My Great-Great Grandmother Rachel Jacobs Cohen: Her Death Certificate

I have received a certified copy of my great-great grandmother’s death certificate from the General Register Office in London.  This is my first English vital record, and I was quite excited to receive it.  It amazes me that I can obtain a record that is over 150 years old from a foreign country just by clicking on the keys of a computer.  Below is a scan of the document and also a cropped version to highlight the actual text on the certificate.

Rachel Jacobs Cohen  death certificate

Rachel Jacobs Cohen death certificate

rachel jacobs cohen death cert 1851 cropped

There are a number of things that interest me about the information on this document.  First is Rachel’s date of death, January 9, 1851.  When I had searched through the BMD Index for this certificate, there were a number of Rachel Cohens who might have been the right person.  I guessed that it was this one based on the date.  Although Lewis and Jacob, Rachel’s sons, had left for the US in 1846 and 1848, respectively, Rachel’s husband and other children, Elizabeth and Jonas, did not leave until 1851.  I had a hunch that they did not leave because Rachel was ill and not able to make the journey, so they waited until after she died.

As the certificate shows, Rachel’s cause of death was “scirehus paylonis” and exhaustion, and it seems she had been ill for a year.  As best I can tell, scrirehus paylonis would be translated to schirrous pylonis or cancer of the stomach.  (My medical expert should feel free to correct this.)  I found some English writings on line in which that term was used to refer to what we would call stomach cancer.

The certificate also indicates where the family was living—in Landers Buildings in Christchurch, Spitalfields, in the Registration District of Whitechapel, County of Middlesex.  It also confirms that Hart Levy Cohen was a clothes dealer.

Perhaps most interesting and surprising to me is that Hart signed the certificate with a mark, an X, not with a signature.  Was he not able to sign his name? Was he illiterate? It’s so hard for me to imagine not being able to read and write that I found this shocking and disturbing.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Pawnbrokers: Not Reality TV, but Realities

Tradition symbol of pawnbrokers--three connect...

Tradition symbol of pawnbrokers–three connected balls (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Growing up, I always heard my father’s family’s business referred to as jewelry and/or china dealers; I don’t recall them being described as pawnbrokers.  Maybe I just wasn’t listening (quite likely), or maybe that’s how my father explained it when I was too young to understand what “pawnshop” meant.

Anyway, I never thought of them as pawnbrokers.  My image of a pawnbroker was based on what I saw on crime shows on television, in movies like The Pawnbroker, and through windows as we drove through poor neighborhoods in New York.  The pawnshop was a place for either desperate people in need of money or criminals fencing stolen goods.  The pawnbroker was someone who was thus taking advantage of someone’s misfortune or the willing or unwitting participant in a crime.  I know of two incidents where my ancestors aided the police in solving crimes, so I am hoping that they were not complicit in receiving stolen goods, but were they taking advantage of the misfortunes of others?  Was this just a stereotype promoted in popular culture? Were pawnbrokers actually parasites, usurers, or were they providing a much needed service?

The Pawnbroker (film)

The Pawnbroker (film) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Interestingly, I had not really focused on this as I was researching until I could not decipher a word on the 1910 census for Joseph Cohen’s occupation, as I posted earlier this week.  I had asked for help here and elsewhere to decipher the word.  Several people expressed the same opinion—that the word is “loan office.”  As one person commented, it was just a nicer term for a pawnbroker.  Joseph may have been attempting to convey a less controversial image of his occupation.

I decided to do some reading to see what I could learn about pawnbrokers.  First, I wanted to better understand how the pawn business works.  I know that there are now a few reality television shows based on pawnshops, most notably Pawn Stars.  (One of my students brought this up in class this year during a discussion of bailment contracts, and I was sure he had said PORN Stars.  Just shows how uncool I can be….)  I read a few definitions and websites online about how pawning works, and this one seemed to be fairly accurate and concise, from Dictionary.com: “a dealer licensed to lend money at a specified rate of interest on the security of movable personal property, which can be sold if the loan is not repaid within a specified period.”

Wikipedia has a more expanded definition:  “If an item is pawned for a loan, within a certain contractual period of time the pawner may redeem it for the amount of the loan plus some agreed-upon amount for interest. The amount of time, and rate of interest, is governed by law or by the pawnbroker’s policies. If the loan is not paid (or extended, if applicable) within the time period, the pawned item will be offered for sale by the pawnbroker. Unlike other lenders, the pawnbroker does not report the defaulted loan on the customer’s credit report, since the pawnbroker has physical possession of the item and may recoup the loan value through outright sale of the item. The pawnbroker also sells items that have been sold outright to them by customers.”

So a person who needs money but for some reason cannot obtain a bank loan—insufficient credit, time pressure, some other reason that makes a bank an impractical choice—can take their property—jewelry, household items, clothing, whatever—to the pawnshop; the pawnbroker assesses the value of the items and provides a loan of cash to the person who agrees to pay with interest within a set period of time or to forfeit the personal property.

Since the pawnbroker must be licensed and since there are numerous state and federal regulations that apply to the business, there is nothing inherently shady about this business. It is a legal method of loaning money to those who choose not to go to a traditional bank.  So why is there an aura of shadiness often associated with the business?

