Casa Roma aka Eastbrique Tower

In July .., I posted Home Sweet Home as a contribution to "Smile for the Camera : Celebrate Home" that was hosted by footnoteMaven. In that post, I talked a little about the house I lived in while attending Indiana State University (1979-1982) in Terre Haute, Indiana and included the photo below.

"Eastbrique Tower on Fruitridge Avenue, Terre Haute, Indiana. I lived here 1979-1982. I don't know when the house was built but it was quite old. The owner was remodeling it and turning it into apartments. I lived in a little efficiency apartment located in the left corner, first floor. I was devastated when I returned to Terre Haute in 1985 to discover the house had been torn down and the lot turned into a paved parking area for a neighboring restaurant."

A few days ago I received a comment from Donna Bollman who provided more information about the house:

This is the only picture I have ever seen of the "Casa Roma". I loved this building. My parents had bought the building and my father had brought it back to life. We put countless hours into the restoration of the immense wood throughout the home. In one room the opening of the fireplace exceeded 5' and I could walk into the opening. That room also hosted 20' ceilings and touted solid walnut ceiling beams and the room lead out by way of grand french doors that were arched. Behind this manor house was a carriage house that we were converting to a Art Studio/Antique shop. My father feel ill to lung cancer before it was completed. On the day of my fathers funeral in August in 1994 my mother gave me a box that contained a single brick. It was one of two cornerstone bricks from the building. That is how I found out "The Castle" had been demolished. My mother had the building bulldozed the night before the funeral. She destroyed the building at night because she feared the city would stop her from tearing down the oldest remaining grand home on Fruitridge Ave. The land was then sold on the day of the funeral to the restaurant next door for extra parking.

And, my response:

Donna, thank you for sharing the story of 'The Castle.' I have fond memories of that place. Your father showed me every room before I moved in. Since I was a poor college student, I could only afford the efficiency apartment. I really would have loved to live in one of the larger apartments. The woodwork was amazing and your father (and whomever helped him) did a wonderful job in restoring it.

Was the house demolished in 1994 or 1984? In my post I said I visited Terre Haute in 1985 and the house was gone. I could easily have gotten the year mixed up. I'm sure that had it been publicly known, there would have been an outcry to prevent it being destroyed. I'm amazed that your mother was able to pull that off without it being public knowledge! It's sad that it was torn down. It was a grand old place.

Donna, I have another photo of the house, taken from the other side that actually shows the tower. If you are interested I could post it on the blog or email it to you.

Donaa added another comment late last night:

No my mistake 1984. I would love to have a copy of the picture. To this day I still refinish wood for a living. (I was a fine arts major) The name Casa Roma was what it was called in the 1940's when it was a restaurant. The building itself took years to complete. (1860's to 1870's) The couple that built the house went on an extended stay in Europe. Each room was built one at a time. The wife would sent back ideas from homes that she liked in Europe. Many people think it was added on to but that was the way it was built. They say the wife did not see the home till it was finished and loved it. Also each room was furnished in the style of that room.

I find it interesting that both Donna and I were fine arts majors. My emphasis was in photography but I also took quite a few courses in woodworking while at ISU and loved working with wood.



Most of my older photos (i.e., pre-digital) are in boxes in storage but there were a few that were digitized during the scanning frenzy a few years ago, including the three below.





An infrared photo taken from the southwest side. My apartment was in the lower right corner.





The living room was rather small - I think the ceilings were higher than the width of the apartment!





A fun photo, taken with a very wide angle lens, made the apartment look bigger. The three square windows across the top were stained glass and added some wonderful color to the room in the late afternoon.



My thanks to Donna for taking the time to leave her comments and for providing more information about the house.

Achingly Upright

Longer commutes over the past few months have given me the opportunity to ride a variety of upright bikes over varying distances. And while achieving a particular fit is less important to me on upright bikes than it is on roadbikes, I still have preferences. For instance, my ideal handlebar height is on the low side. I began to notice that fairly early on, lowering the bars on my city bikes further with each passing year.I'd assumed this growing preference had to do with performance: That maybe as I picked up handling skills and began to ride faster, lower handlebars just made more sense. And in part that's probably true. But lately I've realised that it's also a matter of physical comfort.



Riding several bikes with the bars set higher than I prefer, I notice that my back starts to hurt after some miles. It's a distinct kind of dull, gnawing pain, somewhere around the shoulder blade area. On bikes where the bars are set lower, I don't experience the pain. And having moved the handlebars on one of the "painful" bikes down an inch, the pain disappeared. I've tried this a few times now over the past couple of months with the same result: When the bars are too high, my back aches.



The downside to having a city bike set up the way I like, is that other women who try it usually tell me the handlebars feel too low.In the end, it's about finding our personal optimal position. And too upright can be just as achy as too leaned forward.

Classic Spring skiing in the PNW.

Skiing theMuir snow field into the Nisqually chutes and lower Nisqually glacier to the bridge is a Cascadeclassic. The bridge is seen in the distance@ 3900'. The picture was taken from around 5000 feet. Muir is at 10,000'. 5 mile and 5000' gain on the skin upfor less than an hourrun down on moderate terrain early in the season.




Perspective on the size of things..










photo courtesy of unknown author via the internet






Below, looking back at the upper half







and down the Nisqually Chutes,mid section of the run.









and looking back at the majority of terrain skied from bridge level......likely close to 6000 vert showing here.








