Grief as privilege

The subject of grief is perhaps an unusual academic interest but it is one of mine. "Grieving shouldn't be a privilege," is an essay about the stark contrasts between the systemic response to the writer's childhood loss and that of the student at the center of the horrific incident that just occurred in a South Carolina high school this week. 

In that incident, an unarmed student was brutally attacked by a police officer for texting during class and later refusing to leave the classroom. The student is a 16-year-old black female and the officer is a white male. The officer has since been fired, but the student still faces criminal charges. 

It has been reported that the student was recently orphaned and is currently living in foster care. The source is her lawyer, so the reports appear to be true. Though we do not know the details of the losses she has suffered, I can only assume (and the writer assumes) that the student is actively grieving. This certainly sheds some light on her behavior (behavior which is, I might add, completely age appropriate and to be expected from time to time in a high school setting, and which is usually responded to with proportionate behavioral discipline and not with savage physical assault). What happened to her inside of her high school classroom is abhorrent by itself. It is made worse somehow to know that in that moment, and every moment since, the girl is also grieving and in pain.

I was bowled over by this essay for personal reasons, though I do not claim to relate to the experiences of a black female high school student in foster care who was subjected to police brutality inside of her school and who now faces entering the juvenile criminal justice system, not to mention ongoing national exposure. I have never experienced discrimination and injustices like these and certainly not because of my race.

As the essay suggests, school should be a refuge for a grieving child. Instead, this student was made a victim of state-sponsored violence, which has only served to traumatize, humiliate and isolate her further. This student was not allowed to be present with her grief. This was a privilege afforded to the writer in high school and to me as well.

I know a bit about being a grieving child. My father died the summer before I started high school. That kind of loss is severe and dark. Still, I had advantages this girl did not have. During my freshman year, I was provided with so much safety and support by teachers, administrators and counselors at my school that it never occurred to me to think about those experiences in the context of privilege until now. Though mine were not as extreme as the writer's experiences (I never failed any classes or needed my records to be erased, for example), my grief was still acknowledged and allowed in a way that is clearly not available to everyone.

The writer explains how she recognized grief in the student just by watching the video. She seems to experience a feeling of solidarity with the student in this moment. It is only a glimpse, but I can see it, too. I think in those first few milliseconds there is also much more to her demeanor than grief. There is complete numbness, despondence and powerlessness. There is a bracing for the inevitable. Everything has already been taken away from her. In an instant, her physical agency, and potentially her future, are also taken from her. Her life is in danger in those moments. She survived but was injured in physical, emotional, and innumerable social ways as well.

Racially charged incidents like these are finally beginning to be seen for what they are. This incident was despicable and outrageous and unfortunately, likely common. Though firing police officers hardly fixes the problem there is at least some semblance of a response. This, of course, is not enough. 

Recognizing grief in a disadvantaged, abused high school student is not enough either. This essay is an example of that. It is mostly about the writer's own experiences. The absence of information about the South Carolina girl in this essay on its own is powerful. The fact that we don't know anything about her grief and loss is a kind of intentional silence. In that blank space, injustice is all too evident.

Institutional racism

This is what institutional racism looks like. In Chicago, it is manifest in a nondescript red brick building known as Homan Square.

The Guardian has been conducting an investigation of Homan Square, an off-the-books interrogation facility used by Chicago police to unlawfully detain and interrogate people without officially recording their arrests in public records. Many claim it operates like a CIA "black site." The Guardian has published several articles in an ongoing series that exposes serious police abuse allegations and civil rights violations related to this facility on the part of the Chicago Police Department.

The overwhelming majority of people who were held at this facility were black. Of the 7,000 people who were detained at this facility over the last decade, 82% were black and 11% were hispanic. Only 32.9% of the Chicago population is black. This is not difficult to figure out.

There are very clear civil and human rights violations occurring at Homan Square, according to the Guardian's reports. This should make us all afraid and enraged. If your arrest is not recorded in a booking system, there is no public notice or record of your whereabouts. Your lawyer or your relatives cannot find you. You are "disappeared" for as long as they decide to hold you. You have essentially been kidnapped. This alone is horrifying. What makes it unconscionable is that black citizens are specifically targeted. It is intentional.