Wendy A. Woloson wrote a book entitled In Hock, Pawning in America from Independence through the Great Depression (2006) that addressed just this question.  She wrote:

Pawnbrokers were at once essential to the continued well-being of this economic system and important scapegoats for the various social ills that the financial difficulties it brought.  Loans from pawnshops supplemented substandard wages, enabling workers to continue to feed their families and producers to continue to exploit their workers.  Although industrialists indirectly benefited from the services pawnbrokers provided, it was also in their interest to encourage the idea that pawnbrokers were fringe operators whose business had no place in the “mainstream” economic system. (p. 21)

Woloson contended that these capitalists promoted an image of pawnbrokers as hard-hearted, greedy and criminally inclined foreigners who used shady practices to exploit their customers. She also asserted that there was a fair degree of anti-Semitism behind these stereotypes.   Although not all pawnbrokers were Jewish, many were.  As Woloson explains, “Jews’ involvement with pawnbroking resulted not from any inherent character flaws or moral failings, as the popular press often posited. Rather, they took up pawnbroking and like occupations largely because they were barred from other trades, especially the mechanical and artisanal, and so necessarily developed an acumen dealing in consumer goods as peddlers, used clothing dealers, and auctioneers.”  (p. 71)

Of course, the negative stereotype of the Jewish moneylender is far more ancient than 19th century America; Shakespeare’s character Shylock from Elizabethan times is evidence of the way society and popular culture have long depicted Jews who were involved in the lending business.  Woloson elaborated on the role this stereotype and the anti-Semitism in society in general had on the popular assumptions about pawnbrokers—that they were Jewish opportunists taking money from hard working Americans.  (pp. 21-24)

Pawnbrokers were aliens in a commercial world populated by supposedly moral and upright Christian entrepreneurs, and the very nature of the business set it apart from ‘normal’ economic dealings.  The antithesis of merchants, pawnbrokers doled out money instead of taking it in, profiting from customers who lacked capital rather than possessed it. (p. 29)

As Woloson wrote, “Jews’ affiliation with pawnbroking and affiliated trades, such as dealing in used clothing and auctioneering, created among them a cohesive, commercially defined group; yet it also reinscribed outsiders’ perception that they operated beyond the currents of mainstream trade.” (p. 25-26)  Woloson explained that since most Americans in the early 19th century did not know many Jews, their preconceived image of the Jew as a greedy moneylender was reinforced by the fact that many pawnbrokers were Jewish. “It mattered little whether or not individual pawnbrokers were Jewish. Because they were all assumed to be, people scrutinized their business practices and questioned their ethics.” (p. 26)

Even as many Jews achieved substantial economic success through other businesses and finance in the 19th century, there was a common assumption that they had done so illegally, and the stereotype of the greedy, heartless moneylender persisted as part of popular culture. (p.28)  Pawnbrokers became common stock characters in works of popular culture, further promoting the negative and anti-Semitic stereotypes; Woloson catalogs a number of examples of novels and plays using such characters based on this stereotypes (pp. 28-53).

Woloson then provides evidence that in fact pawnshops served important public functions and were set up in ways to prevent exploitation of those who used their services. She describes how as cities grew and people outside the wealthy classes needed access to cash on short notice—to pay taxes or acquire assets they need to live or to work, there was a need for the services of pawnbrokers.  In the early 19th century, cities began to adopt regulations for pawnbroking.  I saw many legal notices in the Philadelphia Inquirer announcing the issuance of pawnbroking licenses to my ancestors and others. These required the posting of an expensive bond and thus ensured a commitment by the pawnbrokers to run their businesses in compliance with the regulations.  (pp.  54-57)

These local regulations controlled both the interest rate a pawnbroker could charge and the period a pawnbroker had to wait before the customer’s goods would be forfeited to the shop and available for sale.  For example, in Philadelphia in the 1860s, the interest rate could not exceed 6% and the pawnshop had to hold collateral for a year before reselling it. (p. 58)

Pawnbrokers hoped that this would add some legitimacy to their business and to their image, but apparently that did not occur.  As Woloson wrote:

Pawnbrokers were hardworking people who offered what was fast becoming a necessary service in maturing American cities, providing short-term loans on modest forms of collateral. Yet their profession, like dogcatching, was not one that people aspired to. Unlike clerks and mechanics, who received education through apprenticelike training and shared social activities, pawnbrokers enjoyed neither professional prestige, identity, specialized education, nor occupational camaraderie.  (p. 58)

According to Woloson, most pawnbrokers learned the trade by starting out as general dealers in goods, learning how to assess the value of those goods.  This is consistent with the experience of my ancestors.  First, they sold used goods and then perhaps newer goods, including china and clothing primarily.  Then they became pawnbrokers.  “A lasting and successful career in pawnbroking rested on one’s ability to identify local market niches and to accurately appraise a miscellany of goods.” (p. 60)

In Woloson’s opinion, these pawnbrokers provided substantial benefits to the people and the cities they lived in.  The money borrowed from the brokers helped not only their customers, but the economy of the city by enabling those people to buy goods and services and thus support local businesses.

She also discusses the typical patterns of the pawnbroking business in various cities, including Philadelphia.  Woloson noted that pawnshops tended to locate in areas that sold used clothing and furniture and other second hand goods rather than in the commercial heart of the cities where more elite retail centers would be located.  In Philadelphia, that meant that most pawnshops were located either north or south of the center of the city in areas, for example, like South Street where my great-grandfather’s pawnshop and home were located for many years.  Woloson provides this insightful description of that neighborhood in the mid-19th century:

Unburdened by any systematic police control, the diverse population and its many activities brought a liveliness to these areas. The very rich and the very poor mingled freely, as did members of various ethnicities and races. While this social mixing may have been scandalous to outside observers, residents themselves shared the collective ambition of getting ahead. The neighborhood’s mixed population at midcentury engaged in many enterprises. They drank, whored, pilfered, and occasionally rioted their way down South Street. By 1839 there were at least sixty-two taverns in the ten-block area.39 Men had their pick of brothels. ….  Some back alleys harbored “houses of prostitution of the lowest grade, the resort of pickpockets and thieves of every description.” Strangers were “earnestly admonished to not go there.” In contrast, another brothel only a few blocks away was home to a respectable “swarm of yellow [mulatto] girls, who promenade up and down Chestnut Street every evening, with their faces well powdered.” The lower sorts needed pawnbrokers to get them through the exigencies of the day and to fund their debauchery at night. Ten of the city’s thirteen pawnbrokers in 1850 were on South Street or within one block of the corridor. Rooted, the shops continued to hem the southern and northern fringes of the city until the end of the century.  (pp. 64-65; footnotes omitted)

H. Williams & Co. Ltd. Pawnbrokers

H. Williams & Co. Ltd. Pawnbrokers (Photo credit: christopher.woo)

This description gave me a far different impression than I previously had about how and where my great-grandfather Emanuel and his many siblings grew up; whereas I had never assumed that this was a wealthy neighborhood, I had assumed it was fairly safe and middle-class since Jacob had servants and a business that supported so many people.  Did my great-grandfather grow up hungry?  Probably not, but neither did he grow up in some swanky suburb or upscale city neighborhood.  He grew up surrounded by thieves, pickpockets, brothels, and bars.