Likely as closeas you'll get to The Vallee Blanche off-pisteski routein the CONUS. Starting from the Aiguille du Midithe Vallee Blanche is 17km long with a vertical descent of 2800m. Muir down is 9km and 1900m. Addthe summit of Columbia Crest and you get 13km and 3200m to the bridge. Easy enough to make some comparison by those numbers.



Even on a busy day, skiing Rainier will seem likea wilderness and the food dismal in comparison to the Vallee Blanche. Either way both runsare well worth the effort. Different for sure but fun in their own ways. Be a whole lot less folks skiing the Vallee Blanchewith out the Midi tram.

Ziva's Help

Flag Day! (and some other stuff)

Most likely this picture, from my grandmother's files, was taken on the Fourth of July rather than Flag Day, but I thought it was appropriate for today.


My mother is the little girl on the left and she looks to be about 2 years old, so I'm guessing it was taken about 1930. Patty and Phyllis are Mom's sisters. Gene and Mary are their cousins. Grandma Bill was their grandmother.

Scanning Update: In the last 10 days I've scanned another 710 images for a total of 1680 over the past two months. I don't scan every day but when I do, I usually spend 3-4 hours at a time scanning. And it has been averaging about 25 scans per hour. Of course, that's not including the time spent in sorting and organizing them prior to scanning. LOL. Slow going and no light at the end of the tunnel yet.

Full Feed vs. Partial Feed? This topic comes up periodically in the blogosphere, this time it was brought up by genea-blogger Tim Agazio. When I first started blogging I set my blog for full feeds. Then it came to my attention that my content was being scraped so I switched to partial feeds. I'm not blogging to make money. I want people to read what I write (and hopefully they find it interesting) but I'd also like for them to visit my blog (to leave comments and check out some of the links to other blogs and websites). The thing with feeds is that they don't retain any formatting in the post and sometimes pictures throw off the continuity or "flow" of the post but I guess that is what they are supposed to do - present the posts in a simplified text format for easier reading. So, with that said, I've switched back to full feeds, at least for now.

New Bowl

I got this bowl at a thrift store. I really like, it just called to me, but hubby didn't care for it. It had no markings on it, and wonder if anyone knows anything about cermanic bowls like this.

SLO Town View

slo town view, originally uploaded by ParsecTraveller.

It was a stormy day in San Luis Obispo, but that meant for dramatic skies. Indeed, sunset proved to be an amazing time, with fast-moving clouds and beautiful shades of pink and orange. The non-native grasses, which can be seen in the foreground, are already drying up, despite all the late-season rains we've been having.

Three O' Clock Rock ..

Rod and I headed out to Darrington to climb on what was one of the hottest days of the year so far. Not always a good idea for slab climbing, but it usually means Darrington will be dry.

The drive up was pleasant, and soon we were gearing up in the cool valley floor for a hike to the rock. This was Rod's first time at Three O' Clock Rock, and we were debating the routes to try and get on. I really wanted a second crack at Revolver after trying to climb it wet back in September. But I was also interested in climbing Big Tree One again to get some gear placement "practice" in since I hadn't been on rock in over a month. The harder rating of Revolver had Rod suggesting we start on Big Tree One. This made sense, as it is on the South Buttress, and would be sunnier in the afternoon. And Revolver was on the North Buttress and perhaps wouldn't be as hot during the hottest time of day.

We got to the base and geared up for Big Tree. Rod led it and took a while completing the pitch. I had to run off into the woods before following. I joined him at the top of pitch one. We swapped the rack and I headed off on pitch two. Perhaps it is coming off the couch after a month of not climbing, but I didn't remember this pitch to be as run out. I got to the top and brought Rod over and he prepared for the next lead.

Rod headed up the third (and best) pitch of the route. I had told him where I thought the crux was and he made good time heading up to it. At the crux he balked. He tried a higher gear placement and then even added a second cam. He down climbed a few steps and yo-yo'd a bit. He inspected holds and tried different options. After a long while, he confessed to me he did not have the moves in him. I lowered him down to the anchor and I switched to the sharp end to tackle the moves. The crux of the route in my opinion is a move where the lie backing ends and you have a few friction moves before picking up the lie backing again. I'm not sure it is the technical crux of the route, but it is the mental crux as you leave hand holds and counter pressure for some straight smearing.

I climbed up the crux on top rope and then rearranged the gear Rod had placed so I could have more gear above the crux. I tried the moves and was attempting to remember how I did it last time, but I was not being successful. I couldn't commit to my right foot. I down climbed a few times to a ledge to rest my feet. Was I no longer capable of doing the moves? I had tried low, I had tried midway. What if I tried high? I started back up and instead of forcing my moves rightward I just followed the natural rhythm of the rock and found myself going up a bit more before rightward moves commenced. It felt good. The small tree that I had previously slung appeared bigger, but not as lively. I slung it again and headed off to finish the pitch.

Rod joined me and commented that he still didn't like the moves, even on top rope. I presented him with an option to lead the final pitch as I wanted to move onto other things. He didn't feel the need to, so we started rapping the route.

