The First Burial in Pioneer Cemetery

By Douglas H. Shepard, 2000

In outline, Ursula Woodcock’s account (Fredonia Censor 6/18/1873) was the following. Her parents were Oliver and Asenath (Williams) Woodcock. Living in Oneida County, the family consisted of six children. The Woodcocks left for Fredonia along with the Richard Williams and James Morgan families. Stopping in Buffalo (this was in 1806) it then took another four days to travel from Buffalo to Fredonia. After arriving here, Mr. Woodcock was delegated to go on to La Boeuf (near today’s Watertown, Pa.) to buy corn and have it ground. In the fall of 1806 he helped Hezekiah Barker build his grist mill. In October of that year, his daughter Hannah Woodcock, six years old, was killed while out with other children gathering nuts. A man was clearing the land nearby and a tree he was cutting down fell on her and killed her. The hands at the mill made a coffin. “They carried the little one, through dense woods to our present burying ground, where she was laid to rest under a large hemlock tree.”

The other basic sources (Fredonia Advertiser 2/12/1864; Fredonia Censor 6/25/1873) written by her cousin, Sophia Williams, have some significant differences. Sophia’s father, Richard Williams, exchanged his farm in Oneida County for land in Fredonia. The original settler had cleared a few acres and put part of it into corn and potatoes. Along with the Woodcock family, on June 1, 1807, (not 1806) they left for Fredonia. They reached Buffalo together and, after waiting a few days, sent their goods on by boat and drove overland (almost a week’s journey), arriving in Fredonia on July 16th. “The little girl that was killed by the falling tree was my cousin, Hannah Woodcock. I was with her when she was killed. She was the first that was laid in the old Burying Ground.” (Advertiser.) When Mr. Williams died in Portland on September 20,1822 he was buried “in Fredonia’s burying ground, a place he helped to select in 1807, when the first death occurred.” (Censor.)

These versions differ as to date by one year. When was Hannah Woodcock buried, in 1806 or 1807? Because Mrs. Ursula Ashley was born in 1790 or 1791, she would have been around 15 years old when the Woodcocks arrived, certainly old enough to be aware of the events around her. Her cousin, Mrs. Sophia Harris, on the other hand was, at most, three or four years old. However, as she said in the Advertiser letter “I was a little child then, but some of the incidents...are as fresh in my mind as though they transpired but yesterday.” And, apparently, nothing was said or written in the nine years between this 1864 letter and the version in the Censor in 1873 to cause her to change the account.

There is other evidence supporting the 1807 date. In March 1861, Mrs. James Brigham (Fanny Risley) tried to relieve the monotony of the sick bed for her son, George F. Brigham, by recounting some of her early recollections of Fredonia. When her in—laws—to—be, the Brighams, first came here, she said, they lived with the Richard Williams family for about two weeks until a house could be built. “It was while they were there that a little child was killed by the falling of a tree, the child of Mr. Woodcock, a relative of Mr. Williams living near him. The tree was cut down by Geo. W. Pierce and this was the first death in town.” (Fanny Risley would have been about thirteen at the time.) (Fredonia Censor 9/17/1884.)

1807 seems to be the correct date.

The Common School System in New York State

Compiled by Douglas H. Shepard, 2000

In 1812 a landmark law established a statewide system of common school districts and authorized distribution of interest from the Common School Fund. Town and city officials were directed to lay out the districts. The voters in each district elected trustees to operate its school. State aid was distributed to those districts holding school at least three months a year for population aged 5-15.

While the 1812 act authorized local authorities to establish common school districts, an 1814 amendment required them to do so. The typical district had a one-room or two-room schoolhouse where children learned reading, writing, spelling, arithmetic, and geography. By the mid-1800s New York had over 10,000 common school districts.

Beyond the "3 R's" (readin', 'ritin', 'rithmetic) offered by the common schools, more advanced instruction was available in private high schools known as "academies" or "seminaries." The Regents monitored these schools and provided them modest amounts of aid. After 1827 aid from the Literature Fund was designated for students in all academic courses, not just Latin and Greek, thereby encouraging academies to broaden their programs beyond that of the classical grammar school. By the 1850s about 165 academies around the state provided secondary education. (Very few youths went on to college).

By the 1840s the small common school districts became inadequate in populous areas. In 1853 a state law authorized one or more common districts to form a “union free school district.” This law permitted the new districts to establish "academic departments," or high schools, which were to be overseen by both the Regents and the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Boards of education managed the property and finances of the city and union free districts, and hired superintendents to administer systems with several schools. The private academies could not compete with free high schools, and most soon merged with the union districts or simply closed down. High school enrollments expanded greatly during the 1920s and 1930s, leading the NYS Education Department to promote the comprehensive high school. Most of the union free districts later became the cores of central school districts.

Formation of central rural school districts was first authorized by a 1914 law. In 1917 the Legislature abolished all the thousands of common school districts and formed them into "township units." School taxes shot up, taxpayers protested, and a year later the township system was abandoned. Because a study by the Board of Regents' completed in 1938 criticized the small size of many schools, centralization procedures were improved and a master plan for school consolidation/centralization was developed by 1947 and updated in 1958. Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) were formed in 1948 to provide shared educational services across district lines, especially in rural areas.