These locations were, in Woloson’s view, business necessities.  The people who needed the services of the pawnbrokers were not the wealthy who shopped at fancy stores, but the working class and poor residents who could not get by without a quick and fairly easy loan.  Woloson opines that in some ways pawnbrokers were more straightforward businesspeople than those who used sales techniques to manipulate customers into buying goods.  In Woloson’s view, “Pawnbrokers made no pretense that they did anything other than loan money, and in this way many may have been more honest professionals than the retailers pushing goods on the other side of the city.” (p. 67-68)

Another pattern observed by Woloson was the tendency of pawnbrokers to expand and pass down their businesses within their families.  “Established, successful pawnshops were often passed down through single families rather than being taken over by outside partners; younger generations grew up in the trade and learned from fathers, uncles, and brothers, thus providing steady income to families over generations and contributing to social and economic stability where pawnbrokers resided.”  (p. 74)

Finally, Woloson also discusses the relative economic success of pawnbrokers, debunking the myth that many were wealthy as a result of the exploitation of those of lesser means.  She wrote:

Like many other businessmen operating in interstitial markets, most pawnbrokers worked the margins. Once they reached their professional apex, they typically did not advance much beyond the class of their customers and failed to accumulate enough capital to invest in larger financial endeavors that would have elevated them socially and economically. A pawnbroker’s profits were tied to the economic fortunes of his customers, and he often suffered losses at auctions of unredeemed collateral, especially during economic crunches. Pawnbrokers running shops in smaller cities necessarily supplemented the lending business with other petty entrepreneurial activities. Average pawnbrokers made enough money to support their families and to keep the business going, but probably not much more.  (p. 75)

I am really glad that I found this book because it has really given me a new perspective on my Cohen ancestors.  Compared to my Brotman and Goldschlager relatives, I’d always imagined that my Cohen relatives were wealthy and established.  Of course, by the late 19th century, early 20th century when my mother’s family started to arrive from Galicia and Romania, the Cohens had already been here for about 50 years and were well-settled, owning their own businesses, speaking English, and American-born.  They had the advantages of being here much earlier and so were far ahead economically when my mother’s family arrived.  But they were not the wealthy elite; they were probably at most middle class business people who were working in unpleasant neighborhoods, subjected to negative stereotypes based on their trade as well as their religion, and engaged in a business that required some risk-taking and business acumen but was not well-regarded.  That must have been very painful and frustrating.

Having this new perspective will help me better understand their lives as I continue to move forward in telling their story.

 

 

 

.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Isaac Cohen 1850-1914: A Harder Story to Tell

The third child of my great-great grandparents was Isaac.  He was born on February 4, 1850, in Philadelphia, the first of their children both conceived and born in the US.  Until at least 1872 when he was 22 years old, he lived at home with his parents at 136 South Street and was working as a clerk in one of the family pawnshops.

He was living at a different address as of 1873, 923 Parrish Street, which was two and a half miles north of his family home, continuing the northward movement of the family.  I assume that sometime in 1873 he had married his wife, Emma Cordelia van Horn, since he was no longer living at home.  Emma was born in 1853 in Pennsylvania, the daughter of William van Horn and granddaughter of I.B. Merkel, according to documents relating to her death, but so far I have not been able to find out more about her family or to locate a William van Horn with a daughter named Emma.  I was surprised to see just how many William H. van Horns there were in Philadelphia alone.

Like his older brother Joseph (as well as many of his younger brothers) and his father, Isaac was a pawnbroker.  For his whole career he worked at a pawnshop at 830 North 10th Street, a block away from his residence in 1873 on Parrish Street.   On July 9, 1879, Isaac and Emma’s son, Isaac Wilbert Cohen, was born, and in 1880 the family was living at 636 North 11th Street, only a few blocks away from the store on 10th Street.  The 1880s seem to have been fairly uneventful.  Isaac continued to work at the same location throughout the decade, according to the city directories.  Emma and little Isaac were at home.

Isaac Cohen and son living with Emanuel Cohen and family 1880 census

Isaac Cohen and family 1880 census

Then in 1893, tragedy struck, and Isaac’s life was never the same.  His wife Emma died on November 3, 1893, when she was only forty years old and her son was only fourteen years old.  Emma died from “Septic Peritonitis from Suppurative Salpingitis,” according to her death certificate.  As explained to me by my brother, suppurative salpingitis means she had pus in her fallopian tubes, a condition today known as pelvic inflammatory disease.  In Emma’s case it led to a septic condition in her abdomen which killed her.

Emma Cohen death certificate 1893

Emma Cohen death certificate 1893

Emma Cohen funeral notes 1893

Emma Cohen funeral notes 1893

It was from the funeral notes above that I learned Emma’s father’s and grandfather’s names.

When she died, Emma and Isaac had been living at 1606 Diamond Street, so the family had moved again, about two miles north from 11th Street and Isaac’s store on 10th Street.  After Emma died, Isaac and his son remained at 1606 Diamond Street, and as of 1895, Isaac’s much younger brother, my great-grandfather Emanuel, was also living at 1606 Diamond Street.  Emanuel was thirteen years younger than Isaac, 32 in 1895, and was himself married and the father of three sons, including my grandfather John, who was born in 1895.  On the 1900 census, Isaac and his son were still living with Emanuel and his family, with Emanuel listed as the head of household.

