Elizabeth (Cook) Markle (1791 - 1884)

Born 3 May 1791 in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, United States

Ancestors

Wife of Andrew Markle — married before 1822 in Ontario, Canada

Descendants

Died 13 Sep 1884 at age 93 in St. Vincent Township or Meaford, Grey County, Ontario, Canada

Problems/Questions Profile manager: Joachim Hawn [send private message]

Biography

ELIZABETH COOK MARKLE

ELIZABETH COOK was born on May 3, 1791, in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. She was the daughter of ANNA CHRISTINA PALMER and ANDREW COOK Sr.

Between 1802 and 1804 her parents moved their family to Ontario, Canada, initially settling at Ancaster Township.

The remainder of Elizabeth's story is best told through the provided Source narratives and record citations.

Without the historical insights provided in the Andrew Cook Genealogy, researching Elizabeth Cook proved most frustrating.

From a lack of historical record evidence to family genealogies that have incorrectly associated her with a spouse known only by the surname "Compeign" for whom no historical record remains (if ever existed in the first place) to wildly subjective attempts at explaining why the son born to that "marriage" was nonetheless adopted back into the Cook Family by Elizabeth's younger brother and re-named as a "Cook". It is only when we have the benefit of the Housers work (plus one other) that a more complete image emerges.

The following is From:

A Genealogical Sketch of The Descendants of Andrew and Anna Christina (Palmer) Cook 1769-1970

By John and Eileen (Shepherd) Houser

https://dcms.lds.org/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE5024515

For The Library of The Genealogical Society of Pennsylvania

with the compliments of John and Eileen (Shepherd) Houser.

Printed in Canada

The Historical Society Of Pennsylvania

Presented by Mrs. John H. House: January 11, 1971

The ANDREW COOK Genealogy

Page 169

__________________________

II-3 ELIZABETH COOK

The second child of Andrew and Anna Christina (Palmer) Cook, born in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania on May 3rd, 1791, journeyed to Ancaster, Ontario with her parents when the family emigrated to Canada in 1804.

Nothing more is heard of Elizabeth until her marriage to a man with the French name of Compeign. As mentioned in the review of her brother, Jacob's life (II-600), Jacob had strongly disapproved of this marriage for reasons now long obscure.

Several months after this marriage, Elizabeth's husband, Compeign was killed in a logging accident, and their son, Luke was born on November 3rd, 1818, after his father's death.

(Family Tradition has it that Luke was born either at Cooksville, Ontario or Muddy York now Toronto; however, his Death Certificate gives the location of his birth as New York State - this could be an error.) Jacob made the statement that Elizabeth's son "will be my son and bear my name", and he legally adopted the infant Luke, and in all later references, Elizabeth's son bears the name Luke Cook.

______________________________________________

A momentary interruption for fact-checking:

NOTE Regarding the Birthplace of Luke Cook

Canada Census records for Luke show Ontario, Canada as his place of birth - that is until his last Canada Census record of 1891. That last Census lists his birthplace as the United States.

That his record of death shows New York State is significant - as would be any examples from his and Mary's children that showed: "New York or U.S." for their father's birthplace and "Scotland" for their mother in respective Census Categorical Data or as found in Vital Records.

The Ontario Death Registration Record for Luke mentioned above by the Housers, was 'Informant' signed by his son: Norman Ellsworth Cook. A review of his Censuses findings show

From Library and Archives Canada:

1881 Norman Cook, 14, (Lenke/Luke Cook household) Father’s birthplace = Ontario

1891 Norman Cook, 24, (household of Luke Cook) Father’s birthplace = U.S. (See Image Gallery)

1901 Norman E. Cook, 34, No Categorical Data for Parents birthplaces

1911 Norman E. Cook, 45, No Categorical Data for Parents Birthplaces

As already mentioned, the 1891 Canada Census was Luke's final Census record, his death occurring in 1884. So it seems significant that both for Luke, and son Norman Ellsworth, as of the 1891 Census, and then further on Luke's death record we see repeated citations for Luke's birthplace as either 'New York' or 'United States'. Are these findings replicated by any of Norman Ellworth Cook's siblings? Yes. And that is important because if his children possessed knowledge he was born in New York state that warrants a serious consideration of that location as Luke Cook's birthplace.