Once back at the packs we huddled in the shade and ate lunch. With my need to be back in Seattle by 5pm, it was too late to start a 6+ pitch route like Revolver. We had to come up with other options. I suggested Dirt Circus, a route I had not previously done. The first pitch was bolted 5.9 and the second was a bolted 5.9+. I offered the easier first pitch to Rod and we hiked over to the base.

There must be a good reason for this route to be called dirt circus. The first 10' of stone were filthy. We joked about how we should have power washed it before climbing in the morning and that it would have been ready to go by the afternoon. Rod tied in and made several attempts to place a cam so he could continue. After a period of time he said it wasn't going to happen and I offered another route for us to climb.

Rod got the lead on Under the Bored Walk. A route I suggest to anyone who is climbing at Darrington for the first time. I had him lead it to the top in one pitch. I followed, experimenting with my approach shoes. This was quite scary at first, but as the difficulty eased and I got used to the feeling of chicken heads under my feet, it was not too bad. Afterward, Rod said the route was a good one to bring people new to rock climbing as it was fun and easy.

I love Three O' Clock Rock for the ease of approach and so many good climbs in a range that I can climb. It was great being out on the rock. I feel I needed this to prep me for Squamish in two weeks. We'll see how things go.

Grivel's G20 Monopoint

The crux of the Croz Spur, photos and content courtesy of Dave Searle



So I had a problem.... I had just bought a brand new pair of scarpa 6000's and I didn't have a crampon to fit on them. I prefer using Mono points for mixed climbing and I knew that if I wanted a super-light crampon I only really had two options. The Grivel G20 or the Petzl Dart.



I bought the G20's from a shop here in Chamonix over a year ago now and I have used them for nearly all my climbing. I have used them on the north face's of the Eiger, Droites and Grandes Jorasses. I used them water ice climbing and I have also used them mixed climbing in Scotland as well as using them as my dry-tooling crampon. Are they reaching the end of there life? I'd say so, but hey they have had a good innings.



I knew when I bought them that unlike a modular crampon like the G14 or M10 it would be expensive to change the front section when the front point became to short. I do a lot of climbing and I was willing to take that financial hit for saving the weight and having a more technical crampon. I really wanted a crampon with rear facing secondary points for dry tooling and steep mixed.



These crampons have worked really well in all but one area..... ridges. I know that they weren't designed for that and to be honest any climber who looked at them or used them would say the same thing. If your looking for a crampon that will cover classic alpine routes then look somewhere else. If your looking for a super-light mixed climbing mono then these baby's are well worth a look.



Why aren't they any good for ridge's I hear you ask. Well they are built around Grivels own “mono rail” concept which means that the front of the crampon is attached to the back by a single rail with four teeth along its length. It sits right underneath your foot so when you put your foot on any flat or rounded rock your balancing on one of the rail points which is isn't that stable.



I used these crampons when I climbed the Colton/Macintyre this year and they worked really well on the face, but after we topped out we continued straight into the traverse of the Jorrases, a long and precipitous ridge climb to get to the Canzio Bivi. It was quite hard work with these crampons on but I still managed it ok. I'm not saying you won't be able to climb ridges with them on, all I'm saying is if you want one crampon to rule it all then there are probably better designs out there.



What you loose in stability on that kind of terrain you gain in other area's. For example not having the 4th row of points on the side of your foot means that the 3rd, rear facing points are easier to use when drytooling or steep mixed climbing because there isn't anything in the way on the side of your foot. If you've ever properly used the 'rake' points for there intended purpose you'll know what I'm trying to say. Also having the points underneath your feet on the fixed bar means that if you ever kick your foot out or use it sideways around a icicle you can really get them in because they are so solid on the bottom of your foot.



As can be expected from Grivel these crampons are really well made and I have had no issues with the build quality. I'm not sure what to say about the longevity of them as I personally think they have lasted really well for the use I have given them but some of my friends who have used them as well don't feel the same way. Perhaps I'm better at hitting the ice rather than the rock when I'm mixed climbing?



One thing that Grivel have gone for over Petzl is three adjustments holes for the front bail. This means that you can have the front point super short for technical mixed climbing or super long for ice. Its useful to have that adjustment for when you've filed the front point down a bit as you can push it further forward to get better hold on softer ice or snow.



When I bought these crampons they did not come with the subsidiary horizontal front point that they now come with. I'm not sure how much this will help with grip in snow or soft ice but I haven't had any issues without it. They don't grip as well as a traditional crampon in snow but all you need to do is kick a bit harder up that snow cone before the fun really begins.



I thought that I was going to have some problems with balling up (when heavy wet snow collects under your crampons in a ball, which is heavy and annoying on the flat and pretty dangerous on a slope!). I can honestly say that I haven't had any issues with this with these crampons and that's not because I haven't encountered the right snow for it. I can recount a few times when partners that have been using the Darts have had a total mare of it when its been fine for me. You can buy an anti-balling plate for the front but I haven't felt the need for it yet.



There is only one thing I would change about these crampons. I would get rid of the first point on the mono rail (the furthest forward one). Why? Because I find when I stand on a large spike it takes me a bit fiddling to locate the front of my foot onto it securely. I think if this point wasn't there not only would it be a few grams lighter but it would be easier to nestle your foot on the top of that big granite block your eye-balling.



Pinocchio, Mont Blanc du Tacul

http://searler.com/



"All in all its a great technical crampon that excels on mixed terrain and water ice but also copes really well with big stuff and dry tooling." Dave Searle





Pinocchio, Mont Blanc du Tacul from skigrandbec on Vimeo.