Isaac Cohen and son living with Emanuel Cohen and family 1900 census

Isaac Cohen and son living with Emanuel Cohen and family 1900 census

I found this somewhat puzzling.  Had Emanuel moved his family to Isaac’s home to help take care of his widower brother and motherless nephew?  Or had Isaac taken in Emanuel to help him out?  I assume it’s more likely the former—that Isaac need help with caring for his teenage son and that my great-grandmother Eva was willing to help raise him as well as her three sons, who would have been young boys during the 1890s.  Isaac had twelve siblings, some much closer to him in age.  Why would he have ended up living with Emanuel, his much younger brother and not one of the others?

Isaac was the first member of the Cohen family to marry someone who was not Jewish.  Emma had been buried in a non-Jewish cemetery, West Laurel Hill in Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania, outside Philadelphia.  Had his other siblings been upset that he married outside the faith?

Isaac’s stay in Emanuel’s household continued for almost twenty years.  In 1910, he was still living with Emanuel, Eva, and their sons, now at 1441 Diamond Street, and still working as a pawnbroker.  His son Isaac Wilbert had married Gertrude Mann the year before and was living in his own place.  Why had Isaac stayed with Emanuel and not moved with his son?  To give the newlyweds their own space? Again, it does seem a bit strange, but I suppose that after fifteen years of living with his brother and family, Isaac at age 60 was content to stay put.

Isaac Cohen with Emanuel and family 1910 census

Isaac Cohen with Emanuel and family 1910 census

But then Isaac suffered another terrible loss.  On March 3, 1914, his son Isaac Wilbert Cohen died from lobar pneumonia.  According to the death certificate, Isaac Wilbert had suffered from myocarditis, another family member succumbing to heart problems.  He was only 34 and had been married only five years when he died.  He had no children.

Isaac Wilbert Cohen death certificate

Isaac Wilbert Cohen death certificate

Isaac Cohen, my great-grandfather’s brother, himself died just a few months later on September 15, 1914, from acute peritonitis secondary to pancreatic cancer.

Isaac Cohen death certificate

Isaac Cohen death certificate

He was 64 years old and had lost his wife 21 years before and his only child just six months before.  It seems like he endured far too many losses far too soon.  I hope that he found comfort living with my great-grandparents and my grandfather and great-uncles.  I wish that I knew more about his life and his story.

Like his wife, Isaac was buried at West Laurel Hill cemetery along with his son Isaac Wilbert.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

My Great-Grandfather’s Brother Joseph: 1848-1923

Joseph was the first child of Jacob and Sarah Cohen to be born in the US; he was born on November 21, 1848, in Philadelphia, only four months after his parents’ arrival in July, 1848, meaning his mother was five months pregnant when she traveled from England to the US with her husband and toddler daughter, Fanny.  Joseph lived with his family at 136 South Street until he married Caroline Snellenburg around 1868.

Caroline was born in Germany around 1849 and emigrated to the United States with her family as a young child in 1857.  Although I cannot locate a specific marriage record for Joseph and Caroline, they probably were married sometime in or before 1868 because their first born child, Hart, was born May, 1869.  In June, 1870, when the census was taken, Caroline, Joseph and one year old Hart were living at 115 Congress Street in the same ward and district as Joseph’s parents, and Joseph was working as a tailor.

Joseph and Caroline Cohen 1870 US census

Joseph and Caroline Cohen 1870 US census

 

Then, later that year, little Hart was stricken with typhoid fever and died on November 21, 1870, only one and a half at the time.  So like his older sister Fanny and her husband Ansel who lost their daughter Rachel to typhoid fever in 1873 before she was two years old, Joseph and his wife Caroline lost a young child to typhoid.

Hart Cohen death certificate 1870

Hart Cohen death certificate 1870

I have speculated before about what these deaths must have done to young parents and whether it made them less able to attach to children or made them treasure each child more.  In the case of Joseph and Caroline, it seems they compensated by having another ten children after losing their first born.  At least one other child did not survive to adulthood, the last born child, Meyer, who was born in July 1889 and died the next month.  By having so many children, Joseph and Caroline were able to ensure that at least some of their children would survive the dangers of life back in the 19th century.

By 1875, Jacob and Caroline had four children, Jacob (1872), Bertha and Isaac (1874) and Nathan (1875) and were living at 221 South 2d Street, where they would live at least until 1886, according to various city directories.  This residence was located about half a mile north of where Joseph grew up on South Street and close to the city center of Philadelphia, near Walnut Street.

In 1875 Joseph was listed in the city directory as a clothier, and in 1879 he was in business as Cohen and Brothers with at least his younger brother Reuben and perhaps Hart and Isaac as well.  Although there is no description of what trade Cohen and Brothers were engaged in in the 1879 directory, on the 1880 census Joseph’s occupation was described as a dealer in clothing so he was still in the clothing trade.

Joseph Cohen and family 1880 census

Joseph Cohen and family 1880 census

In 1881, however, the city directory lists his business as being a pawnbroker, like his father and his brothers Isaac and Reuben (Hart was still a clothier), but also as a clothier at his home location.  So by 1881, Joseph had followed in his father’s footsteps and was working as a pawnbroker but also selling clothing.

Perhaps Joseph was engaged in two businesses for good reason.  By 1881, he and Caroline had five children, Sallie having been born in 1877.  By 1884, they had two more, Fannie (1882) and Julia (1884).  By 1886, the family had moved, perhaps to accommodate all these new and growing children, to 703 South 12th Street, and Joseph was in business with his younger brother Lewis Cohen and had a store at 701 South 12th Street, right next door to his residence.  This was a move closer to Broad Street near South Street, so presumably a good business location.   In 1887, Joseph and Caroline had two more children, twins named Morris and Samuel.

