Name: Samuel Foster
   Born: c1784
  Place: prob Abbeville, SC
   Died: 13 Aug 1845120 
  Place: Warren Co., IL
 Buried: 
  Place: Cedar Creek Cemetery120 

Samuel Foster is said to have fought in the War of 1812.

I'm not convinced that Samuel Foster's father was the-often cited James Couples Foster. I simply haven't seen strong evidence of it. There is a document¹⁵⁹ that has been in circulation for decades which purports to have been originally written in 1861 by James's son Alexander Foster and later revised (1915-1916) by his son, Robert Andrew Foster. It does mention Samuel's family. The typewritten copy I have includes handwritten corrections. The authenticity of this record is, in my mind, in question.

Nevertheless, there is no dispute that Samuel's son, John A Foster, was born in Abbeville District, SC in 1818 and that they were closely related to James Couples Foster, as becomes evident when looking at the early census records (below). James C Foster is said to have been born in Ireland in 1753. He was the son of another James Foster.

Samuel was married at least three times. The tombstone at the grave of his last known child, Samuel Hamilton Foster, states that his parents were Samuel and Nancy Foster. We cannot know, however, if Nancy was the mother of all Samuel's children. He did marry twice more in his later years in Warren county, Illinois, having no children with either wife: Margaret Lusk on 4 Oct 1839 (she died two years later) and Mrs Eleanor (Struthers) Pollock on 17 April 1849 only four months before he died.

The early Fosters of Abbeville District, South Carolina appear to have been members of the Lower Long Cane Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church.

Samuel and his family arrived in Warren county, Illinois on 18 May 1837 after 8 weeks travel.¹⁵⁷

Will of Samuel Foster, 1845

I've had a copy of this in my files for 20 years or more. Finally (in 2007), I've taken the time to transcribe it. Samuel's gravestone says that he was 61 years old at death. That puts his death pretty squarely in 1784.

I Samuel Foster of the County of Warren in the State of Illinois do make and publishe this my last will and tistament [sic] in manner and form following
that is to say
first it is my will that my funeral expenses and all just debts be fully paid
second I give devise and bequeth to my beloved wife Eleanor Foster all the property that she brought with her and all she has not brought that belongs to her.
third I give and devise to my son John Foster the East half of my land both timber and Prairie to his heirs and assigns forever and the half of my other property after my debts is all paid.
fourth I give and devise to my son Samuel H. Foster the West half of my land both timber and prairie his life time; and at his death I allow it to be divided among the rest of my children also I allow him the the half of my personal property after my debts is paid. If Hamilton lives with John I allow John the use of Hamiltons land for helping him
and lastly I hereby constitute and appoint John C McCrery and James Foster to be the Executors for this my last will and testament revoking and anulling all former wills by me made and ratifying and conforming this and no other to be my last will and testament
In testimony [sic] whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 11th day of August 1845

             Samuel Foster
                 his
                  X
                 mark

Signed published and declared by the
above named Smauel Foster as and for
his last will and testament in
presence of all who at his request
have signed as witnesses to the same

Gilbert M'Crery
Cornelius F. Kitchen

I had puzzled over why Samuel would assume that his son, Samuel Hamilton Foster, might want to live with his brother despite being given half of his father's real property. And it was curious that Samuel assumed that "Hamilton" would have no heirs to pass the property on to, that it would automatically revert to John. Harriett Reynolds, who I had opportunity to meet later in the year, provided the answer in her February 1988 letter to me.

[Samuel Hamilton Foster] was a dwarf, a carpenter and tailor. Mainly a tailor. He always lived with John or my grandmother Margaret B. Arthurs. He's living with the Arthurs on the 1860 census.

We know now, of course, that dwarfism does not, in and of itself, prevent someone from having a family. The mindset of the time is evident in Samuel's will.

Census Readings

The are four Samuels on the 1810 census. The closest match, I believe, is on page 50. There are many more Fosters than I've listed here.

   pg 28
   James Foster      31010 11110
   George Kidd       00101 12210
   Samuel Foster     00100 11100
   James Foster Sr   20101 10100

   pg 50
   John Foster       11010 20010
   Samuel Foster     10010 10100
   Benjamin Hill     02010 41010

   pg 58
   John Foster Sr    41010 12201
   Samuel Foster Sr  00001 00001 died 1825?
   Samuel Foster Jr  10020 00010 son John C Foster?

Here is a list of the 19 Foster households found in the 1820 census, with page numbers.