From: The United States Federal Cenus and the Iowa State Census for another of Luke's son's: Cyrus Milton Cook

______________________________

The Iowa State Census, 1905

Jasper, Iowa, United States

Name:..................C.M. Cook

Age:...................................42

Marital Status:........Married

Birthplace:...............Canada

Father's Birthplace:...New York

Mother's Birthplace:...Scotland

Card Number:.............A545

____________________________

United States Federal Census, 1910

Chicago Ward 21, Cook, Illinois

Name:................Cyrus N. Cook

Age:.........................................47

Birthplace:....................Canada

Immigration Year:............1884

Father's Birthplace:..New York

Mother's Birthplace:..Scotland

Sheet Letter:............................B

Sheet Number:........................2

________________________________

United States Federal Census, 1920

Danville Ward 2, Vermilion, Illinois

Name:..................Cyrus Milton Cook

Age:.................................................58

Marital Status:......................Married

Birth Year (Estimated):.............1862

Birthplace:.............................Canada

Immigration Year:.....................1883

Father's Birthplace:..............Canada

Mother's Birthplace:..........Scotland

Sheet Letter:....................................A

Sheet Number:................................2

_____________________________________

United States Federal Census, 1930

Danville, Vermilion, Illinois

Name:..........Cyrus M Cook

Gender:.......................Male

Age:.................................65

Marital Status:......Married

Race:..........................White

Relationship to Head of Household: Head

Birth Year (Est):..........1865

Birthplace:.............Canada

Father's Birthplace:..New York

Mother's Birthplace:..Scotland

Sheet Letter:...................A

Sheet Number:...............7

Similar categorical data found for the other Cook children failed to provide consistent or definitive findings on the same subject. For me, having the two sons of Luke Cook report basically same responses on the matter of where their father was born, is compelling. The reason will be addressed following the conclusion of the Housers material. And the fact that not all of them reported the same as their brothers is not necessarily a road block. Remember, most of Luke's children remained in and around their birthplace. Putting in writing something that could be embarrassing, or deemed disrespectful to their father and/or his memory could easily explain the distorted findings.

________________________________________________________________

Again, from the Andrew Cook Genealogy:

According to "Family Tradition", Elizabeth Cook married again four times, but the records recently brought to light, together with the recollection of a living granddaughter, maintain that after her first child was born:

LUKE COOK

Elizabeth married Andrew Markle with whom she lived until both died more than fifty years later in 1884.

They had three daughters who are the known children born of Elizabeth's last marriage:

IRENE MARKLE LAKE

RACHEL MARKLE COMPAIGN, and

SARAH ANN ELIZABETH MARKLE HALLOCK

Andrew and Elizabeth (Cook) (Compeign) Markle moved into Nottawasaga Township, Simcoe County, Ontario with their three daughters in 1834.

Here, just east of the present Town of Collingwood, they opened only the second Tavern to appear between Barrie and St. Vincent Township (The latter Was just beginning to be settled at that date ).

(So, a question to impart here is - 'if Elizabeth was married to the same man for over fifty years, how was it that some of Jacob's descendants recalled her marrying four times before she married Andrew Markle?' The underlying impression here being one of a question of her moral character, not one vested with recalling her actual lived life. This is the kind behavior often seen in narrative forms for women of Elizabeth's era to suggest or infer she was a wanton woman or of ill repute. The kind of reputation garnered by women who bore children out of wedlock. The proposition that Elizabeth's brother was so angry over Elizabeth's marriage to "Compeign" stemmed from the fact that the Cook's were staunch Methodists, and the name 'Compeign' infers French Canadian origin, merits thought, but on the face of it, it is very weak as an argument. Remember, Elizabeth's younger brother "Jacob" declared that her son would be his son before adopting Luke. Now, why would it be so important for Jacob to adopt and raise his nephew as his own child, specifying that his surname would be Cook? Does it really make rational sense that Jacob would, in fact, take away Elizabeth's firstborn child, merely out of his discomfort over her interfaith marriage? I don't believe so. There is another, more reasonable explanation...)

