Will the real Caleb Benedict please stand up?

Question

In my efforts to identify slave owners in Connecticut, I'm currently working from the US Census. In the 1790 US Census, Greenwich, Connecticut, we find Caleb Benedict, whose household consists of the following:

• 4 free white persons, males <16
• 1 free white male >16
• 3 free white females
• 2 free persons of color
• 2 slaves

If only I could figure out which Caleb Benedict it is. It appears to be someone who only spent a brief time in Greenwich, as I'm not finding many records at all there. Findagrave doesn't have any Benedicts born before 1794 listed in Greenwich. (Search result.) The following list of Caleb Benedict profiles is drawn from every single one listed in the index of Henry Marvin Benedict's Genealogy of the Benedicts in America (1870):

1. Caleb Benedict (1739-1819) 
2. Caleb Benedict (1740-1812)
3. Caleb Benedict (1758-1800)  
4. Caleb Benedict (1762-1822)  
5. Caleb Benedict (1764-1848) 

Any takers as to which one it might be? Mostly I can get them on my own, and there's a handful I've put aside till later. This one, I guess I'm done for the day I'll check in to look for brilliant suggestions tomorrow. My next step will be to check their wills; sometimes slaves are specifically bequeathed or included in the estate's inventory. Not always, but it's worth a look.

Other Benedict slave holders listed below. I'm leaving out the households with free persons of color here, many of whom could have been emancipated slaves, since the "peculiar institution" was phasing out in the Nutmeg State by the time the US Census came to town:

• Nathaniel Benedict, 1790 in Norwalk + Stamford
• Sherman Benedict, 1790 in Norwalk + Stamford
• Thaddeus Benedict, 1790 in Redding

There was also Caleb Benedict in Norwalk 1800 w/1 free person of color in his household. Might be the same Caleb as 1790 in Greenwich, but not necessarily. And numerous other Benedict households with free persons of color I'm not listing here.

I'm looking forward to brilliant solutions from you all!

Answer 1

Not 1 or 5 as both were in  Danbury in 1790. Three is born in Norfolk which is Litchfield County, not Fairfield, and he died in Canada. Unlikely to be him. That leaves 2 and 4. The household numbers appear to fit Caleb #2. It also seems more likely that the older Caleb would be the slaveholder. Also, Caleb #4 moved to New York at some point. In 1790 there is a Caleb listed in Albany that could be him.

Comments

Yes, this is exactly the kind of method I've used to work through these all. This one is almost like looking for the donut hole: No evidence that any of them ever were in Greenwich, such as a child born there.

• Agreed on #1 & #5. I added a links to the 1790 Census for Danbury to remind me.
• Same, we can rule out #3, as you noted.

So, as to #2 or #4: I have found a number of young slave owners. Typically they came to own them by inheritance or dowry. Also, #4 moved to New York in 1797. And when he did, he joined a Benedict cluster in Delaware County, NY. (FAG has over 250 of them in that county.) Which is to say, I'm not ready to choose #2, who lived his whole life in New Canaan at least up to 1784 when son Trowbridge was born there. I'll have to dig more up on him before I'm ready to decide.

At present, I'm adding locations to everything I can. The Benedict compilation often leaves them out, dagnabbit!

---

I think you're right. I spent some time on Caleb #4's wife to make sure she didn't bring some children to the marriage. Best I can tell, she did not, as she married with her maiden name. So, I'm now with you on this. On to the other slave holding Benedicts!

---

Hey, Thanks for pitching in, Deb. I'm satisfied with the outcome for Caleb. And Nathaniel wasn't much of a problem. I think I might give Thomas a pass, though. Sheesh!! It's a much more difficult problem! 1790 in "Norwalk + Stamford", 2 males over 16 and 3 slaves. I have yet to find any Thomas Benedict\ whose wife died before 1790 (or never married.)

Answer 2

I wonder if part of the issue is that Connecticut did not become a state until 1788? Could some of the records be missing due to that?

Comments

Connecticut was one of the original 13 colonies, and the town & church records are continuous from colonial times anyhow. But I always assume that none of the records are complete. Today, I'm working on the Benedicts who moved to Delaware County, NY. A variety of Benedicts relocated there. There's even a Benedict Cemetery there, and FAG currently lists 257 Benedict memorials in Delaware County. It will help sort out when various ones made the move.

I've got all the Calebs in the records, so far as I know. For now I'm working on the children, spouses &c to help define the locations over the years more thoroughly.

Usually I give up on ones that don't come easily, to revisit later. For some reason, I've gotten stubborn on this one. I figure working it in more detail will help locate other Benedicts with slaves reported in the Census that I'll be looking to place, too.