Even when lawyers do become aware of clients being held at Homan Square, the Guardian claims many lawyers still are denied access. This would appear to be corroborated by the data the Chicago PD provided, which records a paltry 68 times in 10 years that people were officially allowed access to lawyers.

The Guardian reports that people were held at Homan Square for hours and sometimes days. They were intimidated, threatened, and physically and sexually abused. They were denied food and water. They were denied access to telephones and legal representation. They were brought there for one purpose: to basically be given the chance to incriminate themselves without lawyers or family members present. As a result, most of the people we know about who were held at Homan Square were eventually charged, mostly with low-level drug offenses.

We must stop imprisoning people for drug offenses. The sole accomplishment of the ongoing war on drugs is the systemic oppression and imprisonment of black people disproportionate to every other kind of person in America. Drug abuse is a public health problem. Only through complete decriminalization can we even begin to think about fixing this problem. Reform is inevitable and necessary. By the way, I am sorely disappointed in the UN for backing away from its reported new "global drug decriminalization" policy this week.

The smart bet is that 7,000 arrests won't be the end of this. It seems like a huge number, but we are talking about a period of over 10 years. We will probably never know exactly how many people were detained at Homan Square, which of course is the nature and purpose of an "off-the-books" operation and why it shouldn't exist. People continue to be held at this facility unlawfully today, according to the Guardian.

In addition, those 7,000 are only the arrests that the Chicago PD has disclosed to the Guardian so far, and only because they were forced to by a court of law. It is twice the number the Chicago PD originally disclosed to the Guardian earlier this year, citing how burdensome it is to come up with records because things at Homan Square are not yet digitized.

Not only has the Chicago Police Department apparently not yet entered the digital age, they have failed to recognize that unlawfully holding people in a secret police detention facility is essentially domestic terrorism.

There is no longer a question that these atrocities are happening. Police abuse in poor black communities is a symptom of systemic oppression. The Chicago PD won't be the last to be scrutinized. Law enforcement is also not the beginning or the end of the problem. We must examine the broader context of a society in which a Homan Square and all the institutions like it are allowed to exist. We must change this.

Please read the Guardian's series on Homan Square. The link below is the latest update.

Homan Square revealed: how Chicago police 'disappeared' 7,000 people

Josephine - Part 4

1870 U.S. Census Record of the "William" and Sarah E. Toon Household

Hilary Cornelius Toon

I can still confirm that the "William Toon" whose household Josephine Hobbs is listed under in the 1870 census is not the William Pius Toon she eventually married in 1877. So which William Toon did Josephine live with as a child? 

After taking a closer look at the 1870 census record and researching all possible William Toons in my family tree, my conclusion is that the census taker mistakenly wrote "William" when he meant to write "Hilary" for Hilliory/Hilary Cornelius Toon.

Hilary Cornelius Toon was born in 1838 to parents William Toon and Perdelia/Cornelia Carrico. Hilary's father, William Toon, is brother to Stanish Lloyd Toon. Both are children of Stanislaus Toon and Jenny Blandford. Stanish Lloyd and Stanislaus are my direct ancestors.

What this means is that William Pius and Hilary Cornelius were cousins. Josephine was living with the cousin of her future husband in 1870. This is no doubt how they met and eventually married.

Evidence

Hilary Cornelius Toon had three William Toons in his life: his father, his brother, and his son. None of them could have possibly been the William Toon listed as head of household with Sarah E. in this 1870 census record. Besides the fact that both adult William Toons are accounted for elsewhere in the 1870 census with their own households, their dates of birth also eliminate them.

William Toon (Hilary's Father) lived from 1807-1882. Definitely not remotely 30 years old in 1870.

William S.L. Toon (Hilary's brother) lived from 1831-1879. This William would have been almost 40 at the time of the 1870 census. It's possible there was an error in the recording of the age instead of the name. But what doesn't make sense about that theory is William living with his sister-in-law and his brother's children. Hilary is absent for a time in this scenario, which doesn't seem plausible.