Back to the Cook Genealogy:

In about 1856, the Markle's moved to St. Vincent Township, and occupied one acre of Lot No. 29, Concession 7, where Andrew Markle was a self-employed Shoemaker. The balance of the 100 acre farm on which they located was owned by William Hallock (James Hallock, a son of William married Sarah Ann Elizabeth Markle, and they were destined to have 18 children.

The other two daughters, Irene and Rachel, married Matthew Lake and John Campaign, respectively, but Specific dates, location of settlement, and descendants are yet to be determined.

Much of the confusion concerning Canadian birth, marriage, and death dates in the earlier years result from the fact that there were no Provincial or Federal requirements existent for enforcing formal record entry of such dates. These did not appear on the scene until 1869, and prior to that date, one must depend on information recorded in Family Bibles or from other miscellaneous sources. Even after 1869, Church fires, etc. often caused the loss of pertinent documents unavailable from other sources. (Such fires did, in fact, destroy some records in Meaford of the period in question.)

We have persisted in using the name "Markle" throughout this sketch even though there is some reason to believe that it may, on occasion, have been spelled differently. The Town Clerk of Meaford, for instance, advises that Andrew Markle was at some times on the Assessment Roll as "Markle" "Maracle” and "Miricle."

Mr. Frank Harding, a Historian of the Meaford area, states that an early article in the Meaford Monitor carried a notice of the death on Sept. 8th, 1884 of Andrew Maracle (this is the spelling recalled by one descendant). A fourth spelling appeared on the 1873 Assessment Roll, where Andrew's surname appears as Marcle. 171 III-4

Andrew Markle died at Meaford, Ontario on September 8th, 1884, at the age of 87.

Five days later, his wife of over 50 years, Elizabeth (Cook) (Compeign) Markle died in her 94th year, on September 13th, 1884. They are both buried at Meaford, Ontario, but we were unable to locate their graves.

The District of St. Vincent, where they resided had several small local rural cemeteries, but all of this part of St. Vincent, about 20,000 acres, was taken over by the Department of Defence in the War years. Still used as the Armoured Vehicles Firing Range, it is closed to the public.

The Death Certificates show Andrew's date of passing as September 8th, 1884, and Elizabeth's as September 13th, 1884, both Registered, however, in the name ”MARKLE.”

This, together with the old family records recently located, is our reason for selecting the spelling version we did. It would appear that these four versions of the spelling of the name -

MARACLE MARCLE MIRICLE and MARKLE

obviously result from confusing handwriting and spelling, compounded by the different interpretations by reader or listener.

___________________

NOTE: A question that could (and should) rightly be asked about the aforementioned account of Elizabeth's life might be: "How likely would it be that an event determining such a drastic outcome as befell Elizabeth in the forced adoption of her first-born child, would nonetheless be lost to history without even an attempt at keeping the account preserved"? Recall that the Houser's in their research describe Jacob's furor as being "lost to history". Now it would truly be unusual that Cook descendants had preserved this story for over a century, and yet fail to mention the heart of the matter (what had so angered him). It leaves a gaping hole in the account and reduces it to more akin to "hearsay" by a second or third party, rather than as family lore that had carefully been preserved and transmitted among descendants. The tale itself was important enough to remember and pass on, but not important enough to do so intact? That would be highly unusual.

Furthermore, how was it that Elizabeth's younger brother was able to command such an authoritative warrant as to basically make such a declarative statement, upon which everything and everyone in the family merely followed suit? But the reason for all of this was just 'lost'? And lastly, how was it that the other Cook Family descendants who did know of the story, were also able to put forward the additional detail alleging Elizabeth had married 'another' four times? Considering Elizabeth had never been more than a few miles from her other family members, it would seem at the very least, her fifty-year marriage that produced three daughters would have been equally well known....unless of course, there was 'another' issue altogether different, that was the explanation for all this odd behavior.

To the material provided by the Housers, there is one additional account that bears much value toward understanding Elizabeth's plight. Her recollection of the event is made all the more pertinent when we consider that she was the daughter of Norman Ellsworth Cook, and granddaughter of Luke Cook...