The business and the family remained at this location at least through 1889, and then in 1892, Joseph had a store at 1200 South Street and was residing at 710 North 5th Street.  This was a move four miles north, and so nearing the turn of the century, Joseph, like his sister Fanny, was living in North Philadelphia, part of the migration of Jews from the southern to the northern parts of the city.  Presumably, the business and the family were doing quite well.

Interestingly, in 1900, Joseph and Caroline and the children were living in Cape May, New Jersey, where Joseph was working as a pawnbroker.  I assume that he was working to establish a new store in a new territory, perhaps for one of his sons. Or maybe after the death of infant Meyer in August of 1889, they just needed a change of scenery.  Although the records conflict, some records indicate that the twins Morris and Samuel were born in Cape May in August, 1887, so it could be that this was a second stay for the family in Cape May.

Joseph Cohen and family 1900 census

Joseph Cohen and family 1900 census

Although Joseph and Caroline’s oldest son Jacob was already married at this point, he is listed on the census as living in Cape May with his parents in 1900.  (He is also listed as living with his wife and child back in Philadelphia, so I assume he was shuttling back and forth.)  His occupation was as a jeweler, a business that I know became a part of the Cohen family businesses.  His younger brother Isaac was working as a traveling salesman, and Nathan, then 25, was working as a clerk in the pawn store.

By 1903, however, Joseph was back in Philadelphia, working at the store at 1200 South Street, and in 1910 Joseph and Caroline were living with six of their adult children at 1915 Diamond Street, another few miles north and west of where they had lived in 1889.

Joseph Cohen and family 1910 census

Joseph Cohen and family 1910 census

Joseph was described as the proprietor of a business, but I cannot decipher the script for what type of business.  If one of you can, I’d love to know.

Detail: What is the word after "Proprietor" on Joseph Cohen's line?

Detail: What is the word after “Proprietor” on Joseph Cohen’s line?

Sam and Morris were working in a department store (maybe Ansel’s, maybe their father’s?), and Nathan was working as a loan officer in a bank.  Imagine that! A rebel in the family, abandoning the long tradition of being merchants and pawnbrokers.

On October 17, 1918, Joseph and Caroline lost another child, but this time an adult child.  Their son Morris, who was only 30 years old, died from pneumonia after having influenza.  Morris was married to Helen Goodman and working as a sheet metal worker in the manufacture of automobile radiators, according to his death certificate and 1917 World War I draft registration.  He had only completed that draft registration a few months before his death.

Morris Cohen death certificate

Morris Cohen death certificate

Morris Cohen draft registration for World War I

Morris Cohen draft registration for World War I

In 1920, Joseph and Caroline were living with just two of their adult children, Nathan, now 43 and still working as a loan officer, and Fanny, who was 35 and not employed outside the home.  Joseph had no occupation listed on this census, and he and Caroline were now 70 years old.  They were living at 1914 Erie Avenue, even further north and west from their prior home on Diamond Street.

Joseph Cohen and family 1920 census

Joseph Cohen and family 1920 census

Joseph died three years later, on June 10, 1923, from chronic endocarditis, another family member dying from heart disease.  The contributing causes were chronic parenchymalious nephritis.  According to my medical consultant and brother, this is form of kidney disease.

Joseph Cohen death certificate 1923

Joseph Cohen death certificate 1923

Caroline died the following year on April 3, 1924.  I do not have a death certificate for her, but both she and Joseph were buried in Mt Sinai cemetery.  Together they had endured a fair share of heartache, losing at least two children as babies and one as an adult, but they also had enjoyed a fair amount of financial security and the company of many of their children.  As with Fanny, Jacob and Sarah would have been pleased to know that their son Joseph had overall lived a good life.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

1846-1911:  Frances Cohen Hamberg, My Great-Grandfather’s Oldest Sibling

By 1870, Jacob and Sarah’s oldest child, the baby they had brought with them from England, was married.  Frances, or Fanny, had married Ansel Hamberg in 1866, and they had had three daughters in those four years: Bertha (1866), Sarah (1868) and Hannah (1869).  Ansel was working as a pawnbroker with his father-in-law Jacob, according to the 1868 city directory.  The family was living in Ward 13, District 38, at 533 Lorain Street, a street that I cannot find on a current map.

Fanny and Ansel Hamberg and family 1870 census

Fanny and Ansel Hamberg and family 1870 census

One additional note on Ansel before we move forward, especially since this is Memorial Weekend.  He served as a second lieutenant in the Union forces during the Civil War and was cited in a number of newspaper articles as an example of the Jewish men who fought for their country during that war.  He was commissioned as a colonel after the war in 1872, and even volunteered his services to the Secretary of War in 1898 during the Spanish-American War.  I don’t know that he ever was called to duty during that war, however.  He was born in Germany and came to the US as a young boy, but obviously felt a strong tie to his adopted country.

In 1872 and 1877, Ansel was working as a pawnbroker at 233 South 9th Street, according to the city directories for those years.  At home, Fanny and Ansel were having more children.  Rachel was born in 1872, but died just a year later of typhoid fever.

Rachel Hamberg death certificate June 17, 1783

Rachel Hamberg death certificate June 17, 1783

Another daughter, Caroline, was born in 1879.   In 1880 the family was living on Lombard Street in the Seventh Ward, not too far from 136 South Street where Jacob and the other children were living.

Hamberg Family 1880 US census

Hamberg Family 1880 US census

Ansel was still working as a pawnbroker in 1881, now at 515 South 8th Street, just a few blocks away, so perhaps they moved to be closer to where he was working.

From 1882 through and 1884 Ansel continued to work as a pawnbroker, although moving to new locations in 1882 and in 1884.  I cannot tell from these records whether he was still working with Jacob or whether he was on his own, nor can I determine why he kept moving.