Stoddards and Lovells

By Douglas H. Shepard, 2008

                Alford (frequently entered as "Alfred") Stoddard was born in Vermont ca. 1798. The 1850 Census gives his age as 52; the 1855 as 57. He married Anna Gore, born on 13 January 1802, daughter of Ezekiel and Meriam Gore, on 8 October 1819 at Halifax, Windham, Vermont. There is an undocumented entry to this effect in the LDS Online International Genealogical Index for North America. The Stoddard family came to Fredonia probably around 1833. (In the 1855 Census they claim to have been resident 22 years.) Alfred and Anna Stoddard were both admitted into the Fredonia Baptist Church by letter on 5 September 1835. (Church Records; and see The Chautauqua Genealogist Vol.29,No.1,p.17.)

                Alford Stoddard appears for the first time in the Pomfret Assessment Roll for 1835, owning 80 acres and having personal property valued at $3500. It may not be a coincidence that a Silas E. Stoddard also appeared for the first time in Pomfret in 1835. Alford Stoddard purchased additional lands on 24 November 1841 and 22 May 1844. (Property Deeds, Mayville Court House.) A daughter, Mary Ann, born in November 1823.  Her obituary of February 1856 says she was 32 years, 3 months old. She was married to Amos B. Lovell of Pleasantville PA on 16 November 1848 in Fredonia. The marriage was performed by the Rev. B. C. Willoughby of the Fredonia Baptist Church (Fredonia Censor 21 November 1848). Lovell, then from Allegany, Cattaraugus County, had attended the Fredonia Academy in the April 1848 Term. He was 22 at the time (Academy Records).

                The 1850 Census lists the household as: Alford Stoddard, 52; Anna, 48; Mila, 21; Augusta, 16; Chester,12; Alice, 8; and Ellen, 5.  The 1851 map of Fredonia shows Stoddard living on Hamlet Street near Water Street. On 12 May 1851 "A. Stoddard" married "C. N. Walker" and "M. Stoddard" married "C. L. Quackenbush," both ceremonies (a joint ceremony?) performed by the Rev. T. S. Griswold of the Fredonia Baptist Church (FC 6 and 13 May 1851). The grooms were probably Carlton N. Walker, son of Lewis M. Walker, who attended the Fredonia Academy in 1837 and again in 1847, and Chauncey L. Quackenbush of Charlotte, who attended the Academy in the August 1849 Term. Augusta Stoddard of Fredonia attended in 1845-1850.; Mila in 1844 and 1845 (Academy Records).

                The Fredonia Village map of the 1854 Atlas shows Alford Stoddard living on Eagle Street at what was then the equivalent of today's 101 Eagle Street. Later it was moved to become 120 Eagle Street. It was illustrated in the Atlas. The family as listed in the 1855 Census was: Alford Stoddard, 57, resident 22 years, born in VT; Anna, 53, ditto; Mila, 26, born in VT; Chester, 17; Alice, 14; and Ellen, 10, all born in NY; and five hired men.

                On 19 February 1856, Mary Ann (Stoddard) Lovell died in Pleasantville PA, wife of Amos Lovell and daughter of Alfred Stafford [sic] of Fredonia (FC 27 February 1856). The Lovell family believes there was a young daughter, Mary Ann Lovell, who was raised by her grandmother, Anna Stafford. She never married and died in Los Angeles CA in 1939. Amos Lovell married an Elizabeth A. Carroll (?) in 1858 (Personal letter from Burrell B. Lovell to the Barker Historical Museum 1 February 2006).

                Chester Stoddard died on 29 October 1857, age 20 ¼. He was buried in Forest Hill Cemetery in a plot purchased by his father (FC 4 November 1857 and Cemetery Records.) The death of his only son may have been a precipitating factor in Stoddard's decision to leave Fredonia. Through 1857 and 1858 the assessment rolls show him with his handsome dwelling on a substantial parcel of land plus an astounding list of twenty two other lots, homes and businesses, but by 1859 he was gone. He does not appear anywhere in the 1860 Census, although he may have been in Iowa by then. The 1870 Census records him in Benton Township, IA with an Alice Stoddard, 11, born in Iowa. They are living in the household of Sarah T. Wood, 19, born in Ohio; Robert J. Wood, 1 month old born in Iowa; Frank J. Wood, 3, born in Iowa; and Martha E. Wood, 7, born in Iowa. There is no indication if Alice is Stoddard's daughter, granddaughter, or niece, nor if either is related to Sarah T. Wood.

                The 1860 Census does record Amos Lovel, 35, born in PA; Betsy, 31, born in NY; Calvin, 1, born in NY; and Sarah Carroll, 32, born in NY; living in Laona. If this is Mary Ann's widower, he must have moved back to New York before 1859.  The 1870 Census for Oil Creek PA notes a Mary Lovell, 20, domestic help, in the family of Alonzo Poor, farmer. It is possible this is Amos Lovell's daughter, if she was born around 1850. However, the family believes that her mother may have died giving her birth, in 1856. The Forest Hill Cemetery Records note that Alfred Stoddard deeded Lot C-45, where Chester occupied one grave, to a Chatfield H. Parsons in 1874, indicating that Stoddard was still alive, son, 10, born in PA, also at school. This does seem to be Amos B. Lovell and his second family.