Her name was Ellen Louks Cook Fairclough

______________________________________________

Excerpt from COOK-17699 of the Andrew Cook Genealogy

"She was born Ellen Louks Cook, in Hamilton, Ontario, on Saturday, January 28, 1905, the third of five children in a fifth-generation Canadian family. On her mother Nellie's side, she was descended from Huguenots and United Empire Loyalists who moved to Norfolk County from Vermont in 1790. Her paternal ancestors emigrated to Ancaster, Upper Canada, in 1802, from Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Her father, Norman Ellsworth Cook ...."

The following material is in her own words, from her publication Book: Saturday's Child Memoirs of Canada's first female Cabinet Minister....beginning on Page 331

On my paternal side, I am descended from Andrew and Anna Cook who emigrated to Ancaster, Upper Canada, in 1802 from Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

Andrew applied for a Land Grant and was given 200 Acres in Toronto, Township, in 1808; but he did not the move Family there until 1816.

His son, Jacob Cook, at the age of nineteen, had settled there a year earlier, after voluntary service in the War of 1812. This Family Founded the Town of Cooksville.

Although I’d been vaguely aware of having many relatives, it was not until John and Eileen (Shepard) Houser published a Genealogical Sketch of the descendants of Anna Christina Palmer and Andrew Cook in 1970, that I discovered the names of two thousand of them in my Father’s Family. Captain Fred Cook, my first cousin once removed; now a resident of Tillsonburg, with the help of many other Cook's, is continuing this research.

"Andrew and Anna Christina had Twelve Children: Their second child–Elizabeth, married a woodsman named Compeign. That is all we know about him except he was killed in a logging accident a few months after their marriage, leaving Elizabeth pregnant.

According to the Family story, Elizabeth had married against the wishes of her brother Jacob. Though her Junior by five years, Jacob was the eldest son and took over as head of the Family following Andrew's death. He promptly disowned Elizabeth, probably because Compeign was both French and Roman Catholic. Since Religious conviction ran deep in Methodist Family’s like the Cook's – Elizabeth was written out of the Family for her choice of Husband.

When it became known Elizabeth was Widowed and Pregnant – Jacob refused to receive her into the Family Home. (Jacob was not then married himself, but had taken possession of the Role as Head–of–Household.)

Prevailed upon by Family and Neighbors, he exclaimed: “I have no Sister!” Of Course, he had other sisters, but at least in this dramatic account he referred expressly to Elizabeth.

Finally, it is said; a Roman Catholic Priest convinced Jacob to ‘do the right thing’ by his sister. But..there were strings attached.

You may come home,…(Jacob is reputed to have informed his sister)…

But your son, when he is born; will be my son and bear my name.

(It apparently, never appeared to him; the child could well have been a girl!)

So it was that Luke became Jacob's adopted son, and in the course of time; my own grandfather.

Luke married Mary Hamilton in 1845. They had seven children, the youngest being my father, Norman Ellsworth Cook.

SATURDAY'S CHILD-MEMOIRS of CANADA'S FIRST FEMALE CABINET MINISTER

Ellen Louks Fairclough, December 1995

University of Toronto Press

Page 331

______________________________

Now, I accept Ellen's family version of the story as being the one preserved. But there are superficial errors it contains that must be addressed. Ellen recalls that Jacob, as the oldest son, took the affairs of family into his own hands with the death of his father, Andrew. The problem here is that Andrew Cook died sometime between 1852 and 1853. By that time, Elizabeth's son (Luke) was a man in his thirties and had long since been adopted by Jacob, in his infancy. What this tells us is that during the period of the original story recalled, Andrew Cook was still vital and head of his household and family. How could Jacob just sidestep his father? Finally, Elizabeth is mentioned as being written out of the family history for her indiscretion. Yet, in fact, she was not written out of Andrew's most important of all earthly documents - his last will.

First, a little from her biography

Ellen Fairclough is perhaps best known as the first woman in Canada to become a federal cabinet minister.

John Diefenbaker appointed her Secretary of State in 1957.

In the course of her career she also served as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Minister responsible for Indian Affairs, and was in charge of the National Gallery, the National Film Board, the Dominion Archives, and the National Library.

