Genealogical Research on Lemuel Church (1797–1872)

‍

Background and Objective

Lemuel Church (born c.1797 in the United States) is known to have died in Michigan in the 1870s, but his parentage remains uncertain. He married Ann “Anna” Winans (b. 1802) and had several children, and the family eventually settled in Berrien County, Michigan. No known contemporaneous documents directly name Lemuel’s parents. This report compiles evidence from U.S. census records, Michigan death/burial records, land and probate files, local histories, and compiled family trees to identify strong leads regarding Lemuel Church’s origins and correct parentage. All findings are cited, and any speculative connections are noted as hypotheses for further investigation.

U.S. Federal Census Records (1850–1870)

1850 – Mahoning County, Ohio: Lemuel Church appears as a 55-year-old in Jackson Township, Mahoning County (formerly part of Trumbull County). He is listed as a shoemaker with $360 in property. Notably, his birthplace is recorded as Connecticut. His wife Ann (age 48) is in the same household, and their younger children (e.g., son William, b. 1833) are present. This establishes that by 1850 Lemuel was in northeast Ohio. Earlier federal censuses (pre-1850) list only heads of households; Lemuel does not appear by name in 1820 or 1830, but his presence in Ohio by 1850 and birth of children in the 1820s indicate he likely lived in Ohio much earlier (possibly the 1810s or 1820s).

1860 – Berrien County, Michigan: Lemuel and Ann Church had moved to Niles Township, Berrien County, Michigan by 1860. The 1860 census lists Lemuel (age 63, a farmer) and wife Ann (age 59) with a small household. Lemuel’s birthplace is now given as Massachusetts, whereas Ann’s is Pennsylvania. (This discrepancy in Lemuel’s reported birth state – CT in 1850 vs. MA in 1860 – may reflect either an error or uncertainty on the family’s part. It suggests Lemuel’s early life may have involved both states, e.g., born near the Connecticut–Massachusetts border.) One Louisa M. Church, age 14, is also in Lemuel’s 1860 household. Louisa is too young to be a daughter of Ann (who was nearly 45 by 1846) and is likely a granddaughter or other relative.

1870 – Berrien County, Michigan: The 1870 census shows Lemuel (listed as age 73, “no occupation,” born in Massachusetts) and Ann (age 68, keeping house) still living in Niles Township. His real estate was valued at $800. By this time their children were grown and not in the immediate household. Lemuel’s consistent listing as born in New England (Mass. in 1860 and 1870; Conn. in 1850) is a key clue for locating his family of origin.

Summary of Census Clues

The census data firmly place Lemuel Church in Ohio by the 1820s–1850s (with birth of a daughter in 1826 in Muskingum County, Ohio) and later in Michigan. His reported birth state oscillates between Massachusetts and Connecticut. This could indicate he was born near the border (e.g., in the Connecticut Western Reserve, where many early settlers were from Connecticut). It’s also possible one parent was from Massachusetts and Lemuel spent early years there. The census ages align with a birth around 1796–1797. No census record names his parents, but these details narrow the search to New England Church families around 1797.

Michigan Death and Burial Records

According to compiled sources (FamilySearch and Find a Grave), Lemuel Church died 7 July 1872 in Niles, Berrien County, Michigan. He was about 75 years old and was buried in Johnson Cemetery in Niles Township. The Find a Grave memorial confirms these dates and the burial location, and it links his wife as Ann Winans Church (1802–1881) and several children. However, it does not list parents, which suggests that information was not known or inscribed. Early Michigan death registers (if an entry exists for Lemuel) might list a birthplace (likely just the state) and possibly “parents unknown” or simply omit parents – typical of that era when the deceased’s informant might not know those details.

A check of Berrien County death index did not readily reveal Lemuel’s name (he may have died just before state indexing improved). If a church or cemetery record exists from 1872, it has not surfaced in online databases.

Shall I continue with pages 4–6 next?

Family Tree Database Findings (Ancestry, FamilySearch, WikiTree)

Several compiled family trees address Lemuel Church but have yet to confirm his parentage. Key points from these sources:

• FamilySearch Family Tree (FSFT) lists Lemuel Church with exact dates: born 7 June 1797 in Massachusetts, married Ann Winans on 22 Feb 1815 in Ohio, died 7 July 1872 in Niles, Michigan. However, FSFT shows no parents attached, indicating that contributors have not found a documented mother or father. The profile draws on census and burial data and notes at least four sons for Lemuel and Ann. This aligns with what we know: their children included Seymour A. Church (b. 1828, Ohio), Laura Ann (1826–1911), William H. Church (b. 1833, Ohio), and likely one or two more sons (some trees suggest a Lemuel Jr. born about 1816–1820 who may have died young or lived elsewhere, and possibly an Isaac or John – though these are not well documented). The FSFT data confirms the basic life events but leaves the parent field blank, underscoring the brick wall on his ancestry.
• WikiTree has a profile for Lemuel Church which explicitly notes a potential confusion: “There were two men named Lemuel Church in Ohio early on. One was born 11 June 1792 and lived in Coshocton Co., OH… The other (our Lemuel) was born about 1797 (Mass. or CT) and died in 1872 in Niles, Michigan.” This distinction is crucial – an earlier genealogical assumption was that Lemuel might descend from the prominent Church family of Massachusetts (descendants of Richard Church of Plymouth). In fact, the Lemuel born 1792 in Ohio was the son of Joseph Church and Sarah (Simmons) Church of Massachusetts/Pennsylvania lineage. That Lemuel (1792–1875) married Betsey Simmons and settled in Coshocton County, Ohio. Because of the shared first name and overlapping time in Ohio, some family trees in the past may have entangled the two. The genealogical compilation History of the Church Family (1887) documents that Joseph and Sarah Church’s youngest child was Lemuel, born 1792 – clearly not the same person as our Lemuel (b.1797) who was living in a different part of Ohio and married to Ann Winans.
• Find a Grave confirms the family relationships (spouse and children) but, as mentioned, does not provide parental information. It’s common for 18th-century births that the parents’ graves are unknown or in another state.
• Ancestry.com user trees show a variety of guesses. Some trees tentatively connect Lemuel to a New England Church family – for example, one tree lists a father “John Church” from Connecticut (without sources), while another posits a link to the Church family of Plymouth via a Lemuel Church born 1751. These appear to be speculative or based on name similarity. No credible sourced evidence was found in those trees. It’s wise to treat such unsourced links with caution. At present, no known Mayflower or DAR application has tied Lemuel (1797) to a colonial lineage, which suggests his descendants did not have proof of his parentage to claim such heritage.

D.A.R. and S.A.R. Lineage Searches

Because Lemuel was born in 1797, he himself was too young to serve in the War of 1812, let alone the Revolution. However, if his father or grandfather had Revolutionary War service, a descendant might have joined the Daughters of the American Revolution (D.A.R.) or Sons of the American Revolution (S.A.R.) by proving that lineage.

A search of DAR/SAR online indexes did not immediately reveal Lemuel Church’s name. There was no DAR Patriot identified as “father of Lemuel Church (1797–1872)” in their published lineages. This implies that none of Lemuel’s descendants successfully applied under one of his ancestors’ service – likely because they could not document his parents.

One interesting find was a reference in a D.A.R. Genealogical Records Committee (GRC) report to a family Bible of a Lemuel Church born 1821 and wife Mary Carr. This appears unrelated to our Lemuel except by surname; it might refer to a younger Lemuel in New York. In short, lineage society records have not yet been helpful in identifying Lemuel’s father or mother.

Potential Leads on Lemuel’s Parentage

Despite the lack of direct evidence, several clues point toward Lemuel’s possible family of origin:

• New England Origin: All evidence indicates Lemuel was of New England stock (born in Mass./Conn. in 1797). One theory is that he might descend from the Church families of New England that migrated west. The prominent Richard Church of Plymouth (1620s) had many descendants in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut by the 1700s. While the well-documented branch (Nathaniel Church’s line in Plymouth County) does not list a Lemuel born in 1797, it’s possible Lemuel belongs to a more obscure branch or a collateral line that moved out of New England early. Many Connecticut families moved to the Western Reserve (northeast Ohio) after 1795. Lemuel could have come to Ohio as a child with his parents as part of this migration. The Connecticut connection (as stated in 1850) and the fact he later lived in Trumbull/Mahoning County (which was part of the Connecticut Western Reserve) supports this possibility.
• Early Ohio Church Families – the “Catherine Lane” clue: A striking lead comes from a FamilySearch entry for Catherine Lane (1786–1863). Catherine Lane married (in about 1803) a man with the surname Church, and they had children in the early 1800s with familiar names: Lemuel Church (b. 1804), Mary Church (b. ~1806), Caroline Church (1807–1828), and Seymour A. Church (1808–1901). This family lived in Trumbull County, Ohio. The recurrence of the name Seymour A. Church in 1808 is noteworthy – Lemuel (1797) named one of his own sons Seymour A. Church (born 1828). Seymour is not a common given name in the Church family, suggesting a possible familial connection. One hypothesis is that the elder Seymour A. Church (b. 1808) and Lemuel Church (b. 1804) were half-siblings or cousins of our Lemuel (b. 1797). If Lemuel’s father died when Lemuel was young, perhaps his mother or father’s family then married into the Lane family. For example, perhaps Lemuel’s father was a Church man who had an earlier marriage producing Lemuel (1797), and a second marriage to Catherine Lane in 1803 producing the children born 1804–1808. In that scenario, the father (name unknown) would be the common link – making the younger Lemuel, Mary, Caroline, Seymour (1808) all one family. This is speculative but consistent with timing. The geographic context fits, as this hypothetical Church father would be in Pennsylvania or Ohio by 1803 (Catherine Lane was from PA).