Sometimes you just wear gear out and it simply needs to be replaced

The Cyclist and the Roundabout

Though not nearly as widespread as in the UK, roundabouts - also known as rotaries and traffic circles - are fairly common back in New England, particularly in the sort of areas that brevets and similar rides tend to take us through.Personally, I don't know anyone in the US - be they cyclist or driver - who actually likes roundabouts, and I am no exception. Over the years my attitude toward them has transitioned from one of pure terror to one of a more manageable, subdued loathing. There are right of way rules to navigating them, but somehow the traffic flow ends up being chaotic despite those rules. Drivers don't always yield to other vehicles correctly, and bikes they sometimes outright ignore. As a cyclist, you can end up waiting your turn forever despite having the right of way. Or worse yet, a driver's failure to yield once you're already moving through the circle can result in a close call or collision.




Now cycling in Northern Ireland, my relationship with roundabouts has moved to an entirely new, downright intimate level. On the North Coast they are everywhere, often used in leu of traffic lights, and I go through at least one - but more typically anywhere between three and six - every day. There are large roundabouts the size of parks. There are smaller ones that might display a modern sculpture or two. And there are tiny ones that are just painted circles on tarmac, easy to miss. There are urban roundabouts through which cars move at a crawl. And there are rural ones, through which lorries fly at top speed.




Most impressive of all are the roundabouts situated along steep hills. One such stunner is just outside of Limavady town, approaching the village of Aghanloo. When I first saw this thing appear in front of me, my jaw dropped. When approached from one direction, this roundabout requires being ready to yield or stop while climbing a 10% grade, from another direction while descending the same. And to be clear, the hill does not start or end with the roundabout; the intersection is half way through the climb. For a cyclist this can be rather ...interesting, requiring precise control of one's bike and brakes.




But one thing I realised about the roundabouts in Northern Ireland over time, is that they are predictable: There is no chaos or confusion, as everyone actually follows the right of way rules. Traveling on the left side of the road, you yield to traffic approaching from the right, and in the same manner other traffic yields to you. Unlike in New England, drivers do actually yield when it is another vehicle's turn - even if that other vehicle is a bike! It took me some time to trust in this, but once I started to all the stress from navigating the roundabouts was removed. When it's my turn, I go and when it's not, I stop: easy, and, admittedly, more efficient than a traffic light. I like it!




What has been your experience with roundabouts as a cyclist in the area where you live?

Data Mining :: Who is Who? And how do they fit?

This is going to be a long post... it has taken far more time to compile than anticipated and I wasn't sure how to present the information. Hopefully it will be somewhat clearer than mud and will be of help to someone besides myself! If you are doing research on these Rupert families, please contact me – kinexxions@gmail.com



These past three weeks I have consumed “quite a few” hours searching for tidbits regarding Rupert families in Columbiana County, Ohio - in online family trees, FamilySearch, Ancestry dot com, Footnote, and other sites as well as spending three full days at the Allen County Public Library in Fort Wayne.



A considerable amount of time has also been spent in evaluating what had been found at the Family History Library in addition to the new stuff. A lot of “information” has been gathered with more than a few “Huh?” moments, especially with the family trees but also in “official records,” which has resulted in a bit of confusion which in turn has caused some degree of frustration because the records that are needed are not immediately available. More information = more questions that need answered.



In trying to sort out the Rupert families in Columbiana County, it certainly helps that the two “biggest players” (Adam and John) both left wills that named their children, though perhaps not all of them and, of course, some of the names are the same! However, John did not give us the married names of his daughters, just their first names, which certainly complicates matters. I do appreciate the fact that he listed his children but why oh why couldn't he have given us their married names?



For now, my goal was to attempt to determine how many Rupert families there were in Columbiana County and who belongs to whom. At this time it is a “best guess” and more research is needed to confirm or deny any assumptions. I have not, by any stretch of the imagination reviewed all of the family trees online that are out there for these people nor have I done an exhaustive search (though this has been a bit exhausting!) for all records.



FamilySearch has been putting the Ohio Tax Records 1800-1850 online. They are only 17% complete and include just 11 counties for the years 1816 through 1838, but one of those counties happens to be Columbiana! The neat thing about the years 1816-1820 is that they listed the original owner as well as the current proprietor.



In addition, the microfilm of the Ohio Land Records (Roll 136) for the Register of Certificates 1800-1812 for Steubenville Land Records was viewed at the Allen County Public Library. The records for the “original owners” (Adam, John and William Rupert) were transcribed.



The Tax Lists, along with Census Records and Land Patent Records have identified men with the Rupert surname who either owned land in Columbiana County, Ohio or resided there. For the early years (prior to 1828) the township names were not included on the tax list. I've used the land description (Range and Township) to determine the actual township. An example, from the 1816 tax list for Columbiana County, Ohio is shown below.





1816 Property Tax List, Columbiana County, Ohio



Portion of the Ohio Townships map (pdf) found at the Ohio DNR website.

For reference purposes: Hanover Township is left of Center (where the “OLU” is in Columbiana). Unity Township is in the upper right corner. Columbiana County originally encompassed the southern tier of townships in Mahoning County as well as the eastern tier of townships in Stark and portions of Carroll and Jefferson Townships.