She was also a chartered accountant, a businesswoman, a local politician in Hamilton, and a wife and mother. At a time when many people believed that a woman's place was in the home, she successfully balanced family obligations with a career in the largely male world of federal politics.

Writing with the style and wit for which she was famous as a politician, Ellen Fairclough, now ninety, tells her story. Her reminiscences describe her early life, her efforts to become a businesswoman, and her experiences as a Progressive Conservative member for the constituency of Hamilton West (1950-63).

Fairclough discusses the political factors that led to her appointment to the Diefenbaker cabinet, as well as other factors, including family values and the opportunities available in the bustling industrial city of Hamilton, that served as the context for her successes. While her story focuses on the politics involved, Fairclough also writes extensively about family life, friendships, and domestic detail. She attributes her success to the fact that she was a 'Saturday's child' who worked hard for what she achieved.

The source of much media attention during her political career, Ellen Fairclough was often the only woman in a room full of men and, on one occasion, was asked to leave a cabinet meeting because the topic of discussion – sexual assault – might be too rough for her sensitive ears. Having no female role models to follow, Fairclough made her own rules and charted her own course. These memoirs make a fascinating contribution to the history of women and politics in this country.

_____________________________________________________

I rather like the account known by Fairclough. It has much of the same content as that recounted by the Houser's material but adds a few details. There are several areas and items I could choose to focus on, but I think most are able to discern the key elements, and likewise, key problems with the tale.

What Fairclough's Family account stresses is the central and pivotal role assumed by Elizabeth's brother, Jacob Cook. I should mention here, that in communication with other Cook Family descendants there are opinions that differ from that of mine. So I'll just determine mine now as "my own".

A great deal of importance is placed upon Jacob's role as "head of the Family". One that he had assumed (per to Fairclough's account) by the time of Luke's birth, which permitted him both the agency to deny Elizabeth return to the Family, and also have the authority to determine the plight of her child's very existence. From what I have learned of Jacob Cook, he indeed could be a force to be reckoned with. And his relationship with his older sister was at best, stormy. While that may be, there is a significant problem here....Luke Cook was born in 1818. Jacob Cook would have been 22 or 23 years old. But more to the point is what is known about the Family patriarch and undisputed Head of Household, Andrew Cook. In 1818, Andrew Cook would have been 49 or 50 years old....hardly retirement age. Furthermore, Andrew Cook was still alive as late as 1852, another 34 years after the original story event! And were that not enough to call into question the accuracy of either account, one might well be curious to inquire how it was that a man of such an ardent Methodist faith, would find himself swayed by a Roman Catholic Priest on the matter of familial moral conduct?

So then, what seems to be 'inferred' from the first account, is something so horribly unforgivable had occurred so as to force Jacob's hand in the adoption of Elizabeth's son: Luke. Yet apparently, no memory of exactly 'what' that had been had survived. But what did survive were allegations that could only be interpreted as slurs against Elizabeth's reputation.... suggesting she'd married such an exaggerated number of times. And had the Housers not located a direct descendant, that may well have been our last impression of Elizabeth Cook. So without question, "Something" had transpired that rocked the family's sense of tranquility requiring drastic action be taken.

In both accounts that "something" is centered upon the child Elizabeth was carrying. But equally common to both accounts is a less than believable or even realistic story. Neither account even remembers what the so-named Mr. "Compeign" had managed to accomplish with such precision as to cause both the shunning of a daughter, transpiring simultaneously with the somewhat awkward "adoption" of her child and making the odd comment that the child's name, would not be Compeign, but Cook. Even in the Fairclough account, Ellen Fairclough stresses the subjective element of "supposing" a religious conflict could lay at the heart of the matter. She also quite clearly stated

"Their second child–Elizabeth, married a woodsman named Compeign. That is all we know about him except he was killed in a logging accident a few months after their marriage, leaving Elizabeth pregnant".