Finally, the record in question is line 37 of the picture included in this post. The fact that there is another William written directly above him in line 36 could have contributed to the error. Weary census taker who had been recording population data all day by hand, perhaps. Plausible.

The simplest explanation is that this record is in fact a record of the household of Hilary Cornelius Toon. Hilary would have been about 30 years old at the time of his last birthday when the 1870 census was taken. In addition, Hilary is not accounted for anywhere else in the 1870 census and was the only one married to Sarah E. Together they had 6 children, 3 of which are listed in the census, along with Josephine: Martin Willett, Ann Irene, and William "Willie" Burk. Not yet born by the 1870 census were Mary Imelda, Samuel, and Susan Mohohis Toon.

Willett Connection

I also found a Willett in the family tree, which explains son Martin's middle name. Susan Willett was the second wife of William Toon (Hilary's father). They never had any children together. Susan Willett would have been like a mother to Hilary Cornelius. His biological mother, Perdelia/Cornelia, died in 1850 when he was around 12 years old. 

I still have yet to determine if there is any relation between Susan Willett and Mahala Rose Willett, who was Josephine's father's first wife. My thought is that this connection, if true, would explain how Josephine came to live with this family of Toons as a child in the first place.

To learn more, please see Josephine - Part 1, Josephine - Part 2, and Josephine - Part 3.

Josephine - Part 3

Catherine Josephine Hobbs Toon, 1939

Why "I am Josephine"
As my paternal great-great-grandmother, Josephine is a focal point of complexity in my family tree. While many of her life events were somewhat common for the time period (including child loss), her life seems to be the most tumultuous and least traditional of many of those around her.

Of course, I am not Josephine and my life does not mirror hers. I feel connected to her because the events of her life suggest untold resilience, grit, strength, and self-reliance. These are traits I admire most in myself and others. To a certain extent, I have personified them in Josephine and made them my heritage.

I became interested in researching Josephine because she is an archetype of feminine (and human) determination and power that is underrepresented in historical accounts. She likely did not have much social or financial power as a widowed woman in a farming town at the turn of the 20th century. Despite this, she never remarried, though in theory she was still of age to have more children at the time. Josephine is a complicated character in that respect.

Suffering is isolating. I think this is the core of where I draw inspiration from Josephine. The facts of her life are sparse but they reveal to me an image of an isolated, strong-willed woman. It is my own image. On the other side of my family tree, I see Josephine in them, too. It is the image of my mother, and her mother, the only grandmother I knew. I am their daughter. In this way, I am Josephine.

Who is Josephine

Josephine's parents were both on their second marriage when she was born in 1861. She was the only child of Samuel W. Hobbs and Elizabeth Farmer. Her father died when she was a baby. She had many half-siblings from her parents' other marriages.

She was perhaps all but abandoned by her mother, who remarried and lived in another town on the other side of the Kentucky-Missouri border. As a child, Josephine somehow ended up living with a family in Fancy Farm, Kentucky with the last name Toon. However, it was apparently not the same Toon family as the one she married into years later.

Josephine married extremely young. Marrying at 15 years old was young even for the 19th century. Most people married in their early 20s at the time. She never remarried or had other children after becoming a widow at age 31. She had been married to William Pius Toon, my great-great-grandfather, for 16 years when he died. She was around 6 months pregnant at the time of his death.

Three of her children died during the 1890s, possibly sometime after the death of William Pius in 1893. The only record of their deaths is within the 1900 census. Overall, half of her children died over the course of her lifetime.

She died in Pueblo, Colorado at the age of 86 and is buried in St. Jerome Cemetery in Fancy Farm, Graves County, Kentucky.

Historical Context

My image of Josephine is entirely based on the facts I know about her life from electronically searchable public records. I know about marriages, births, deaths, and residences. The most revealing documents I have are federal census records that show where she was living and who she was living with over time. However, census records are only snapshots taken every 10 years. It is not possible to fill in the blanks without imagination.

I have no idea about her character or personality. I have no idea what political views she held. For all I know she was a Confederate apologist with deeply held beliefs in support of slavery. She lived in the southernmost outskirts of a border state during the post-Civil War era. Though it was technically a Union state, Kentucky's citizens were deeply divided. Graves County's history of slave ownership was still relatively recent. For certain, she had beliefs.