                The only other record is in the 1920 Census for Los Angeles CA: Mary A. Lovell, lodger, 59, born in New York, single. She is a Saleslady — medicine. Her father's birthplace is unknown, her mother's New York. This is the woman the Lovell family believes was the daughter of Mary A. Stoddard and Amos B. Lovell who died in Los Angeles in 1939. However, if she was truly 59 in 1920, therefore born in 1861, those dates do not work.

The 1854 Stephen May Letter and Excommunication

Transcribed by Douglas H. Shepard, 2005

                To the Baptist Church in Fredonia, of which the undersigned is a Member,

                Brethren, Whereas there is a prejudice against me in this Chh. which is believed by some to have its origin in the differences existing between Mr. C. Roberts and myself, which I deem untrue, and hope to show, because this prejudice existed more than three years before he was known in this community, which is the sole cause of the offensive document purporting to be a Report of a Committee appointed by the Chh. and read in Chh. meeting by G. W. Lewis on the 10th day of Nov. last. Therefore I ask your patience while I trace the events of the past six years which have a bearing on the matter in question.

                At the time when efforts were being made for the adjustment of the difficulties between the two bodies claiming to be the first baptist chh. of Pomfret and the formation of a new chh. I was solicited to become a constituent member, and as I had stood aloof from both parties during eight years, and having a strong desire for the prosperity of the baptist interest, I complied with the oft repeated solicitation and became a member—— At that time, I regret to say it was obvious there was little union of sentiment and less unanimity of feeling existing between members of the chh.  Arminianism Campbellism and soon after Millerism found advocates in the chh. Among them Campbellism was the most prominent which seemed to be fast gaining advocates in the body.

One of the members who openly advocated the Campbellite sentiments had a large number under his tuition at that time as we had no Minister during that year after the first of April. There were a number of candidates for the Pastoral Office, but they were rejected mainly thro' the influence of those adhering to Campbellism. And indeed every opportunity was seized on during the year to poison the minds of the youth with this antichristian doctrine and sentiment by G. W. Lewis. Against this as a member of the baptist chh., and a Christian, I deemed it my duty to stand up and bear testimony, having a strong desire for the purity and oneness of the baptist sentiment without which no church can be successful. It was stated repeatedly by the leader of this party that it was not necessary for the church to have a Minister That the New testament was all we needed.

I opposed this sentiment often and referred to the directions given in the Scriptures on this point, and quoted such language as the following. How can they hear without a preacher & which will be recollected by some of the members. I pursued this course during the year on account of which Mr. Lewis and his adherents took offence. In the Spring of 1849 Elder Griswold took the pastoral charge of the Chh.­­________ As a man, a citizen, a christian and a minister, he was universally beloved and respected. The congregation greatly increased in numbers and the chh. was edified. Soon after the settlement of Eld. Griswold, one of the members of the chh. Dea. Hamilton became a Millerite having embraced all the false doctrine of that deluded sect, and at the first meeting afterwards he avowed and advocated these false sentiments, and said at the same time there could be no objection to his continuing his membership inasmuch as there were members of the chh. who were not Baptists, thereby intimating that our errors justified another. But I opposed his course and was happy to find I was sustained by the Pastor and some of the members of the chh.

This opposition I continued as often as these errors were repeated and sustained by G. W. Lewis.

In thus doing what I deemed my duty in opposing error and heresy I laid the foundation for the prejudices against me by Members of the chh. which have been industriously augmented by Campbellite influence. This state of things increased to such a degree that G. W. Lewis refused to instance common civility towards me during more than two years. He seemed determined that Dea. Hamilton should be retained a member of the chh. and intimated that the greater the diversity of sentiment in the chh. the sooner he could organize a Campbellite Society and build up an interest on the ruins of the Baptist Chh. and this in five years he boasted he would do.

At the close of the first year of Eld. Griswolds services there was chh. meeting to discuss the subject of continuing him as Pastor of the Chh. __ __ G. W. Lewis opposed the motion urging as a reason that Eld. Griswold was not a grammarian, was ignorant of the Scriptures, and thus incapable of teaching, and that if he were retained he would not give anything towards his support. A subscription was liberally sustained by all with the exception of Mr. Lewis and those under his influence, and Eld. Griswold continued his pastoral labors during the summer but said the Campbellite influence was against him and paralizing all his influence and efforts.

                About this time the case of Dea. Hamilton was bro't before the chh. meeting by D. Barrell, nine months had passed since Dea. Hamilton had maintained his erroneous sentiments. The chh. had had hopes of his abandoning them, but their hopes were vain. A sharp debate took place between Mr. Barrell & Lewis._____ Mr. Lewis alleged that the chhh. had no right to exclude one on account of his sentiments. Mr. Barrell said that Dea. Hamilton was fully established in his views, would make no concession and did not wish to be retained a member of the chh. ­­­­_____On the other hand, Mr. Lewis insisted that he should be retained a member and seemed very angry, using insolent language and created a great degree of excitement. At this time I confess I was excited in some measure and said there was no difference between Campbellism Mormonism and Millerism, for they were all disorganizers in everything pertaining to chh. order._______ This gave great offence to Mr. Lewis and his party. He seemed in a great rage and determined to have revenge. Soon after this I requested a chh. meeting to take into consideration his conduct and antichristian sentiments. ___  At four different covenant meetings I made this request, but some of his party opposed it. I therefore each time asked for a letter of dismission affirming that my sentiments would not justify me in continuing in a chh. where such false views and erroneous practices were sustained, that I wished to be separate from all heresy and false doctrine.