Below is a compilation of the Ohio Tax Lists available at Family Search for the years 1816-1836 and the early federal census records (1820-1840) for Columbiana County for the surname Rupert, or variations (Rooperd, Rupart, Ruper, Ruperd, Rupert, Ruppard, Ruppart, Ruppert, and Ruport) To save space, I've omitted the surname from the Property Tax abstracts. The Tax Lists for Personal Property have not been included but I found no additional names for the years covered.



I'm not sure what, if any, conclusions can be drawn with this information. Examination of the actual Deed Records could provide additional information. I'm hoping that someone with more information will see this and contact me! kinexxions@gmail.com



=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= John =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

• John Rubert, resident of Columbiana County, Ohio was issued Patent Certificate 1145 on December 1, 1804 for 159.4 acres in R4 T15 S26 through the Steubenville Land Office. Final Certificate 1347 was issued to him on November 25, 1808.

• John – Tax List - Hanover Twp (R4 T15 S26) – original owner - 161.3 acres - 1816, 1817, 1818, 1819, 1820 (80 acres), 1821, 1822, 1823, 1824, 1825, 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1831, 1832, 1833, 1834, 1835, 1836

• John Rupert - 1820 - Hanover Twp p5, one male over 45 and one female over 45.

• John Ropert - 1830 - Hanover Twp p19, one male 80-89, one female 20-29, one female 70-79 [This is the father of my ancestor Eva Rupert Yarian. The 1830 census puts John's date of birth between 1741 and 1750. The female age 20-29 is most likely a caretaker or housekeeper.]

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Richard, son of John =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

• Richard Rupert - 1820 - Hanover Twp p5, one male under 10, one male 16-25, one female 16-25 [He is most likely Andrew Richard who sold land in 1824 along with his wife Mary and John Ruppard and wife Barbara and the Richard mentioned in John's will. He may be the Andrew Rupert listed in the 1830 census Sandy Twp, Stark County, Ohio p1.]

• Richard - Tax List - Hanover Twp (R4 T15 S26) - original owner: John Rooperd – 80 acres - 1820, 1821, 1822, 1823, 1824, 1825

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Adam =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

• Adam Rupert, resident of Columbiana County, Ohio was issued Patent Certificate 1350 on April 26, 1805 for 313.2 acres in R7 T19 S11 through the Steubenville Land Office. Final Certificate 1445 was issued to him on April 12, 1809.

• Adam - Tax List - Unity Twp (R1 T8 S17) – original owner - 324 acres – 1816, 1817, 1818, 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822, 1823, 1824, 1825, 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829 [apparently sold land to Adam Jr and Jacob]

• Adam - Tax List - Canton Twp (R8 T10 S25) - original owner: John Nichols - 160 acres – 1819, 1820 [Canton Twp is now part of Stark County. Do not know if this is the same Adam Rupert]

• Adam - Tax List - Unity Twp (R1 T8 S5) – 50 acres - 1824

• Adam Rupert – 1820 - Unity Twp p5, one male under 10, two males 16-25, one male 45 and over, one female 10-15, one female 16-25, two females 45 and over.

• Adam Rookart Sr - 1830 – Unity Twp p17, one male 70-79, one male 80-89, one female 10-14, two females 70-79. One person in the household is blind. [Am assuming this is Adam Rupert Sr. as he is otherwise not enumerated in the census for Unity Township. On the same page as Adam Jr. and Jacob Rookart. Indexed as Adam Rookard Junior.]

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Jacob, son of Adam =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

• Jacob - Tax List - Unity Twp (R1 T8 S17) - 160 acres – 1830, 1832, 1833, 1834, 1835, 1836 [Apparently purchased or received half of the property that was owned by his father.]

• Jacob Rupert – 1820 - Unity Twp p5, one male under 10, one male 26-44, one female under 10, one female 16-25. [He is listed on the line immediately after Adam. Jacob was not named in the will of Adam Rupert but it was mentioned in several online trees that he was given a share of the remaining undistributed assets of Adam's estate.]

• Jacob Rookart – 1830 - Unity Twp p17, three males under 5, one male 5-9, one male 30-39, one female under 5, one female 5-9, one female 30-39. [Am assuming this is Jacob Rupert. He is enumerated on the same page as Adam Rookart Jr and Sr.]

• Rebecca Rupert - 1840 – Unity Twp p19, two males 5-9, one male 10-14, two males 15-19, one male 20-29, one female 10-14, one female 15-19, one female 40-49. [Rebecca is the widow of Jacob]

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Adam Junior, son of Adam =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

• Adam Jr - Tax List - Unity Twp (R1 T8 S17) – 160 acres – 1830, 1832, 1833, 1835, 1836 [Apparently purchased or received half of the property that was owned by his father.]

• Adam Jr - Tax List - Unity Twp (R1 T8 S11) – 160 acres – 1834

• Adam Rookart Jr - 1830 – Unity Twp p17, one male under 5, one male 20-29, one male 30-39, two females under 5, one female 5-9, one female 20-29. [Assuming this is Adam Rupert Jr. as he is otherwise not enumerated in the census for Unity Township. Listed on the line just below Adam Sr. Indexed as Adam Rookard Junior]

• Adam Rupert – 1840 – Unity Twp p19, two males under 5, one male 5-9, one male 10-14, one male 20-29, one male 30-39, two females under 5, three females 10-14, one female 30-39, one female 80-89. [This is Adam Jr as the elder Adam passed away on April 22 1840.]