I can only assume the Klan was active where she lived. I'm sure she was witness to the violent oppression and subjugation of black people during this era in one way or another. I can only hope that she rejected the concept of White supremacy and that her thoughts about the Klan's atrocious activities were on the right side of history. 

Josephine's suffering was small and personal relative to the developments of the time period. Her experience during this era is perhaps less important to analyze than white supremacy, civil rights, and terrorism campaigns against black people. Josephine was a white woman who apparently owned property and ran her own farm. This undoubtedly afforded her privileges not available to everyone. 

Property and Resources

I know that Charles Kelvy transitioned to head of household sometime around 1920, according to that year's census. Josephine was living with him that year. I assume he inherited the farm from her but I do not have any records to confirm. 

Early census records were not uniform. Researchers must piece together clues from multiple census records over time in order to get a full picture. Property value is one example of a data point that lacks uniformity across the census records of 1850-1940. Home values were not recorded in the census records during Josephine's adult life until 1930. Josephine does not appear anywhere in the 1930 census that I could find. Charles Kelvy, however, is recorded that year as the head of household for a farm with an address of "Fancy Farm and Lowes Road." There is a column for home value, but it was left blank.

In the 1940 census, the value of the Charles Kelvy Toon home is listed at $2,500. That is roughly $42,000 in today's dollars. Again, I am assuming he inherited this farm from Josephine. There is no address listed in the 1940 record that I could decipher. Regardless, this does not appear to have been a particularly high value property. It does not indicate that the family had a lot of money and resources. Like all of his neighbors listed on the same page of the 1940 census, Charles Kelvy's income from wages is recorded at $0. It does say he made more than $50 in the last year "from sources other than money, wages or salary."

Josephine is recorded in the 1940 census as head of household for a $1,400 property on Highway Grave Road in Graves County, Kentucky, which is the equivalent of around $24,000 today. It is not marked as a farm. This census record shows she lived in the same house in 1935, and we know she lived with Charles Kelvy in 1920. Since we don't yet know where Josephine lived in 1930, this house must have been purchased sometime between 1920-1935. What became of this property after she died in 1948 is unclear.

I am unsure what happened to the Toon family farm after Charles Kelvy's death in 1968. My own father had memories of that farm. He used to tell me stories about playing in the corn fields with his brother. When I visited Fancy Farm in 2000, my great uncle William Pius (1928-2012) took my sister and I on a tour of the town. He showed us family gravestones in St. Jerome Cemetery and the house where my grandmother, Mary Alma, had lived. My impression at the time was that the farm had long since been sold.

One day I hope to go back.

Blog
With context in mind, the facts and records available about her life suggest Josephine's power, strength, and determination in her personal life. The spaces in between those historic records are pure speculation. She seems to me like an extraordinary woman who lived an usually long life. Outside of her home and her farm, it is hard to say at all what kind of person she was. For me and for this blog, she is both anchor and muse.

To learn more about Josephine, see Josephine - Part 1 and Josephine - Part 2.

Josephine - Part 2

1900 U.S. Federal Census, Graves County, Kentucky

Catherine Josephine Hobbs Toon was my great-great-grandmother. She was known as Josephine. Her father, Samuel W. Hobbs, died when she was 2 years old. Her mother Elizabeth remarried soon after and remained in Josephine's Missouri hometown. Meanwhile, records indicate that as a child Josephine was sent to live with the family of William Toon, his sister-in-law Sarah, and her children sometime during the 1860s-1870s. The reasons for Josephine's separation from her mother are unclear. How was her mother connected with the family of William Toon in Graves County, Kentucky? Why did she send Josephine to live with them? How long did Josephine live with them? How is William Pius related to Josephine's Toon family caretakers? Many questions arise from the 1870 census record that were discussed in my previous post, Josephine - Part 1.

Marriage and Children
Josephine married William Pius Toon, age 26, in 1877. Josephine was 15 years old. The beginning of her adult life as a married woman is not recorded. Between 1877 and the birth of her first child in 1881, it's difficult to say where she lived or what she was doing.