But a deaf ear was turned to all my requests and as Mr. Lewis became acquainted with and understood all my objections to him he grew more revengeful. In the spring of 1851 Elder Kingsbury assumed the Pastorate charge of the chh. But he had been here but a few months before Mr. Lewis commenced an unprovoked attack on him, accusing him of falsehood and lying, but soon found he had commenced on the wrong man. He did not find him the patient inoffensive Eld. Griswold. He was met by prompt and energetic decission and he cowered down under the influence of truth.

In the Spring of 1854 I commenced a labour with C. Roberts, in accordance with the rule contained in the 18th of Matthew. But he refused to hear me, I then took one more with me but he refused to hear him. I then told it to the chh. and ___ they refused to hear me. I then asked for an unprejudiced committee to investigate my charges against C. Roberts together with my conduct towards him and requested at the same time that the investigation should be confined to the difficulty existing between us. All matters of deal had been adjusted between us. All that now existed was in regard to christian conduct towards each other. A Committee was appointed and the first named on that Committee was G. W. Lewis who owned he was prejudiced against me and yet was Chairman of that Committee. I knew he was my enemy and the enemy of the chh. and the enemy of the Baptist denomination and yet he was appointed to and accepted the responsible station of carrying out the discipline of the Baptist chh. and he himself not a Baptist and no feelings of interests in common with Baptists. The Committee reported that the labour was not in accordance with the gospel "rule" But they had no evidence words crossed out

I said it was taken in accordance with such rule. But the Committee were not appointed for the purpose of deciding on the merits of the labour that was no part of their business whether the labour was taken in accordance with Gospel rule or not. They transcended their power. As the facts existed they were in duty bound to hear the evidence and make a just report in writing. To hear the amount of evidence introduced on each charge ____ The chh. then would have been enabled to act understandingly. If from the evidence adduced the chh. had come to the conclusion that I had done wrong I should like a christian [have?]  confessed my faults. If there had been an honest and christian course pursued all difficulty might have been amicably adjusted and the church have been in peace and harmony. But the scripture saith not in vain "one sinner destroyeth much good." And he that speaketh as man never spake said "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy." It is plain to be seen how much good has been prevented by the influence in the chh. ____ The Report of Committee was accepted and the Committee was discharged. A new Committee of five members was appointed, but for what purpose I was not informed as I was not present at the time. Sometime in July the Chairman of the Committee told me the appointment was made to investigate the difficulties between C. Roberts and myself. About the first of September, I met the Committee with Mr. Roberts. The charges I had [proposed/prefered?]  against him were talked over and as he made no concessions I offered to prove my charges at any time they might appoint. But no time was appointed as they did not wish me to bring any evidence.

Soon after this meeting I called on the chairman of the committee to ascertain when the Committee would be ready for the evidence. His reply was "They do not wish any evidence." From that time I supposed the subject was given up as I heard nothing more about it until the 10th of November. It had been kept a profound secret from me. I did not suppose a report could or would be made without the evidence on both sides and the accuser and the accused were had face to face. It seemed to me they did not act in good faith. It looks like a premeditated plan to deprive me of my rights as it was kept a secret from me and I was not allowed to bring any evidence and no intimation given that a report was being made. About the 8th of Nov. I was informed by the chh. clerk that a chh. meeting was appointed to be held on the tenth of Nov. but did not intimate to me the object or the meeting, I supposed it to be an ordinary business. But greatly to my surprise on that day a report as foreign from the facts in the case as falsehood is from the truth was made. This committee as individuals had made "full inquiries" from the 1st of July until the 10th of Nov. to ascertain whether I was morally or had cheated anybody, but failing to find anything against me, They seized hold of a case which had been adjusted four years before. I allude to the case of Br. J. Porter. The case between us was a legal one and was amicably adjusted and in accordance with his own proposition. Hence the inference is plain that this Committee were not governed by the Gospel "Do unto others as ye would they should do unto you" but were actuated by prejudice and prepossessian and in opposition to Apostolic injunction "Do nothing by partiality" "Prefer not one above another." But the report is at war with every principle of our holy religion, because it is founded in error partiality and untruth.

The Committee say in their report that they have spared no efforts to obtain a true statement of all the facts bearing on the differences between Bro. May and Roberts. This is the first count. I ask, is this position true or false? If reflecting offered evidence and obtaining false statements from interested individuals constitute the effort, then this position is true, otherwise it is false. Then the judgment founded on this position must necessarily be false, a true Judgment is founded on true testimony___________ The Committee go on further to say that "having as individuals made full inquiries, find themselves unanimous in the conclusions forced on their minds by their investigations." What investigations had they had? They had rejected offered testimony. They had sought and took ex parti statements.__ In this it is presumed they were "unanimous." But does unanimity in a wrong constitute a right?­___ In the 2d count of this report the Committee go on to say "They have made repeated efforts to induce these Brethren mutually to adjust their differences and to settle between themselves but have not been successful ____ But we have had no differences to settle since our arbitration. All matters were then adjusted by three members of the chh. by mutual agreement and Mr. Roberts was on the stand one whole day and testified to all the facts relative to himself__ ___ ___ ___ The charges I had previously prefered against Mr. Roberts for immoral conduct were not included in our settlement by arbitration. In the third count, the Committee say They are satisfied that Br. May made such promises in his letters to Br. Roberts and held out such inducements in conversation with him as led him to believe that it would be greatly for his interest and the interest of his family to leave his former place of residence where he was doing well and remove to Fredonia."