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= ? ? ? ? ? ? =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=



Then there are these fellows, none of which are mentioned in the will of John or Adam Rupert. Are they related or are they “strays” that don't belong to either John or Adam?



=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= ? ? William Rupert ? ? =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=



The actual census pages were viewed and William is not listed in the 1820 or 1830 census for Green or Beaver Township.

• William Rupert, resident of Frederick County, Maryland was issued Patent Certificate 627 on October 20, 1803 through the Steubenville Land Office. Final Certificate 1104 was issued to him on February 16, 1804.

• William - Tax List - Green Twp (R3 T16 S1) – original owner - 690 acres - 1816, 1817 (delinquent), 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822 (non resident), 1823 (non resident), 1824 (non resident), 1825 (non resident) - entry shows S11, 1827 (no first name listed), 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832, 1833, 1834, 1835 (delinquent for 1833 & 34), 1836

• William Rupert, resident of Frederick County, Maryland was issued Patent Certificate 628 on October 20, 1803 for 628 acres in R3 T16 S8 through the Steubenville Land Office. Final Certificate 1103 was issued to him on February 16, 1804.

• William - Tax List - Green Twp (R3 T16 S8) – original owner - 640 acres – 1816, 1817 (delinquent), 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822 (non resident), 1823 (non resident), 1824 (non resident), 1825 (non resident), 1827 (no first name listed), 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832, 1833, 1834, 1835, 1836 (delinquent for 1835)

• William Rupert, resident of Adams County, Pennsylvania was issued Patent Certificate 2516 on October 23, 1806 for 159.82 acres in R2 T13 S18 through the Steubenville Land Office. Final Certificate 1754 was issued to him on November 18, 1809. [May not be the same man who purchased land in Green Twp. There was another Rupert family in Beaver Township. See below.]

• William - Tax List - Beaver Twp (R2 T13 S18) – original owner - 160 acres – 1816, 1817 (delinquent), 1818, 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822 (non resident), 1823 (non resident), 1824 (non resident)

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= ? ? Christian Rupert ? ? =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

• Christian Rupert – 1820 - Centreville p2, one male 26-44, one female 16-25. A marriage is recorded for Christian Rupert and Mary Steller in Columbiana County ( v2 p12) on September 1, 1818. [The town of Carrollton was originally called Centreville. The name was changed when Carroll County was organized in 1833.]

• Christian - Tax List – Washington Twp (R5 T14 S23) – 3 acres – 1826, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1832 [This land is now part of Carroll County.]

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= ? ? George Ropert ? ? =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

• Geo Ropert – 1830 - Hanover Twp p19, one male under 5, one male 20-29, one female under 5, one female 20-29. [George is in Hanover Township, same as John.]

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= ? ? Beaver Township Ruperts ? ? =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=



And then, there is another Rupert family residing in Columbiana County - in Beaver Township. In 1846, Beaver Township became a part of newly formed Mahoning County. On pages 790-791 of the “20th Century History of Youngstown and Mahoning County, Ohio and Representative Citizens” edited and compiled by Gen. Thos. W. Sanderson, 1907 there is a biography of Jacob W. Rupert born August 13, 1840, in Beaver township, Mahoning County, Ohio. He is a son of Benjamin and Catherine (Wonsetler) Ruppert. Benjamin “was born in Beaver township and was a son of Jacob Ruppert, who came from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and settled first just north of North Lima, removing from there to a farm of 200 acres, northeast of Canfield, on which he lived for the rest of his life.” This Jacob does not appear to be part of the John or Adam Rupert families, but, who knows? I do have some additional information on this Mahoning County Clan but haven't had time to fully review it yet.

• Jacob Ruperd - 1820 – Beaver Twp p2, five males under 10, one male 26-44, one female 26-44

• Jacob - Tax List- Beaver Twp (R2 T13 S22) - original owner: Christian Klinker - 163 acres – 1817, 1818, 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822, 1823, 1825, 1826

• Jacob - Tax List - Beaver Twp (R2 T13 S14) – 10.25 acres – 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832

• Jacob Rupert – 1830 - Beaver Twp p9, one male under 5, one male 5-9, one male 10-14, one male 20-29, one male 40-49, one female under 5, one female 30-39.

• Jacob - Tax List - Beaver Twp (R2 T13 S11) - 10 acres - 1831, 1832

• Jacob - Tax List - Beaver Twp (R2 T13 S8) - 72 acres – 1833, 1834, 1835, 1836

• Jacob - Tax List - Beaver Twp (R2 T13 S7) - 59 acres – 1836

• Samuel - Tax List - Beaver Twp (R2 T13 S18) – 160 acres – 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1831

• Jacob Rupert - 1840 – Beaver Twp p7, one male 10-14, three males 15-19, two males 20-29, one male 40-49, one female 10-14, one female 40-49.

• Benjamin Rupert - 1840 – Beaver Twp p3, one male under 5, one male 20-29, one female 15-19.

• Eli Rupart – 1840 - Beaver Twp p17, one male under 5, one male 20-29, one female under 5, one female 15-19.