In 1887, the family was living at 1323 South Street, and Ansel was now listing his business as “livery” at 609 South 13th Street.  A year later his occupation in the directory was men’s furnishings, and he remained in the clothing business from that point on until his death.  The family also continued to live at 1323 South Street during this entire time period, a location right near Broad Street and further west from where Fanny had grown up.

In 1900, Fanny and Ansel were still living at 1323 South Street, and three of their daughters, Bertha, Hannah, and Caroline, now 33, 30, and 21, were living at home and all working as “salesladies,” perhaps in the “furnishing store” where Ansel worked and perhaps that he owned.  There was also a male servant living with them, Alexander Blunt.  From the address and the fact that they had a servant, I assume that the family was doing quite well.  Although I have not yet found a marriage record for the fourth sister, Sarah, I assume that sometime between 1880 and 1900, she had married, as I know from later records that she was married to a man named Harry Speare.

Hamberg family 1900

Hamberg family 1900

 

Sadly, on December 16, 1901, Ansel died at age 61 of heart disease and was buried at Mt Sinai Cemetery in Philadelphia.

Ansel Hamberg death certificate 1901

Ansel Hamberg death certificate 1901

In 1903, Frances, now a widow, was listed in the city directory, still living at the same address, under the “Men’s Furnishings” category, so it would appear that she took over running the store.  In 1910, Frances and two of her daughters, Bertha and Caroline (Carrie) were still living together, now at 1532 Page Street in North Philadelphia.  Frances’ occupation was owner/manager, if I am reading the handwriting on the 1910 census correctly.  Bertha was working as a mail order clerk for a department store, and Carrie was working as a saleswoman in a department store.  I am assuming that the department store was the family store, the one owned and managed by their mother.  Hannah had married by this time.

Hamberg family 1910

Hamberg family 1910

Ten years after Ansel died, his wife Frances, my great-grandaunt, died on October 24, 1911.  She was 65 years old.  The cause of death was hemiplegia, with contributing causes given as “nephrotic mitral stenosis,”, which, according to my medical expert, sounds like a combination of health issues—heart, kidney, and who knows what else.  Hemiplegia is defined as “total or partial paralysis of one side of the body that results from disease of or injury to the motor centers of the brain” by the Merriam-Webster online dictionary.  Overall, it sounds like Frances was in poor health for many reasons.  She was buried at Mt Sinai cemetery with her husband Ansel.

Fannie Cohen Hamberg death certificate 1911

Fannie Cohen Hamberg death certificate 1911

Looking back over Fanny’s life, it seems like a fairly good life, despite losing one child to typhoid fever.  She and her husband Ansel had a long marriage and seemed to build a business of their own once Ansel left the pawnbroker trade and focused on men’s clothing instead.  They lived in one location for many years after bouncing around earlier on when Ansel was a pawnbroker.  They raised four daughters and even had a servant living with them for some time.

At the end, Fanny and her daughters Bertha and Carrie were able to move to a neighborhood in North Philadelphia, the area where more and more Jews were moving by the end of the 19th century.  I imagine those last ten years as a time when these three adult women, Fanny, Bertha and Carrie, were, like their aunt Elizabeth Cohen, not living the traditional roles assigned to women.  They were all unmarried, working outside the home, and even owning a business.

If Jacob left England to find a better life for his family, Fanny’s life may have been some evidence that his hopes were fulfilled.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

I had thought I would write one post that covered four of the siblings, but now I see that that would make for very long posts.  For now, I will instead write one post per sibling and see how that goes.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

So Many Cohens, So Many Stories to Tell

Alone and drowning

 (Photo credit: wok)

I am feeling a little overwhelmed.  I thought there were a lot of Rosenzweigs; after all, Gustave had nine children and Tillie had seven.  But my great-great-grandparents Jacob and Sarah Cohen had THIRTEEN children, and Jacob’s brother Moses had five more. And they are only the first generation of American Cohens.  There are two more to go before I get to my generation, and each generation gets bigger.  Fortunately, Jacob’s other siblings did not have children, or I would really be drowning in Cohens.

As is it, I am not sure where to start or how to tell the story of Hart Levy and Rachel Cohen’s grandchildren.  Do I keep doing it by decade, jumping from one of those descendants to another?  Do I take each one and discuss his or her life separately?  Doing it the first way gives me more of an opportunity to see and describe the big picture, but it could make each post very long if I tell the story of all the grandchildren’s lives in a particular decade.  Doing it one by one would be simpler, but would mean losing the chance to see overall trends in the family.

I am also still researching each one of these eighteen grandchildren and looking ahead to see how many children each one of them brought into the world.  I haven’t even begun to research that generation—the great-grandchildren of Hart and Rachel, many of whom lived far into the 20th century.  But I am getting ahead of myself.  One thing at a time.  First, the children of Jacob and Sarah.  Then the children of Moses and Adeline.

Since Jacob and Sarah’s children were born over a twenty year span from Frances (1846) to Abraham (1866), I think it makes sense to take a few of these children at a time in chronological sets.  I will do first the four oldest, then the middle five, and then the last four.  Some of these people, especially the women, I have not been able to track completely, but amazingly for most of them, I have been able to go from birth to death.

Once I have done Jacob and Sarah’s children, I will turn to the five children of Moses and Adeline Cohen.  I am still researching the question of whether or not the DC Cohens were in fact related to the Philadelphia Cohens, but I am operating under the assumption that they were in fact all descendants of Hart and Rachel.  I am even having my brother take a DNA test to see if we can make the linkage.  Only time will tell, but meanwhile I am going with my hunch that Moses and Jacob were brothers.

So that’s where I am.  Thanks for letting me think out loud and get organized.  It may take a bit longer to get each of these posts researched and written, so I may be posting a little less frequently. Stay tuned for the continuing saga of the Cohen clan.