The letters referred to here were before the Arbitrators and passed on by them and the conversations alluded to were testified to by Mr. Roberts on the trial. How came this Committee in possession of the conversations between Mr. Roberts and myself? If they obtained them of Mr. Roberts it could not be received as testimony unless I was present and gave my assent to it. But I was not present on any such occasion.__ __ The committee say that "I held out inducements in my letters and conversation for Mr. Roberts to leave where he was doing well." Mr. Roberts was a hired servant by the year and liable to be turned out of employment at the end of the year. He had no property and had no way to make any. My compassion on the Motherless children when I was there in the Spring of 1850 induced me afterwards to write to him what I had thoughts of doing for the benefit of those children and not him or for his other children. So far from that, I told him plainly I did not design to give him anything. But what I left would be for the benefit of those Motherless children __ His reply was, he did not expect me to give him any thing.

I also wrote, I had thoughts of purchasing a farm and he might come and live on the farm and we would live together. He should do the work under my direction and we would divide the profits as he would with any other man, so that I could have something to bestow on other needy ones and assist in the education of motherless children___ I did purchase a farm for $3500. Team tools, and cows and furnished provisions for his famiy for more than a year. And what did I receive in return for my expense and labour? Nothing but abuse which I could have shown by ample and competent testimony ____ What I did for him the first year amounted to more than $600. and so much over and above what I ever thought of doing. I carried out every suggestion that I ever made and arrangement for the benefit of his children. The conduct of Mr. Roberts and his Wife was such and their abuse, claiming the exclusive ownership of my property __ Threatening personal violence and driving me out of my house, was the cause of the arrangements being broken up. Mr. Roberts continued on the farm during the next year and the avails of which I received nothing. The Committee go on to say that for more than "one year Br. May was satisfied with Br. Roberts." __ Which is not true even for one month __ "Nor can your committee learn that by any misconduct on the part of Br. Roberts or nonfulfillment of his part of the engagement that he has rendered void the positive and repeated obligation which Br. May voluntarily entered into with him." This may all be true for they refused to hear the testimony which he freely acknowledged to several persons and which the Committee cannot regard in any other light than as a contract as (binding as) one written and sealed and which could not be violated without involving a great moral wrong." _____ Suffice it here to say that there was no contract made with him of any name or nature and this he testified to before the arbitrators. In the fourth count, the Committee say "They believe Br. May has violated his contract and that the work of reconciliation rests with him, and in order to effect which it becomes his duty fully to satisfy Br. Roberts for the injuries sustained by him, and to remunerate him for the loss and disadvantage which such violation has caused him to suffer" ____ In answer to this let me here say that inasmuch as there was no contract there was none to violate and that "the work of reconciliation" rests with him and not with me for he and his Wife have been the cause of breaking up the arrangements and making the difficulty. ­­­ The committee further say that I have deprived him of the use of a good farm worth $2500." I utterly deny ever having either directly or indirectly made him a promise of a farm or that I ever had the intention or intimated an intention of giving him or his family one dollar of my property while I lived.

It may seem strange to some that the Committee have in their report entirely justified Mr. Roberts in all these transactions and yet my charges against him lay before them and proof offered to substantiate those charges. The last item of the Report which I deem worthy of notice is the [suing?] of Bro. J. Porter. It is true there was a matter of difference existing between us which was tried in court and settled by mutual agreement, since which there has been no difficulty between us and that was four years ago. That there has been a great moral wrong connected with these transactions I freely admit. But the wrong rests entirely with Mr. Roberts inasmuch as he was the cause of breaking up the arrangements and thereby depriving his children of what I  intended to leave them. I think therefore it must be obvious to all that the premises being false the conclusions must be so too. The whole transaction of the committee seems to me to be most extraordinary._____Instead of eliciting the truth and correcting errors wherever they may be found, It seems to have been the object of the Committee to find occasion for my removal from the chh. under the impression that I should be formidable in opposing the errors so strenuously maintained by one at least of the members of the Committee. My interest has been identified with the baptist cause for more than fifty years. Believing it to be the cause of God; any innovation raises all the energies of my soul in its defense. I have seen the progress of error for these many years in this place with painful emotions and as opportunity offered I have lifted up my voice against it and for this cause do I now stand before you accused and persecuted. Thus much I deemed it my duty to say in answer to the document purporting to be a report of a committee of the chh. I am aware that in many things I have offended and done wrong, which I regret most sincerely and ask forgiveness__ __ __ __ But so far as the report of the Committee is concerned it seems to me that it bears on its face the impress of partiality and falsehood.