Why this matters: if we identify Catherine Lane’s Church husband, we may find Lemuel’s father. Unfortunately, the records so far do not name the husband directly. Investigating Trumbull County marriage records around 1803 and early church records in that area might reveal a marriage of Catherine (Lane) to a Church (possibly a widower). The given names Lemuel and Seymour appearing in that family strongly hint at a link to our Lemuel’s family. It’s a lead worth pursuing.

• DNA and Surname Distribution: Modern descendants could turn to DNA matches for clues. While outside the scope of document-based research, it’s noted that some WikiTree members are exploring DNA to connect Lemuel with other Church lines. If many of Lemuel’s descendants match those of, say, the Joseph Church/Sarah Simmons line or another New England Church line, that could indicate a relationship. As of now, no definitive DNA conclusion has been published, but it remains a future avenue.
• Eliminated Possibilities: It is established that Lemuel Church is not the son of Joseph and Sarah (Simmons) Church of Massachusetts/Pennsylvania (who had a son Lemuel b.1792). Some early genealogies and online trees may have conflated the two Lemuels, but the records clearly differentiate them (different birth years, different wives, different death locations). Likewise, Lemuel does not appear to be the son of Lemuel Church (1743–1828) of Scituate, MA – that elder Lemuel’s children are documented in Scituate records and do not include a son named Lemuel in 1797.

Conclusion and Recommendations

In summary, Lemuel Church (1797–1872) remains a genealogical mystery in terms of parentage, but several strong leads emerge:

• New England Roots: All evidence points to Lemuel being born in New England (Massachusetts or Connecticut). It’s likely he was part of the post-Revolution generation that moved west. His parents may have migrated to Pennsylvania or the Ohio Territory in the late 1790s or early 1800s. Researchers should focus on Church families in New England circa 1760–1800 who had sons that “disappear” to the west.
• Ohio Connections: By marrying in Ohio in 1815, Lemuel must have come to Ohio as a youth. Identifying all Church families in Ohio in the 1810s could narrow candidates for his family. The Catherine (Lane) Church family in Trumbull County is a prime lead – the unusual given names and proximity make it plausible that Lemuel was connected to them. Further research in Trumbull/Mahoning records (deeds, wills of early settlers, church membership lists) is recommended. For instance, if a will for an unknown Mr. Church circa 1810–1820 in Trumbull exists, it might name children Lemuel, etc.
• Family Naming Patterns: Lemuel and Ann’s children’s names might honor relatives. We see Laura Ann (possibly named after Ann herself or a female relative), Seymour A. Church (the middle initial “A” might stand for Ann or a family surname?), William H. Church (the middle initial could be a clue; one family tree lists his name as William Henry). It’s worth noting that Ann Winans’ parents are not confirmed here, but Winans is a New Jersey/Pennsylvania family – possibly irrelevant to Church lineage except that Lemuel and Ann’s meeting could have been facilitated by family networks.
• Compiled Sources: The WikiTree community and others have actively worked on this problem. To date, the consensus is that Lemuel’s correct parents are unknown. However, the process of elimination (excluding the Coshocton Lemuel’s parents) and the new clues (Catherine Lane’s children) bring us closer. It may turn out that Lemuel’s father was a Church from Connecticut who served in the Revolutionary War or War of 1812. Checking D.A.R. patriot indexes for any Church from Connecticut or Massachusetts who died in Ohio could be worthwhile. If such a person existed, their pension or probate might mention a son Lemuel.

In conclusion, the correct parents of Lemuel Church (b. 1797) have not been definitively identified, but evidence strongly suggests he came from a New England family that migrated to Ohio. The overlapping of unique names and locations provides a roadmap for further research. Investigating the early Church families of Trumbull County, OH and adjoining areas (including any relation to the Lane family) is the next logical step. Collaborating with other descendants (e.g., the Nelson family researchers) and examining DNA matches may eventually yield the proof needed to confirm Lemuel’s lineage. Until a record surfaces – such as a baptism in Massachusetts or a family Bible – Lemuel’s parentage remains an educated guess. All the above findings, however, give us a much clearer picture and several promising avenues to explore.

Sources

[1] (https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/M47F-QNB/lemuel-church-1797-1872)
[2] (https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/139212862/lemuel-church)
[3] (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Church-2106)
[4] (https://forgottenbooks.com/fr/download/TheHistoryoftheChurchFamily_10875437.pdf)
[5] (https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/L7NX-D1X/catherine-lane-1786-1863)
[6] (https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/9609225/berrien-county-probate-court-deceased-files-file-nos-1-11280-)
[7] (https://fr.findagrave.com/memorial/205810550/laura-ann-nelson)
[8] (https://yanceyfamilygenealogy.org/Family_Bibles_starting_with_letter/C/CHURCH.pdf)