If you think my plan makes no sense, let me know.  I am more than open to suggestions on how to tell the story.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Changing of the Guard: 1870 to 1893

Mikveh Israel Cemetery, Philadelphia

Mikveh Israel Cemetery, Philadelphia (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As we move forward from 1870, the grandchildren of Hart and Rachel Cohen were becoming adults and forming businesses and families of their own.  The generation of Hart and Rachel’s children—Elizabeth, Lewis, Moses, Jacob and Jonas—was growing older and passing on the legacy of the family to this next generation.  Today’s post will focus on those five children, my great-great grandfather and his siblings.  Subsequent posts will focus on the grandchildren and their families, in particular my great-grandfather Emanuel and his family.

In 1871, Elizabeth was still working as a clothier, according to the Philadelphia city directory.  Lewis continued to work as a pawnbroker and Jonas a clothing salesman through the 1870s, according to the city directories.  In 1880, the three siblings were still living with each other at 713 May Street, a location north and west of the neighborhood where the family had long lived near 136 South Street.

Lewis, Elizabeth and Jonas Cohen 1880 US census

Lewis, Elizabeth and Jonas Cohen 1880 US census

In 1870, their brother Jacob continued to live at 136 South Street with his wife Sarah and eleven of his thirteen children, ages five through twenty-one.  He also continued to work as a pawnbroker, and his sons Isaac and Reuben were also working in the business in 1870.  By 1880 much would have changed.  Most importantly, Jacob’s wife, my great-great grandmother Sarah, died on November 19, 1879, of erysipelas, a bacterial infection similar to cellulitis.  She, like her father-in-law Hart, was buried in Mikveh Israel cemetery.  She was 53 years old, had moved from London to Philadelphia with her husband and first child, and had then given birth to twelve more children, some of whom were still young teenagers when she died.

Sarah Jacobs Cohen death certificate 1879

Sarah Jacobs Cohen death certificate 1879

On the 1880 census, Jacob was a widower, still working as a pawnbroker, and living with five of his children, ages 14 through 23.  All but one of them, Lizzie who was 19, was working either as a salesperson or a clerk in a store, presumably their father’s store.  The eight other children were married and out of the house, some of them also working as pawnbrokers. His son-in-law Ansel Hamberg, Fannie’s husband, was also working as a pawnbroker, again presumably still in business with Jacob.   Jacob’s business was still supporting many people.  Obviously, with all those children working in the store, it must have been quite an establishment.

Jacob Cohen and family 1880 US census

Jacob Cohen and family 1880 US census

In the decade that followed that census, all of Hart and Rachel’s children passed away, except for Jonas, the youngest, who died in 1893. First, Elizabeth died on June 28, 1883, of what looks like “atrophy muscular,”  which I assume, from reading online, was some form of a motor neuron disease.  She was about 65 years old.  She was buried in Mikveh Israel cemetery, like her father and her sister-in-law, Sarah.

Elizabeth Cohen death record 1883

Elizabeth Cohen death record 1883

Less than a year later, on March 6, 1884, her brother Lewis died of an abscess of the lung.  His age was given as 68 on his death certificate, and he also was buried at Mikveh Israel cemetery.

Lewis Cohen death certificate 1884

Lewis Cohen death certificate 1884

On April 21, 1888, my great-great-grandfather Jacob died as well, also in his sixties.  He, too, was buried at Mikveh Israel, with his wife Sarah, his father and his siblings.  According to his death certificate, he died from “uremia from Bright’s disease of the kidneys (probably  auto ? kidneys).”  (If someone can decipher the word after “probably,” please comment below.)  Bright’s disease was defined in Wikipedia as follows:  “Bright’s disease is a historical classification of kidney diseases that would be described in modern medicine as acute or chronic nephritis. The term is no longer used, as diseases are now classified according to their more fully understood causes.”

Jacob Cohen 1888 death certificate

Jacob Cohen 1888 death certificate

 

The last of Jacob and Sarah’s children, the youngest, Jonas, died on January 23, 1893, and was also buried at Mikveh Israel.  He also was in his early 60s when he died.  His cause of death was given as pneumonia.

Jonas Cohen 1893 death certificate

Jonas Cohen 1893 death certificate

So all five of Jacob and Sarah’s children died before reaching seventy years of age, whereas their father lived to be 88.  (Their brother Moses had died before reaching forty; although I’ve yet to locate a death certificate for Moses, according to the 1860 census taken just months before he died, he was “insane from intemperance.”)  They all died from different causes—atrophy muscular, a lung abscess, kidney disease, and pneumonia.  Their mother died from a bacterial infection. I would think most of these would be treatable today and that, given better medical treatment, they all could have lived a long life like Hart Levy Cohen had. Looking at how young they all were when they died makes me realize just how remarkable it was for Hart to live to be almost 90 years old back in the 19th century.  And how lucky we all are to live in the 21st century.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Adding another Dimension to the Story: What Newspapers Can Reveal

Before moving on to the next decade of the Cohen saga, I decided to spend some time searching through old newspapers online, seeing if I could find some birth, marriage or death announcement that might be helpful.  I was surprised to find some real news stories about my ancestors which add some additional dimensions to their life stories.

First, it seems that Jacob, my great-great grandfather, had a couple of interactions with law enforcement—never as the accused (as far as I found), but as a victim and/or witness to crimes.    One time Jacob was able to identify the man who had stolen a watch and chain and had pawned the chain to Jacob.[1]  The second incident involved Jacob purely as a victim of a crime when one of his servants, Eliza, stole a watch and chain worth about $50 from his home. [2]

Jacob’s grandson, also named Jacob Cohen, continued this tradition in 1899 when he also ended up with stolen goods in his possession as a pawnbroker. The thieves had broken into a house and stolen $1000 worth of household items, including some rugs that they had pawned to Jacob.   Jacob was able to identify the men who had pawned the rugs and thus assisted the police in capturing them.[3]

I am not sure what to make of these three stories, except to observe that (1) being a pawnbroker, one runs the risk of receiving stolen property, and (2) both Jacobs were observant witnesses and willing to assist the police in stopping crime.