                In closing the remarks I have to offer I desire distinctly to disavow all intention of dictating to the chh. the course it shall pursue, or to ride over the chh. as has been suggested. I have never entertained any such tho't. I think I possess a strong desire for the prosperity of the chh. and would not willingly do anything to retard its progress in the way of holiness and happiness. It must be obvious to all that oneness of mind, unanimity of feeling and concert of action are indispensable to the promotion of peace and good will among Brethren. "One Lord one faith one baptism. I pray that they all may be one" are scriptural injunctions embodying the sentiments I would here set forth. Diversity of sentiment on the fundamental principles of the Gospel, produces disunion discord and strife, confidence is destroyed and how can they strive together for the faith of the gospel? The strife is between themselves. The Holy Spirit is compared to a dove, which will not remain where there is strife and confusion. The scripture saith not in vain "If any man hath not the spirit of Christ he is none of his.” Without the Spirit of Christ there is hatred. The Apostle says "whoso hateth his brother is a wanderer and if any man saith he loveth God and hates his brother is a liar, for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen. “ We know we have passed from death unto life because we love the Brethren" __

In reviewing carefully and prayerfully and often the acts for which I am arraigned before you as a culprit I possess the smiles of an approving conscience.____ The Apostle Peter saith "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the Godly out of temptation and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished, for if our heart condemn us God is greater than mans heart and knoweth all things. Beloved if our heart condemn us not then have we confidence towards God.” No one should presume to judge between God and the conscience of his fellow. If Christ justifies, who dares condemn. The Gospel is our only rule of action, from its teachings I perceive in myself a wide departure as well as in others. I desire and pray that all things may be overruled for the best good of those who trust in him, that his chh. throughout the world may be built up in the faith and order of the Gospel. That this end might be attained The chh. should be purified from all things that disturb its peace and harmony, for as it was anciently so is it now. He that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit. Nevertheless what saith the Scriptures. Cast out the bond Woman and her son for the son of the bond woman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman.

There are two passages of scripture which I desire read before the chh. now, Which I think appropriate on this occasion. 2d Thess, 2s ch. 3-12. 2d Let. 2d ch. 11-19 I prize above all price the privileges connected with membership in a well refulated chh. It is the only solace left me in my declining years, and yet I would greatly prefer to forego its pleasures and immunities, than connive at spiritual wickedness in high places. "Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather reprove them.”_______ As there is an individual who is a member of the chh. and whose sentiments are not in accordance with the truths of the Gospel and who is not a baptist, I cannot conscientiously remain a member of the chh. unless that individual is severed. I ask then for a letter dismission.                          Stephen May

                Read by the Clk in Ch  Meeting Dec 12  1854 after which on Mo. D. A. Woodruff seconded by H. A. Buck

                "Resolved, That in view of the charges sustained against Bro Stephen May, and the railing accusations made by him against the Committee of the Church and its members in his written reply to the Report of Committee, this day, read in church meeting at his request, this church withdraw from him the hand of fellowship.

Sources for Pioneer Cemetery

By Douglas H. Shepard, 2000

                George Ryman, who had emigrated from England with his wife in 1856, had been working for Louis Barmore, undertaker and cabinet maker, who was very involved with the new Forest Hill Cemetery. On 8 January 1859 Ryman was appointed Sexton of Forest Hill Cemetery. At some point an agreement was reached for him to act as Sexton for Pioneer Cemetery as well. He kept a running account of the burials he performed, and the records for 1867 through 1893 are now in the Barker Historical Museum.

                Ryman made no reference to the in-ground markers. The first entry, for 2 January 1867, reads "Child of Mr. Johnson on right hand of J. Mullins girls grave." A late entry, 26 March 1893, reads "Mrs. Henry Green on the north side of her parents." Ryman was killed in a railroad accident in December 1893. There are no records between then and 1909 when Wilder made his map and register. Of course, whatever markers were erected in those sixteen years probably were still quite legible.

                Wilder in 1909 surveyed Pioneer Cemetery, made a map of all identifiable gravesites, gave each a number and made a numerical register. Against each number, where there was a legible grave marker, he noted the basic information: name, relationship (e.g. wife of, son of, etc.), date of birth and date of death. On the map, perhaps as a check for accuracy, he very often marked the initials under the grave marker. The initials were supposed to correspond with the fulll entry in his register (e.g. R.H. for Ralph A. Howell, or O.B. for Our Babe). He also made an alpha index for his register.

                Around 1985 Jack Blodgett did a walk-through of Pioneer Cemetery. He did not refer to Wilder's map. He simply started in the lower left-hand corner of Pioneer Cemetery and worked his way up and down the rows noting down as much as he could read of every inscription (e.g. "Sarah P., daughter of M.P. Lidall (?) [actually Lasalle] died.... (overgrown with grass)...."). At the end of his register, p. 100, he noted, "Loose stones in or near pile by west fence" followed by six entries from those stones. After that he wrote "Stones now missing, read 1952" followed by three entries. (This apparently refers to a register made by his mother who was an active genealogist. He is said to have helped her with some of her work.) Jack had worked as a librarian in New York City from 1948 to 1978. After he retired he returned to Fredonia and joined the Chautauqua County Genealogical Society. After his register was completed, Jack inserted an alpha index keyed to the page numbers of the register.