Alex, 50 Ebnezer, 37 Elijah, 76 Hannah, 76 James, 48 James Sr, 45 James W S, 22 Joseph, 38 Joseph, 76 Joseph, 68

Robert, 28 Robert, 43 Robert, 49 Robert Sr, 76 Robert Sr, 80 Samuel, 48 Samuel C, 76 William, 15 William H, 76

I read the entries on page 48 as follows. It's worth noting that they're cited one after the other. Might James and Samuel have been brothers? Samuel did have two sons, James (1815) and John (1818) and three known daughters, Jane (1809), Margaret (1811) and Mary (c1813), by that time. His future son-in-law, Hamilton Hill, and his father, Benjamin Hill, are also on the same page.

   James Foster      110010 10110
   Samuel Foster     200010 41010

The following are the census entries for the name Foster in Abbeville District, 1830. Samuel is undoubtedly on page 57. It fits perfectly:

   Males
   1 to 5  (Samuel H.)
   1 5-10  (James)
   2 10-15 (John and William)
   1 40-50 (Samuel)

   Females
   1 5-10  
   2 10-15 
   2 15-20 (Margaret B and Mary C)
   1 40-50 (wife, Nancy?)

Daughter Jane married John C McCrery in 1829. He also had daughter, Martha L of unknown birth year.

  1830  >  SOUTH CAROLINA  >  ABBEVILLE  >  ABBEVILLE
  Series: M19  Roll: 169

  pg line FOSTER     Males         Females               Slaves
   7   5  Joseph     0000100100000 0000001000000 (50-60) 20
  18  25  William H  1010010000000 1100010000000 (30-40) 
  44   1  Joseph     0120010000000 0011010000000 (30-40) 5
  45   8  Jane       0000100000000 0000100100000 (50-60) 
  46  16  Sarah      0001000000000 1000100001000 (70-80) 2
  53   3  Elisabeth  0100000000000 0101001000000 (40-50) 25
  55   1  James M    2000010000000 0200010000000 (30-40) 
  56   3  John       0010001000000 0002001000000 (40-50) 3
       8  Samuel     0020000100000 0111001000000 (50-60) 
      26  Alex P     1000100000000 0000100000000 (20-30) 1
      27  James      0001100010000 0001100000000 (60-70) 
  57   1  Samuel     1120001000000 0122001000000 (40-50) 
       3  John P     0000010000000 1000010000000 (30-40) 
       9  James Sr   0100100001000 1000100000000 (70-80) 1
      10  James Esq  0000100100000 0000100100000 (50-60) 1
      13  A?n?       3200010000000 2111110000000 (30-40) 2
  77  20  Cradern    2020100000000 1110100000000 (20-30) 
      21  Robert     0101001000000 0011101000000 (40-50) 4
  96  26  John W     1210010000000 1000001000000 (30-40) 2

Other names of interest include:

John Morrow, page 56, line 2.
John A Hamilton, page 56, line 6.
Andrew Hamilton Sr, page 56, line 7
Hamilton Hill, page 56, line 24. He m2 Samuel's daughter, Margaret
John McCrary, page 57, line 2. Probably his son-in-law.

Sarah Foster, on page 46, may have been Sarah (Golding) Foster and the widow of Samuel Sr (d 1825). She died in 1845.

The entries for the 1840 census are opposite to what I'd expect. In fact, I'm convinced that that's the case--James and Samuel were mis-enumerated. James's household matches what Samuel's should have looked like and visa vera. Samuel's wife at the time would have been Margaret Lusk.

  1840  >  ILLINOIS  >  WARREN  >  12 N 2 W
  Series: M704  Roll: 72  Page: 186

  James Foster  0011100100000 0000001000000 (50-60)
  Samuel Foster 0000100000000 0000100000000 (20-30)

If Samuel was indeed the son of James Couples Foster, his genealogy would look something like the ahnentafel below. Stephen Hopkins and his son Giles were passengers on the Mayflower. However, I found the following quoted on several web pages, apparently the words of "Worth Ray":

This David is often tied to Hannah Hopkins because of a will dated Nov 22, 1734, where David Murray was a testator in the will of Elizabeth Davis of Somerset County, Maryland. Other testators include Nathaniel Hopkins and Hannah Murray. HOWEVER, subsequent research uncovered the will of David m. Hannah Hopkins and the list of children is DIFFERENT than those connected to this David (Samuel, Adam, and David)

And here's an excellent post to the MORROW-L Archives by Bill Morrow.