William Pius Toon was my great-great-grandfather. His father, Stanish Lloyd Toon (1818-1877), died the same year of his marriage to Josephine. According to the 1880 U.S. Federal Census, William Pius lived with his mother, Jane Ryan, on his childhood farm in Graves County after his father's death. He was 29 at the time the census was taken. His marital status is recorded as single, however. This seems to be an error since we know he had been married to Josephine for 3 years.

Josephine is not included in this record nor was I able to determine her whereabouts anywhere in the 1880 census. Perhaps she was living with her mother in Missouri while William Pius helped with the farm after the loss of his father. This theory would seem to make sense since Josephine and William Pius did not have a recorded childbirth until 1881. Josephine was 19 years old when their son, William Joseph Toon, was born. Between 1881-1893, Josephine and William Pius had 8 children. There were a total of 4 boys (William Joseph, Stanislaus, Samuel Leo, and Charles Kelvy) and 4 girls (Ella May, Jennice Idella, Anna Appolonia, and Henrietta Frederica).

After 16 years of marriage, William Pius died in 1893 at the age of 42. Josephine was pregnant with my great-grandfather, Charles Kelvy, at the time of his death. William Pius died in August and Charles Kelvy was born in December of that same year. It's difficult to imagine what this year was like for Josephine.

Head of Household
Josephine was 31 at the time of her husband's death. I'm sure she felt societal pressure to remarry, but perhaps Josephine was determined to remain on her farm and carry on as before. It appears she remained a widow for the rest of her life. She never had any additional recorded children.

She is next found in census records from 1900 as the head of her household in Graves County. Her marital status is recorded as "M/D" to denote married, then divorced. It is interesting that she is not recorded as a widow at this time. Perhaps there was another marriage in the 1890s that is not recorded in searchable records. More likely it is a clerical error in the census. Assumptions or misunderstandings could have certainly occurred on the part of the census taker.

According to the census record, in 1900 Josephine now owns her home and her farm free and clear. Her occupation is listed as farmer. Her oldest son, William Joseph, is recorded as a farm laborer. There are no other farm hands or laborers recorded in her household. It seems she was maintaining the house and the farm largely on her own. Her children were also expected to work as well, I'm sure, as was common for the time period. The census shows her children all went to school at least for a time. They are all recorded as having the ability to read and write.

Child Loss

The 1900 census record also shows that 5 of her 8 children are living. Her children Samuel Leo, Jennice Idella, and Anna Appolonia all appear to have died by 1900. That year, their ages would have been about 15, 13, and 12, respectively. I wonder if they all died at the same time in 1900 or if they died at different times during the 1890s as young children.

There is no way to know what happened to these three children since the 1900 census is the only record that appears to exist of their deaths. I have not been able to find the William Pius and Josephine Toon household in the 1890 census record, which may have shed some light on the timing of those events. Without it I can only assume all of Josephine's children were alive (and 1 in the womb) at the time of William Pius's death in 1893. This information reveals an incredible amount of suffering for Josephine during the 1890s. She lost her husband and 3 of her children in the span of about 7 years.

Later, Josephine experienced the death of another daughter, Ella May (1883-1904), who was 21 when she died. Ella May might have died from complications of childbirth. She married James Noral Cissel in 1902 and had at least one surviving son. In the 1910 census record, Vodry B. Cissel, age 7, is listed as Josephine's grandson and a member of her household. The census shows he went to school, but perhaps he worked on the farm as well.

Later Life
In 1910, Josephine was 49 years old. She is still recorded in the 1910 census as the head of household and this time as "W" for widow. Her youngest son, Charles Kelvy, my great-grandfather, is the last of the children living with her at the time.  He was 17 in 1910 and working as a farmer at their home. It appears the rest of Josephine's children moved away by this time.

Josephine remained in Fancy Farm for the rest of her life. Later census records show that Charles Kelvy eventually became head of household after he married Mary Alma Roberts (1899-1999), my great-grandmother. Josephine lived with them at least for a time. She is recorded as the mother of the head of household (Charles Kelvy) in the 1920 census but falls off the radar until 1940.