                The three sources differ from each other, because each of the three men had a different goal in mind. Ryman's was to have a record of work done to be paid for; Wilder, the engineer, wanted a map showing grave placement as accurately as possible; and Blodgett wanted to preserve whatever information was left for people doing family history whether he found the site where each stone belonged or not.

Samuel Harris

By Douglas H. Shepard, about 2000

                The earliest record for Samuel Harris is in the 1860 Federal Population Census for New York City (Manhattan) 5th District, 7th Ward (the page itself is marked in ink 549). His age is given as 40, occupation "Gilder." Born in England. Sarah, 38 his wife, born in England. Elizabeth, 3, born in NY. Arin [i.e. Aaron?]Isaac, 24, born in England. (From Series M653, Roll 493, p.9.)The 1865 N. Y. State Census lists him in Dunkirk, age 42, occupation "clerk." Sarah, 38; Elizabeth, 8, born in En [i.e. Erie County?]; Alice, 3½. The 1870 Federal Census shows him still in Dunkirk, 45, a "Clothier." Sarah, 43; Lizzie, 13; and Alice, 8.

                Child's Gazetteer (1873-74) lists in Dunkirk Samuel Harris "dealer in clothing, hats, caps and gents' furnishing goods." Third [i.e. 3rd Street in Dunkirk.]The 1875 N. Y. State Census lists him still in Dunkirk, 49, a Clothier. Sarah, 48; Lizzie, 17; Alice, 13. The 1880 Federal Census does not list him nor does the 1881 Dunkirk Directory.

                The British Population Census of 1881 lists him as living in London. He is 56, born in Marylebone, Middlesex, England, Commercial Traveler; Sarah, 56, also born in Marylebone; Lizzie, 20, "British Subject, born in U.S." Elsia [sic], 18, the same. Their Census address is given as 56 Chippenham Rd., London. This is from the Family History Library (Mormon Church) film 1341002. The P. R. O. Reference is RG 11.  Piece/folio  0010/63.  Page 53

                If Elizabeth was born in New York, the family must have been in the U.S. at least by 1857 if not earlier. Since the 1865 Census seems to list her place of birth as Erie County, it is likely they were in Buffalo in 1857, the major city of that county. That might have meant they made their way in from Canada to the nearest large city in the U.S. while Elizabeth was born, then later went on to New York City for a time, then back to Western New York and Dunkirk.

George Ryman kept a small notebook in which he recorded the graves he dug in Pioneer Cemetery from 1867 through December 1893. At times, in describing locations, he mentioned pathways, gates, etc. These entries are given below. The possible, approximate or exact location is given in the square brackets following the entry.

16 July 1869:  Mrs. Kane's Grave on the south side of a grave marked My Mother [#262] close to Barker's Fence and the Gillett Lot. [Mrs. Kane=#248? Milo Gillett=#258, Charles Gillett=#260, Polly Gillett=#261]

1 August 1869: Louis Heyls Brothers Daughters grave on the north side of a childs grave by the name of Trapstone 1 Rod from George Barkers fence.

15 August 1869: Mr. Wicks grave 2nd grave north of Iron fence of Margarett _____? Scotch near the gate. (This is very difficult to make out. It may mean "Margaret ______" who was Scotch. Ryman does use identifications such as "Swede" or "Dutch.")

14 May 1870: Mr. Staats grave by Barker fence.

7 July 1870: Charles Bland (colored) infant on south side of his other children made a wide grave for the 3 (near the south east corner of Devillo White's fence).

3 October 1870: Dutch girl 13 years old the 4th grave from alley on the south side of alley leading from the gate behind the Adams graves. [Adams graves were #1091-1096; the Dutch girl's grave may be #1110]

3 December 1870: Mr. Henry Foster's son about 6 feet south of John Sloan's grave, head to the Central walk. [Jonathan Sloan=769]

21 August 1871: Mrs. Woodruff close to the new cemetery fence on the north side of 2 Locke graves. [Locke graves=978-979; i.e. fence between Pioneer and Forest Hill. The wording suggests it is Pioneer's fence.]

20 October 1871: Mr. Petermans grave near Barkers fence on the north side of his father.

13 July 1872: Mr  Muchlong (pronounced Meling) grave 3rd grave north of Catheriine Nelsons and near the entrance on south side.

20 October 1872: Miss Baldwin on the Button lot on the left hand of the steps at the entrance. [#1611]

12 December 1872: Mr. Clamers on the south side of Aner wife of William Cookson near the gate of the old ground. [#1112]

22 March 1873: Mrs. Howe close to Cemetery line on the Mason grave lot.

11 January 1874: Father in law of Fred Smith south side of Fred Smith's child that was buried last March East side of Main Alley running north and south to opposite Joseph Gilbert's grave and by south of Balsam tree.

14 February 1874: Mrs. Smiths grave on the same Tier as Gen. Risley across the alley.

23 February 1874: Samuel Goodson on the north side of his wife and close to Main Alley near the gate.

5 March 1874: Mrs. Peterson close to Barker Fence between her husband and son.

5 April 1874: Daniel Gould where George Buttons father was buried next to the alley.

29 November 1874: Mrs. Marbeons [grave] Head to the alley west of Cates lot and next grave south of Maple tree the foot of it is a little south west of the headstone of Mr. Hocks (Shocks? S Locks?) grave.