• William Rupert – 1840 - Beaver Twp p17, one male 20-29 [born 1811-1820], one female under 5, one female 20-29.

The Estate of John Rupert :: The final “Final Account”

The will of John Rupart dated October 17, 1828 was admitted to probate in Columbiana County, Ohio in August of 1831. The final account was prepared on March 29, 1842.



I thought it was more than a little strange that the only papers in the microfilmed estate file that were dated between the time of the Widow's Allowance in May 1832 and this document was a previous “final account” dated August 5th 1832.



I don't usually like making assumptions, but based upon this statement in the will of John Rupart: “after her decease I allow my real and personal property to be sold by my executor” I think we can assume that Barbara Rupart passed away prior to the sale of the land on August 1, 1842 (the second deed discussed in this post).



Sadly, from my point of view, even though there was a balance of $1,369.68¼ in the estate, there was no “final distribution” document in the microfilmed file. It probably would have listed the names of the husbands of the daughters and that would have made locating them much simpler and in several cases, even possible!



= + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + = + =



First page of Final Account March 29, 1842.

Estate of John Rupart. Packet 1439. Family History Library microfilm 2032592.

The final account of Conrod Yerrien and David

Ehrhart as executors of the estate of John Rupart, late of

the county of Columbiana, deceased



These accountants charge themselves with the following sums received.

1836 July 14th

Cash for rent of Real estate - - - - - - - - - - - $62.56 ¼

Interest on same to 11th Augt 1842 - - - - - - - 22.67 ½

Cash for rent of Real estate - - - - - - - - - - - - 34.60

Interest on same to 11th Augt 1842 - - - - - - - 12.54



1837 Apl 1st

Cash for rent of Real estate - - - - - - - - - - - - 34.60

Interest on same to 11th Augt 1842 - - - - - - - 12.54

Cash for rent of Real estate - - - - - - - - - - - - 57.00

Int on same to 11 August 1842 - - - - - - - - - 17.95 ½



1842 Augt 11th

Cash on sale of Real estate - - - - - - - - - - - 1200.00

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1407.33 ¼



These accountants claim credit for the following sums

1842 Jany 31

Paid Wm B. Morgan Printer - - - - - - - - - - - 1.00

Paid Pierce for coffin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5.00

Paid John Robertson for shroud &c - - - - - - 3.25

Paid On the above note of $57.00 - - - - - - - 9.40

Paid David Ehrhart for repairs &c - - - - - - - 24.00

Paid Fisher A. Blockson Atty - - - - - - - - - - - 5.00

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $27.65



To the Honorable Court of Common Pleas for the county of Columbiana

The undersigned Master Commissioner of this court to whom was refered the account of the executors of the estate of John Rupart late of said county, deceased. Reports – That in pursuance of the Rule of this Court he has examined said account and finds that said accountants have received

Rents of real estate with interest thereon - - - $207.33 ¼

From sale of Real estate - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1200.00

Making the whole amount charged

against accountants on the account - - - - - - $1407.33 ¼





Second page of Final Account March 29, 1842.

Estate of John Rupart. Packet 1439. Family History Library microfilm 2032592.

I do find by proper vouchers exhibited that said

accountants have paid debts owing

by said estate to the amount of - - - - - - - $21.65



Costs of administration, exclusive of the

sum to be allowed accountants for their

services - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $6.00

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $27.65



Leaving in the hands of accountants for

distribution - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1379.68 ¼



Out of which the accountants compensation

for his services and masters fee to be

allowed by court to be deducted.



All which is respectfully submitted

March 29th 1842 - - - - - - - - Fisher A. Blackman

My fee - - - - - - - - $2.00 - - - - Mast Comm



April 5th the accounts having produced vouchers

No 4 & 5 amounting to $8.00 which being deducted

leaves - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $1371.68 ¼

F A Blackman

Mas Com



No 6 of $2 being duducted leaves - - - - $1369.68 ¼

Basket Shop

This is from the courtyard in front of the church looking toward the Basket Shop that is so well known and poplular in Old Town.

Under the Rock

This is the photo I took of the crawl space that goes all the way under the huge rock. It is next to the 'cave' in the above shot.

Red Yuca

A red yuca blossom which is much smaller than the native New Mexico yuccas with white blossoms.

Summer Afternoon on Wauswaugoning Bay

On several recent afternoons we have been experiencing late summer rain squalls that are very intense but short-lived. They often only last a few minutes then the sky clears and the sun comes back out from behind the clouds. These photoswere taken last week during our outing on Lake Superior where we dodged several of these rain squalls. When these photos weremade a squall had just passed over Wauswaugoning Bay to the west of us. We could see the rain falling in sheets over the bay and over Mt. Josephine, but we remained dry from our vantage point. As the clouds broke up after the rain had passed the conditions were so beautiful I just HAD to photograph the scene (imagine that!).

Distance Mountains

Looking toward Schoolhouse Mesa in the Jemez Mountains.

Switzer Land :: Jacob and Catherine sell to Daniel Deemer

There were certain rather interesting reservations(at least I thought so)made in the sale of this land... On February 10, 1847 Jacob Switzer and Catharine, his wife, sold their property in Salem Township to their son-in-law Daniel Deemer for the sum of $... This was the land that was situated in the South ½ of the Northeast ¼ of Section 33 in Township 15 Range 3, which was bounded by the lands of John Bricker, Samuel Wall, Abraham Arter, Simon Arter and Samuel Entrikin and contained eighty acres. Jacob had purchased this land on March 26, 1838 for $2600 from John and Hanna Froth.



