man shot a woman to death in a Hazleton taproom early today and then killed himself, Police Chief Carl Meiss reported.

Miss said the man, Andrew Harvilla, a retired coal miner from nearby Treckow (sic), entered Beltz's cafe shortly after the woman, Mrs. Helen Bronsavage, 33, and asked her to have a drink with him.

She refused, Meiss said, and asked Harvilla to call a taxi. Then she went to a table. Miss said the man walked to her table, drew a .38 caliber revolver from his pocket and fired a bullet into her head. Then, the police officer said, he walked eight feet away and fired a bullet into his own head.

Mrs. Bronsavage was acquitted of murder charges last October. She was accused of firing the shotgun charge that killed Louis Broton, 34, at a cabin near Freehand last May 1."

I've blogged about Helen Bronsavage nee Sabulash previously (see below), but I never realized how far her murder was broadcast. It made national news when she killed a man, claimed self-defense, and got off. Perhaps that's why this was picked up by the AP. Her murder happened less than a year after her acquittal. I had been looking for information on my Bronsavage line on Newspapers.com when this article (and several others like it) popped up.

I always get a bit angry when I read about her. I think that's why I share the articles/information. It's a way to vent. In my opinion she was a terrible mother and wife and got her just desserts. Her husband was in a wheelchair and she went around with other men. She didn't divorce him, she just screwed around on him. She had a little girl at home too that she apparently wasn't taking care of. How different their lives could have been if she hadn't decided to do the things she had done. I suppose that's true with everything though.

Related posts:
Thriller Thursday: Some People Just Can't Be Good, Part I
Thriller Thursday: Some People Just Can't Be Good, Part II
Thriller Thursday: Some People Just Can't Be Good, Part III

Thriller Thursday - Wrapping Up the Villers Trial, Part 4

The Jamestown Weekly Alert
20JAN1898, pg1

OK. OK. I finally finished that discussion post for my Lighting class. It wasn't as bad as I expected either. Now I'm just waiting until my kiddos get home from school and until it's time to head out to caucus (it's Super Tuesday as I write this). So I'm going to pick back up where I left off and we're going to hear about the evidence that was presented in the case of North Dakota vs Martin J. Villers.

 "Evidence.

From the foregoing provisions of our code it will be noticed that the death of August Tromer must be established by direct proof. Evidence is of two kinds: direct and circumstantial evidence.

Direct evidence is the evidence of witnesses who either saw or head the facts about which they testify or otherwise perceived their exsistance (sic) by some of their senses. You will remember what the testimony is bearing upon the fact of the death of August Tromer and if you find from the direct proof in the case beyond a reasonable doubt that he was killed on or about the day charged in this information, the exact date being immaterial, then you will pass to the other question in the case as to whether or not this defendant Martin J. Villers, is the person who did such killing. And whether or not he had a premeditated design to effect the death of the said August Tromer.

The Jamestown Weekly Alert
20JAN1898, pg1

Before you can find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree as charged in this information it will be necessary for you to find from the evidence in the case beyond a reasonable doubt that August Tromer was unlawfully killed about Sept. 14, '94 and that this defendant killed him in the manner charged in the information and further that at the time of said killing, this defendant had a premeditated design to effect the death of August Tromer and unless you find all of these facts to be true from the evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt you must acquit the defendant.

The fact that the states attorney of county has filed this information accusing Mr. Villers of the crime charged against him is no evidence whatsoever of his guilt and must not be so construed by you. The defendedendant (sic) comes into this court clothed with the presumption of innocence and this presumption continues throughout the trial until overcome by proof of hi guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

Well...so much for the actual evidence...this only defines it. I imagine they'll get into the actual evidence at some point. What this does do is let us know that the jury was supposed to only find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Still the same as today, but still nothing about that whole unanimous decision.  I'll keep it short and sweet and jump into at least one more section next week.