15 January 1875: Mr. Morley's grave [#1149] close to the main Alley from the gate the foot of the grave to the Head of Isaac Godfreys grave. [#1131]

22 October 1875: Mr. Staats [#34] south side of father close to a Maple Tree the foot of the grave up to Barkers fence.

1 May 1876: Mother of Horatio W. Green at the foot of the Markham Fence between two other graves. [#993?]

3 June 1878: Chester Brown south of his wife close to Main Street.

9 August 1878: Mrs. Ribble south side of Story childs grave near the southeast corner of the Old Grave Yard.

10 August 1878: Henry Newman on the north side of his infant on the west side of the alley running north and south by the Abell stone with the foot of the grave right to the alley opposite John Sloan on the east and James Thomas on the west. [Infant Newman=#439; Thomas Abell=#334; John Sloan=#769; James Thomas=#540]

21 August 1878: Mrs. Woodruff close to the new cemetery fence on the north side of Lockes graves.

14 January 1879: Mrs. Ruch's (?) grave close to the Forest Hill fence (?) line on the west corner in the Pettits row of graves.

19 March 1879: Mrs. Mary Sloane in John Millers lot back of Rufus Parkers shop.

20 February 1880: Mrs. Beach close almost under the line fence between the old and the new cemeteries on the same tier of graves as I Onnen and Smith's with the foot of the grave to the further alley. [Nancy Beach=#481; Onnen=#480; O. L. Smith=#479]

2 April 1880: Mr. Zenther's infant daughter next to Main alley on the tier west of James B. Sprague lot. [James B. Sprague=#897?]

12 July 1880: Infant of Mr. Churchill on top of his son in southernmost grave on the Leveens Lot and close to and north of Peter Davys child north of the main alley from Main Street.

17 August 1880: Make over two graves for Mrs. LeRoy near old Cemetery entrance etc.

12 January 1881: Mrs. Lucy Gear on south side of other 3 Geers graves near the front or west of the entrance to the old grave yard.

22 February 1881: Close to the New Cemetery but in the Old a Swede girl. The foot of her grave lies to Jonah Bristols Lot and north of an old stone marked Thoma. p.s. Her name was Westling.

18 February 1882: Zenther about 12 feet south of Isaac Godfrey near the main street entrance.

7 August 1882: Mrs. Miller on John Millers lot above Parkers Shop.

21 September 1882: William Gerhan close to New Cemetery Fence on the east of the Frank Stones and in same row as Nathan Franks wife.

23 February 1883: Child 25 feet from the corner post of Forest Hill cemetery east corner.

13 March 1883: William Mullen north side of other son of John Mullen where the Gardners family was taken out (near the gate).

2 May 1883: Mrs. Spink south of Walker graves second grave from the alley in the center of the Yard. [#399-403?]

20 December 1883: Andrew Kennon (?) on north side of infant of Rev. Tyler in what was called the Episcopal burial ground.

10 June 1886: Swede girl 4 or 5 feet from Forest Hill Cemetery line on the north side of a Morey gravestone.

9 August 1886: Infant son of Chas. August close to the Forest Hill Cemetery line with the feet to Hickory Tree.

12 October 1886: Mrs. Barth between Rev. Tylers child and a Ruggles on West Point of the Old Ground.

13 October 1886: Mary Gould near the gate at the head of her mother Mrs Parnell. [Emily Parnwell=#1075+]

10 May 1887: Anna Bertha Gloor (?) in Episcopal lot in the Old Ground.

20 November 1887: Mrs ____ Gould 3rd grave from the drive on the Tier of lots west of the Barzillai Gould graves.

9 December 1887: Mrs. Ingham in South East corner of the old ground nearly close to Barkers fence.

13 March 1888: Mrs. Moshiers grave (TheadoriaTaggart) where I took up Guest grave close to the entrance.

17 April 1888: Zera Sisson Jr. west of his father 2nd tier from the drive back of Tom Spinks wife.

16 June 1889: Florence Gustus close to Cemetery fence.

5 February 1890: Mrs. Emily S. Apthorp north side of 2 children near Cemetery fence. [#636]

19 February 1890: Infant Miller private lot close to lower Wall.

18 March 1890: Richard on a pointed lot west of Devillo Lakes (?) Aged 12 hours.

2 March 1891: Mrs. Elizabeth Heuber south of Rev. Tylers infant Episcopal Ground.

7 December 1891: Mrs. Charles Renne on their lot close to Mattesons fence (?)

24 February 1892: Charles H. Heyl very near to Judge Barkers fence and north of the Heyl Headstone and close to it.

4 May 1892: _______ south side of Main drive across from John and William Janning.

7 September 1892: Infant of Charles Augustus on south side of one of the twins near cemetery fence.

23 January 1893: Pearl A. Myers (?) just inside Cemetery Fence next to Jacksons lot.

12 February 1893: Carl Eloff Carlson close to Forest Hill Cemetery hedge at head of Gustas chiuldren.

9 December 1893: Mrs. Congdon north of Mr. and Mrs. Orcutts grave and east of south end of Iron Fence