So a great deal of "supposing" has taken place to fill in the details to support the outcome. Even so, neither account is able to propose something plausible. Now, there would be one event that could have affected the same turbulence and necessitated some action be taken rivaling that of Jacob Cook's..... and it too would have centered upon the child Elizabeth was carrying. Now consider: Elizabeth became pregnant, outside of marriage, a huge taboo in the early 19th century. I'm sure her son was born in New York, so one would reasonably ask, what was she doing in New York? (The next paragraph details my certitude about Luke's birthplace). The story recounts nothing about this issue. It would be feasible, even more, realistic to imagine Elizabeth being sent off to New York for the duration of her pregnancy, returning only after Luke had been born - to conceal the fact of her unwed problem. Jacob's self-serving declaration that her child was to be known as his, and equally known as a "Cook" only furthers the image. Of course, Luke's surname would already be "Cook", all that was needed was a justification for it. His adoption by another family member would also make sense, so to further the illusion both story accounts purport.

Lastly, is the conundrum proposed by "where" Elizabeth's son was likely born. In both the Fairclough account as well as that acquired by the Housers during their research, Elizabeth's son is born (inferred at least) in Ontario. Yet, there is more than sufficient cause for believing Luke's birthplace was New York state. Here again, a probable resolution that allows for Luke's birth in New York would also be one requiring it....for Elizabeth would not have been welcomed home while still pregnant if she were unmarried, and had she done so it would have precluded any chance for a refashioning her story as contained in both accounts that endeavor to preserve a memory of Luke's "adoption" by Jacob Cook....even if the 'details' preceding that event have either been forgotten, were never clearly understood, or have undergone selective changes over time. Whatever the finer points, my review of Luke Cook's records and the relevant records for his children lends ample evidence to believe his birth was in fact, in New York. So, then, the question for me, is had Elizabeth relocated to New York state in order to be with the alleged husband (who strangely enough is never remembered with a complete name) and there resided throughout her pregnancy, and after "Mr. Compeign"'s untimely demise, returning only after Luke was born....(only to have her baby removed from her) or had she been 'encouraged' to stay away until after the child was born in order to stave off notice and commentary by anyone who would have questioned her condition in light of her probable marital status? That question must remain unanswered. But again, at least two of Luke's sons began reporting their father's birthplace as New York state in the immediate years following Luke's death (and on his death record). At least in terms of optics, this appears similar to other family events of great turbulence where whatever the "issue" had been that was kept secret during the lifetime of the individual(s) who would be most affected by disclosure...became more freely addressed and recorded upon or after their death. What is clear is that Luke himself, in recorded form anyway, never chose to disclose 'where' other-than Ontario his birthplace was. If his sons knew, it was because their father had either informed them himself, or someone within the family had told them. Either way, I don't find it plausible to ponder Luke would not have known. Or at the very least, had not known until very late in his life.

===========================================

See: Image Gallery for digital of the Original Record

WILLIAM COOK & JANE McGARVY, "Ontario, District Marriage Registers, 1801-1858"Citation"Ontario, District Marriage Registers, 1801-1858," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/Q2C1-L4ZP : 30 November 2016), William Cook and Jane McGarvey, 28 Mar 1832; citing Home Township, Algoma, Ontario, Canada, Archives of Ontario, Toronto; FHL microfilm 1,030,052.

==========================================

This one Register of Marriages records two of the COOK sons JOHN and WILLIAM......but it is also to date the only known record capturing ELIZABETH in shared context with one of her brothers [she and ANDREW as witnesses to WILLIAM and JANE's March 28, 1832 marriage] and it provides to date, the earliest known record for Andrew and Elizabeth....

============================================

If Elizabeth had become persona non grata to the Cook Family it would surely have been with the consent and affirmation, of Andrew Cook! Jacob may have possessed general say in the matters of family....but for something so drastic, I cannot see it transpiring without Andrews expressed consent. The kind of familial ex-communication we'd be addressing, would likely not find reprieve in the form of a father's last Will and Testament, bequeathing legacies. The expectation would be to find Elizabeth not mentioned along with her siblings. We are to contend with Andrew's apparent final sentiments on the matter of his daughter, as disclosed in the contents his Will....

______________________________________

The Last Will of ANDREW COOK

(A)

This is the last Will and Testament of ANDREW COOK of Toronto Township, Yeoman.