I have just received info that Hannah Hopkins, (dau of Nathaniel Hopkins d.1739/40 Somerset Co Md), who married David Murray/Murrow, was not the wife of David (50) Morrow shown on page 256 of Worth Ray's "Tennessee Cousins". David Murray/Murrow, husband of Hannah Hopkins died 1746 in Somerset Co Md leaving children: Esther, William, Samuel & Nathaniel Hopkins Murray. Source: page 92, "Colonial Families of the Eastern Shore, Vol 10" by Vernon L. Skinner, Jr & F. Edward Wright.

The children listed under David (50) Morrow were: (100) Rev David Morrow (101) Alexander (102) Old Samuel d.1796 SC (103) Adam (104) John (106) James (107) Sarah (108) William Morrow. Source: page 256 "Tennessee Cousins" 1950 by Worth Ray.

My conclusions are that these were two different men. And I also think that "David Walter Morrow" did not exist, some researchers must have garbled David (50) Morrow and Walter (28) Morrow into one person. Double given names didn't start until early 1800's. Walter Morrow died 1709 in Baltimore County Md. I don't know when David (50) Morrow died. Page 296 of "Morrows & Related Families" 1972 by Dr. J.T. Morrow shows birthyear 1700 deathyear 1780, but no proof is shown.

I think David (50) Morrow's birthyear may have been about 1693, based upon his grandfather David (3) Morrow's will which chides son Alexander (22) Morrow that if he dies without issue (children) his inheritances revert to his siblings. Worth Ray states on page 262 of "Tennessee Cousins" that ..."Alexander (22) Morrow was probably married and a father at that time, but the testator (David (3) Morrow) wanted him to "raise" them and to be sure he had "living heirs" at his death."

Bill Morrow of Oklahoma

So, there would be no Mayflower connection. Nevertheless, here's the "traditional" descent, greying out the disputed Hopkins lineage.

   52. Samuel FOSTER (c1784-1845)

  104. James Couples FOSTER (1753-1837)
  105. Jane MORROW (1757-)

  208. James FOSTER
  210. Samuel MORROW (c1722-1796)
  211. Elizabeth CARMICHAEL

  420. David MORROW (1700-1780)
  421. Hannah HOPKINS

  840. Alexander MORROW (1670-1726)
  841. Grace SMITH [link]
  842. Nathaniel HOPKINS (1684-1766)
  843. Mercy MAYO (1688-)

 1680. David MORROW (1630-1692)
 1681. Ann
 1682. Richard Smith (-c1727)
 1684. Stephen HOPKINS (1642-1718)
 1685. Mary MERRICK (1650-c1694)
 1686. John MAYO (c1656-1725/26)
 1687. Hannah FREEMAN (c1664-1743/44)

 3360. Daniel MORROW
 3361. Ann
 3368. Giles HOPKINS (c1608-1689)
 3369. Catherine WHELDON
 3370. Ensign William MERRICK
 3371. Tracy
 3392. Samuel MAYO (c1625-c1664)
 3393. Thomasine LUMPKIN (1626-1709)
 3394. John FREEMAN (c1622-1719)
 3395. Mary PRENCE (-1711)

 6736. Stephen HOPKINS (c1578-1644)
 6737. Mary (-1613)
 6738. Gabriel WHELDON

13472. John HOPKINS
13473. Elizabeth WILLIAMS

The issue of Samuel's descent may one day be decided by DNA. The trick is to find a patrilineal descendant of Samuel's (a male Foster), test his Y chromosome for markers suitable for genetic genealogy, and compare them with the markers found in a proven descendant of James Couples Foster. That, however, may only prove that Samuel and James were of the same family, not necessarily that they were father and son. A detailed study of the DNA of many known patrilineal would need to be made to make the relationship conclusive. However, to that end, it's necessary to find those living descendants. His son John A Foster, it needs to be noted, had no sons.

As of 1860, Samuel's son, James Foster, had the following family.

1860  >  ILLINOIS   >  WARREN  >  SUMNER TWP
Series: M653  Roll: 234  Page: 460

James   Foster   43 m farmer South Carolina
Susan      "     43 f        Ohio
Margaret A "     18 f        Illinois
Samuel A   "     17 m        Illinois
James G    "     15 m        Illinois
Nancy J    "      9 f        Illinois
Sarah I    "      6 f        Illinois
John A     "      4 m        Illinois
Olive G    "      1 f        Illinois