Josephine's grandson, Vodry B. Cissel, remained with her for a long time. He appears to be living with her until he was at least 37 years old, according to the 1940 census record. From this census record we learn that Josephine has moved to a house on Highway Grave Road in Graves County, Kentucky. She owns it free and clear. I assume Charles Kelvy had inherited the family farm by this time. It's possible they may have sold the original farm and used it to buy Josephine's house. The rest may have bought property for Charles Kelvy to build a new life with his own family. I would have to spend time looking more closely at the census records for clues as to what happened.

Josephine's three surviving sons lived relatively long lives. William Joseph (1881-1952) married a woman named Augusta and had at least 6 children. He died in 1952 at age 70. Stanislaus (1885-1965) was married to a Mary Lois and had 5 recorded children. He was 80 years old. Charles Kelvy (1893-1968) was 74 when he died. He and Mary Alma had 15 children during the course of their marriage. One of them was my grandfather, Thomas Allard Toon (1915-1996).

Henrietta Frederica Toon (1890-1968) was the sole surviving daughter of Josephine and William Pius. The only information I have on Henrietta is that she lived until 1968 and died in Pueblo, Colorado. I am very curious about the Colorado connection.

Death
Josephine died in 1948 at the age of 86, also in Pueblo, Colorado. I wonder if Henrietta married and actually lived in Colorado with her husband, which would explain things.

Josephine is buried in St. Jerome Cemetery in Fancy Farm, Graves County, Kentucky, alongside William Pius.

Grief as madness

A few years ago there was something of a backlash in the media about a burgeoning movement to change the classification of grief in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5, 2013). Basically, it was reported that a group of psychiatrists were advocating to recategorize grief as a mental disorder.

The controversy surrounded what is known as the "bereavement exclusion," a rule in the DSM-4 that instructed clinicians not to diagnose major depressive disorder (MDD) after the recent death of a loved one.

Media reports (see Slate: Is Mourning Madness? by Meghan O'Rourke) concluded that if the bereavement exclusion were removed, it would mean a grieving person experiencing prolonged or complicated grief would be considered mentally ill. This now appears to have been an exaggeration, if not a leap of logic.

In the DSM-5, the bereavement exclusion was eliminated. The rationale (besides the science) is that bereavement does not shield people from developing MDD. Though it is rare, grieving people can certainly develop MDD.

The DSM-5 did retain a version of the rule, however. There is now a guideline that advises clinicians to wait a minimum of 2 weeks before diagnosing MDD in someone who just experienced a major loss. With this, it's important to remember two things: 1) the 2-week minimum is just a guideline and 2) a diagnosis of MDD after a loss does not mean grief is a mental illness.

Political motivations and financial incentives are an unfortunate reality in medicine. However, clinicians are trained to use clinical judgment. There is nothing here to compel clinicians to diagnose a grieving person with a disorder.

Dr. Ronald Pies writes a great summary of this issue for PsychCentral that I have linked here.

http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2013/05/31/how-the-dsm-5-got-grief-bereavement-right/

Josephine - Part 1

1870 U.S. Federal Census, Graves County, Kentucky

Who is Josephine
Catherine Josephine Hobbs Toon (1861-1948) was my great-great-grandmother. I recently became interested in her life while searching through public records to verify the correct spelling of the middle name of my great-grandfather Charles Kelvy Toon (her youngest son). Charles Kelvy was known as "Pappy" to my father. I always wondered where "Kelvy" came from. It is a very unique name that seems oddly assigned to a 19th century southwestern Kentucky farmer. Despite years of research, I have not found this name anywhere else in the family tree. This is what led me to the story of Josephine.

Parents
She was born in Mississippi County, Missouri to Samuel W. Hobbs, age 50, and Elizabeth Farmer, age 29. It was a second marriage for both Samuel and Elizabeth. Samuel was born in North Carolina but had a full life in Springfield, Kentucky for nearly 20 years with his first wife, Mahala Rose Willett. They had six children together. When Mahala died in 1850 at age 36, he moved to Missouri where he presumably met Elizabeth Farmer. I'm not sure which came first.