I will and devise all that my last Debts, funeral and Testamentage expenses be paid by my son, WILLIAM as soon as convenient may be after my decease and as to my worldly estate wherewith it has pleased God to bless me. I give and dispose of the same as follows. I give and devise to my son WILLIAM all of my household furniture and goods and also part of Lot #29 in the ninth Concession of the township of King containing 150 acres more or less being the east part of said Lot to hold to him and his heirs and assigns forever subject never the less to similar devises in favor of other sons and daughters.

I give and devise to my eldest son JACOB the sum of fifty pounds and I also give and devise to my second son JAMES the sum of fifty pounds and :I give and devise to my third son JOHN the sum of fifty pounds and I give and devise to my fourth son ANDREW the sum of fifty pounds and I give and devise to my youngest son ALLEN the sum of fifty pounds and I give and devise to my eldest daughter now living ELIZABETH the sum of fifty pounds and I give and devise to my second daughter CATHERINE the sum of fifty pounds and I give and devise to my third daughter ANN the sum of fifty pounds and I give and devise to my fourth daughter SARAH the amount of fifty pounds that all the above mentioned devisees be paid by my son WILLIAM out of my real estate to them devised nine years after my decease and I also further give and devise to my eldest son JACOB the sum of ten pounds and I further give and devise to my second eldest son JAMES the sum of 10 pounds and I further give and devise to my eldest daughter ELIZABETH the sum of five pounds to be paid by my son WILLIAM out of money due me by my son WILLIAM out of a sum due me by my son JOHN and my son ANDREW and JOHN RYAN my son in law and EBENEZER AUSTIN my son in law the residue remaining after paying JACOB. JAMES and ELIZABETH to be divided equally and among all my sons and daughters to be paid by my son WILLIAM.

Eleven years after my decease and in case any of my sons or daughters should die before me leaving a lawful heir my will then is that such heirs shall inherit the amount to each devised son or daughter and my further will is that my son WILLIAM shall not sell or convey the aforesaid devised premises until all the legates are paid in full their differing devised sums and I further will that any money paid by my son WILLIAM prior to my decease to any my sons or daughters shall be accounted for as part payment of said devisee granted. I further will that my son WILLIAM shall pay year and yearly and every year after my decease the sum of fifty pounds to my Legates beginning with my youngest son ALLEN and continue until all my sons and daughters are paid in full their said devisee sums and I nominate and appoint my beloved sons JACOB and WILLIAM to be the executors of this my last will.

Hereby revoking all former wills in witness whereof I the said ANDREW COOK have hereunder to let my hand seal the fifth day of March in the

year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty nine.

Signed and Published and declared by the Testator ANDREW COOK as and for his last Will and Testament

in the presents of us who at his

request and in his presents and in

the presents of each other have

subscribed our hands as witness

ss ANDREW COOK

there to.

JOHN HAWKINS

WILLIAM C. HAWKINS

An Act to establish a Court of Probate in this Province and also a Surrogate Court in every District thereof

Statutes of Upper Canada, 1793 Chapter 8

==================================

[ANDREW COOK Last Will 5 Mar 1849/5 Mar 1849 Toronto Township, Peel/York, Ontario, Canada – relativelyyoung originally shared this on 04 jul 2015/A jpg image of the transcribed record served as Source for this retyped, minimally reformatted version. Aside sentence structure and personal name capitalizations - the content is unchanged as to wording and sequence - Retyped to Profile by jlph 9/2/18] Ancestry Profile

So, as late as 1849/50 - in the perspective of Andrew Cook, his daughter was still within his graces to the extent of being named an heir in his Will. In fact, her inheritance was equal to that of Jacob and their other siblings. Perhaps not ground-shaking in terms of evidence, but important nonetheless in terms of interpreting the relationship and dynamics.

But the final thought on the matter of estrangement is for me formed not by Jacob Cook, not by Andrew or any of Elizabeth's siblings....