The land was sold, with provisions as set forth in the second paragraph of page 777:

“Reserving nevertheless to him the said Jacob Switzer and to the said Catharine & to the survivor of them during their natural lives and the life time of the survivor of them the house in which they now reside on said premises with the appurtenances – also the truck patch which lays North West of said house containing one quarter of an acre & the orchard which lays East of said house and contains one and a fourth acre – also one half of the garden – also all of the rights and privileges set forth in an article of event date herewith entered into between the said Deemer & said Switzer which said article and all the covenants therein contained on the part of the said Deemer, are hereby expressly charged upon said real estate which is hereby conveyed subject to the same...”

And the legalese continues on page 778. In the portion just prior to the signatures is wording that I've never seen in a deed record before:

“And I the said Catharine wife of the said Jacob do hereby, in consideration of the money paid to my said husband, remise, release, and forever quit claim to the said Daniel Deemer and to his heirs and assigns, all my right and title of dower in and to the above described premises.”

The Article of Agreement between Daniel Deemer and Jacob Switzer and Catharine Switzer was made and concluded on the 10th day of February A.D. 1847 (beginning at the bottom of page 778 and continuing on to page 779).

“That whereas the said Switzer & wife have this day conveyed to the said Deemer the South half of the North East quarter of section number thirty three in township number fifteen in Range number three, in said county for the consideration of two thousand dollars & other considerations – fifteen hundred dollars of which consideration is given to the said Deemer who is the son-in-law of said Switzer & wife – And whereas the said Switzer & wife have made in said deed certain reservations – therefore , the said Deemer covenants & agrees to pay the said Jacob Switzer (as the balance of the consideration of said $..) the sum of five hundred dollars as follows – one hundred dollars on the first day of April 1847 – one hundred dollars on the first day of April 1848 - $100 on the first day of April 1849, $100 on the first day of April 1850 – and $100 on the first day of April 1851 – in accordance with five promissory notes of even date herewith.

“And it is further agreed between the parties that the said Jacob Switzer & Catharine his wife, and the survivor of them, shall reserve for their own use & for the use of the survivor of them the house on said premises in which they now live – also the privileges of the yard around the same – also the truck patch North West of said house of about one quarter of an acre – also the orchard which lays East of the said house containing about an acre and a quarter, also one half of the garden – also pasture and hay from off said premises for one horse and two cows, and stable room for one horse and two cows, also pasture and stabling for two hogs – also the said Switzer & wife or the survivor of them to have one third of the chickens, which shall grow from said premises (the said Switzer & wife to feed said one third thereof.)

The said Switzer & wife also reserve as much fire-wood as they need for their own use (they to cut & haul the same) also the said Switzer & wife to have the manure from said farm for their truck patch & garden as much as they may want for their lives or of the survivor – all of which right and privileges the said Deemer covenants to furnish & guaranty to the said Switzer and wife during their natural lives and the life of the survivor of them. And for the security of the said Switzer & wife, all the above privileges rights and covenants of the said Deemer are hereby charged upon the said premises. In testimony whereof we have hereunto set our hand and seals this day & year above written.”

The Deed was Signed by Daniel Deemer, Jacob Switzer and Catharine Switzer (with her mark).Attested by Edward Carroll and Beulah R. Wright Carroll



The legal stuff continues on page 780. However, I somehow managed to miss scanning that page while at the Family History Library earlier this year! Hopefully there is nothing of major importance included on that page!





Columbiana County, Ohio Deeds Volume 38 page 777 (FHL Film 926944)



Columbiana County, Ohio Deeds Volume 38 page 778 (FHL Film 926944)



Columbiana County, Ohio Deeds Volume 38 page 779 (FHL Film 926944)

If you aren't paying attention?

My friend Jon..did a nice (remember"nice" can be a relative thing;) trip the other day.



I love traverses although I haven't done all that many. But the long day (or days) out can be great fun.



Jon's adventure has to be one of the better ones I have seen lately.






The line: 41 Km and 5000m of ascent. Les Contamines to Aiguille du Midi









41 fooking Kms?! 25 miles in the alpine! Chit man..that is a long day's walk by any standard. Good on ya!



The rest of his adventure is here:



http://www.alpineexposures.com/blogs/chamonix-conditions/8316372-mont-blanc-traverse-single-push?comment=110275372#comments



Not that Jon wouldever admit it but he has becomeis quite themountain animal. Think not and wonder if he climbs? Look here:



http://www.alpineexposures.com/blogs/chamonix-conditions/7454504-solo-link-up-of-aiguille-verte-n-face-ne-face-of-les-droites-and-n-face-of-les-courtes



http://www.rockandice.com/lates-news/the-big-freaking-deal-aint-bouldering



Some great stuff Jon! Now stop dicking around and go back to work.....with a rope on next time, will ya :) I would like to see that amazing photographycontinue!



Jon's real job:



http://www.alpineexposures.com/



http://www.alpineexposures.com/pages/chamonix-conditions














Jon playing on the "wrong" side of the camera during one of his earlier alpine link ups mentioned above.



Onthe Legarde Direct, © Magnus Kastengren