The whereabouts of the Hobbs children during this period are unclear. I wonder if they stayed with family in Kentucky or moved to Missouri with their father. Samuel's parents lived in Fancy Farm, Kentucky, the town where my Toon family line originates.

Elizabeth Farmer was born in Tennessee. Her first life was built in Missouri with a man named Franklin Devasier. She married Franklin when she was 17 years old. After 9 years of marriage, 2 living children and a baby on the way, Franklin died at the age of 28. Elizabeth gave birth a few months later to a baby boy. A year later, in 1859, she married Samuel Hobbs.

Josephine was Samuel and Elizabeth's first and only child. Samuel died in 1863 when Josephine was 2 years old. Records show they resided in Wolf Island, Mississippi County, Missouri. Elizabeth went on to marry a third time to a man named Phillip John Long. The whereabouts of the Devasier children during this period are also unknown to me, as I have not spent time to research it.

Early Childhood
While Elizabeth remained in Missouri as Mrs. Phillip Long, Josephine appears to have been separated from her mother. Census records show Josephine Hobbs living with the family of a William Toon in Fancy Farm, Kentucky in 1870. Her birthplace of Missouri is recorded in the form, which is the best evidence I have to confirm her identity. She is listed as part of the William Toon household but her relationship to William is not included in the record. Subsequent census forms include a column for relationship to the head of the household (e.g. wife, son, daughter, mother, farm laborer, etc).

At the time of the 1870 census, Josephine was 9 years old. How Josephine came to reside in Fancy Farm in 1870 with members of the Toon family piqued my interest, since I know she later married William Pius Toon, my great-great-grandfather (1850-1893). However, I was able to confirm that my great-great-grandfather is not the same William Toon listed on the 1870 census. That William Toon is recorded as being 30 years old and living with a woman named Sarah E. Toon, age 26, and some children at the time. My great-great-grandfather William Pius was born in 1850, so he would have been 20 years old during the 1870 census.

Toon Family Caretakers
A cursory search of Sarah E. Toon found that she was actually married to Hilliory Cornelius Toon. It seems they produced the children listed in the William Toon household on the 1870 census, including Martin Willett Toon, Anna Irene Toon, and William "Willie" Burk Toon. Three subsequent children were recorded in later census records (Mary Imelda Toon, Samuel Toon, and Susan Mohohis Toon), with Hilliory and Sarah E. reunited as head of household and wife.

Earlier census records also show that Hilliory Cornelius Toon and the William Toon of the 1870 census were brothers. So why was William living with his sister-in-law Sarah and her children, who were his nephews and niece, in 1870? Where was Hilliory at the time?

Also, is there some connection to the Willett family, which is the maiden name of Samuel Hobb's first wife? Martin's middle name would suggest this, but I have no idea about the naming practices of the time. There seem to be quite a few potential surnames used as middle names in my family (Kelvy, Willett, Burk, Mohohis, etc). I don't believe it is a coincidence that one of Hilliory and Sarah E.'s children bears the middle name "Willett" while Sarah E. also took in Josephine, the half-orphaned daughter of Samuel Hobbs, during some period of time in the 1860s/70s.

Meanwhile, Josephine's half-siblings from the Hobbs-Willett union might have been residing in Fancy Farm with her Hobbs grandparents. Did she ever meet any of them while living with the Toons?

How often was she reunited with her mother Elizabeth in Missouri?

It may be impossible to fill in many of these blanks at this point. There are a thousand explanations to consider.

Josephine married William Pius Toon in 1877 when she was 15 years old. I assume she was introduced to William Pius through her Toon family caretakers at the time. Perhaps they made the marriage happen. I still need to do more research to discover the Toon family line to which William, Hilliory, Sarah E. and their children belong. I'm not sure how or if William Pius is related to them.

Why I Feel Connected to Josephine
I have a lot of information about Josephine but I have no idea what she was like. I can only make assumptions based on the events of her life. I find myself thinking about the incredible amount of suffering she must have endured and the strength she must have had to survive what she did and for as long as she did. I feel the possibility that her life informs mine in spirit. I will explore this in subsequent posts about her adult life.