Of her four sisters - Elizabeth alone is never cited by her maiden name - or if it is shown, usually in family genealogies, it is never referenced in association to this Cook Family. Not on the current few records we have for her; and not on any vital records of her three daughters where for "Mother's Name" an appropriate response would have been to show Elizabeth's maiden name. There was some kind of family breach, no doubt, but it is nowhere more apparent than with Elizabeth herself and her descendants. I would dare say, there was some enduring sense of familial pride quite evident by the other daughters of Andrew and Anna Cook - for they each preserved their connections with the Cook name in records and which in turn was preserved by their children. However, Elizabeth alone has remained a silent witness to her own earliest origin and the family she called her own...and such drastic familial behavior could only be (in context) explained by an out-of-wedlock pregnancy. This alone would explain the breach between a family of some repute, and the daughter that for posterity, had been written out of the story.

Elizabeth Markle died quietly on 13 September 1884, at St. Vincent Township, Grey County, Ontario, Canada, four days after her husband (Andrew) of over fifty years died. Somehow, their deaths, so close together speaks of an intimacy befitting a 50-year marriage.

Sources

• "Canada, Ontario Census, 1861," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MQ7M-5VL : 9 March 2018), Markle, Beverly, Wentworth, Ontario, Canada; citing p. 72, line 45; Library and Archives Canada film number C-1086, Public Archives, Toronto; FHL microfilm 349,334.
• A GENEALOGICAL SKETCH OF THE DESCENDANTS OF ANDREW AND ANNA CHRISTINA (PALMER) COOK 1769-1970; by John and Eileen (Shepherd) Houser https://dcms.lds.org/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE5024515 For The Library of The Genealogical Society of Pennsylvania with the compliments of John and Eileen (Shepherd) Houser. Printed in Canada https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjl6J2_oMHVAhXK0FQKHSqBB7IQFggrMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffamilysearch.org%2Feng%2Flibrary%2Ffhlcatalog%2Fsupermainframeset.asp%3Fdisplay%3Dtitledetails%26titleno%3D640142%26disp%3DA%2Bgenealogical%2Bsketch%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bdescendants&usg=AFQjCNHtYnk1Nghvz4rtG0TSdqHoY4sXtA THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA Presented by Mrs. John H. House: January 11, 1971-The ANDREW COOK Genealogy
• Michigan Deaths, 1867-1897," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/N36R-S3P : 12 December 2014), Elizabeth Markle for Rachel Campaign, 13 Apr 1874; citing p 17 rn 230, Avon, Oakland, Michigan, Department of Vital Records, Lansing; FHL microfilm 2,363,453.
• Ontario Deaths, 1869-1937 and Overseas Deaths, 1939-1947," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/JDB6-YZ7 : 25 June 2015), Elizabeth Markle, 13 Sep 1884; citing St. Vincent, Grey, Ontario, yr 1884 cn 5243, Archives of Ontario, Toronto; FHL microfilm 1,853,184.
• Canada Census, 1871," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/M435-MZ2 : 2 April 2016), Elizabeth Markle in the household of Andrew Markle, St Vincent, North Grey, Ontario, Canada; citing p. 65, line 6; Library and Archives Canada film number C-9955, Public Archives, Ottawa, Ontario; FHL microfilm 4,396,298.
• "Canada Census, 1881," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/MVF5-JWQ : 30 June 2017), Elizabeth Markle in the household of Andrew Markle, St-Vincent, Grey East, Ontario, Canada; citing p. 3; Library and Archives Canada film number C-13261, Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, Ontario; FHL microfilm 1,375,897.
• Michigan Deaths and Burials, 1800-1995," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/FHLS-K5F : 9 December 2014), Elizabeth Markle for Rachel Campaign, 13 Apr 1874; citing Avon, Oakland, Michigan, reference v 1 p 104 rn 230; FHL microfilm 973,983.
• LEGACY NFS SOURCE: Elizabeth Cook birth-name: Elizabeth Cook Notes Memory of Someone: birth-name: Elizabeth Cook Migrated from user-supplied source citation: urn:familysearch:source:2028140998 https://familysearch.org/links-pages/sourceVE?&entityId=MVSW-Y7X&entityType=person&sourceId=MMPQ-X5P&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Ffamilysearch.org%2Ftree%2Fperson%2FMVSW-Y7X%2Fdetails%3Fspouse%3DMPT4-7V5&showPhotos=true