I was also able to find several articles reporting that Jacob (among others) had obtained a pawnbroker’s license and several ads taken out by his son Isaac regarding the probate of Jacob’s estate.

The other article that I found quite interesting reported on a street argument or fight among several of my relatives, including Reuben Cohen, Lazarus Jacobs, and Reuben Jacobs.  Apparently an argument started at seven in the morning among what the article refers to as “barkers connected with the South Street clothing stores,” which “created considerable excitement in the neighborhood, with their jargon.” Four men were arrested, including my three relatives, who were taken to the alderman to “keep the peace.”  This article was dated Wednesday, July 10, 1867.[4]  In 1860, Joseph Jacobs, the brother of Lazarus and father of Reuben, had been a business partner in a clothing store Jacobs and Cohen with Jacob Cohen, father of Reuben Cohen.  I noticed in the 1868 Philadelphia directory that Jacob’s business was then called Hamberg and Co., presumably for his son-in-law Ansel Hamberg.  Had Jacob and Joseph had a parting of the ways? Were they now competitors? Were the cousins fighting over business at 7 in the morning? Or was this just a quarrel among young men that had nothing to do with the family businesses?

Although none of these articles revealed any significant clues or information about my relatives, they add a human dimension to the facts and data I can find in the census reports and vital records.  These were all real people with real problems.  Times may have changed, but people always have and always will deal with the forces of and the flaws of human nature.

 

 

 

[1] Hearings at the Central, Philadelphia Inquirer, December 4, 1869, p. 2.  Located at http://www.genealogybank.com/gbnk/newspapers/doc/v2:110C9BFA1F116650@GBNEWS-1131D42D94DDFEC8@2404036-1131D42DDDBB7728@1-1131D43073B916C0@Hearings+at+the+Central/?search_terms=cohen%7Cjacobs_dlid=DL0114052113460322139&s_ecproduct=SUB-Y-5595-R-OB&s_ecprodtype=RENEW-A-I&s_trackval=&s_siteloc=&s_referrer=&s_subterm=Subscription%20until%3A%2011%2F07%2F2014&s_docsbal=%20&s_subexpires=11%2F07%2F2014&s_docstart=&s_docsleft=&s_docsread=&s_username=amybesscohen@gmail.com&s_accountid=AC0113110721363014323&s_upgradeable=nos_dlid=DL0114052113505122638&s_ecproduct=SUB-Y-5595-R-OB&s_ecprodtype=RENEW-A-I&s_trackval=&s_siteloc=&s_referrer=&s_subterm=Subscription%20until%3A%2011%2F07%2F2014&s_docsbal=%20&s_subexpires=11%2F07%2F2014&s_docstart=&s_docsleft=&s_docsread=&s_username=amybesscohen@gmail.com&s_accountid=AC0113110721363014323&s_upgradeable=no

[2] At the Central, Philadelphia Inquirer, February 15, 1873, p.2.  Located at http://www.genealogybank.com/gbnk/newspapers/doc/v2:110C9BFA1F116650@GBNEWS-111FE4E816403290@2405205-111FE4E85086AEB0@1-111FE4E9E3B265B0@At+the+Central/?search_terms=cohen%7Cjacobs_dlid=DL0114052113480522392&s_ecproduct=SUB-Y-5595-R-OB&s_ecprodtype=RENEW-A-I&s_trackval=&s_siteloc=&s_referrer=&s_subterm=Subscription%20until%3A%2011%2F07%2F2014&s_docsbal=%20&s_subexpires=11%2F07%2F2014&s_docstart=&s_docsleft=&s_docsread=&s_username=amybesscohen@gmail.com&s_accountid=AC0113110721363014323&s_upgradeable=no

[3] Rugs Gave the Clue, Philadelphia Inquirer, May 28, 1899, p. 13.  Located at http://www.genealogybank.com/gbnk/newspapers/doc/v2:110C9BFA1F116650%40GBNEWS-11499C1A1A4C6430%402414803-11499C1EE5C8F558%4020-11499C2C9B7C3D58%40Rugs+Gave+the+Clue+Police+Hint+They+Have+Captured+Two+Important+Fugitives/?search_terms=%22rugs%20gave%20the%20clue%22%7Ccohen%7Cjacob

[4] City Intelligence, Police Affairs, Philadelphia Inquirer, July 10, 1867. p. 2.  Located at http://www.genealogybank.com/gbnk/newspapers/explore/USA/Pennsylvania/Philadelphia/?lname=cohen&fname=jacob&kwinc=&kwexc=&dateType=range&formDate=&formDateFlex=10&rgfromDate=1850&rgtoDate=1890&processingtime=&group=&pg=3

Who Knew?  My Great-Great Grandmother’s Family, the Jacobs

One of the great surprises I’ve encountered in doing genealogy work is that I have many more surnames in my family than I ever knew.  I knew about Goldschlager and Brotman, on my mother’s side, and I knew about Cohen, Schoenthal, Seligman and Katzenstein, on my father’s side. But I never knew that I was also a Rosenzweig until I found my great-grandmother Ghitla’s maiden name, and now I know that I am also descended from the Jacobs family on my father’s side.  My great-great grandmother was Sarah Jacobs, married to Jacob Cohen.  My great-great-great grandmother was Rachel Jacobs, married to Hart Levy Cohen.  Although I have not yet found any familial connection between Rachel and her mother-in-law Sarah, I have found some evidence of Rachel’s parents and siblings.

First, I noticed that a man named Lazarus Jacobs was living with Rachel and Jacob Cohen in Philadelphia in 1860.  Then yesterday while researching the Cohens in the 1860s, I found a Philadelphia directory that listed Jacob’s business partner as Joseph Jacobs.  I assumed this was another of Rachel’s relatives, but was not sure how they might be related.

After some further searching, I found Joseph Jacobs on the 1841 England census, living with his parents Reuben and Frances and his siblings Rachel, my great-great-grandmother, and Lazarus, the younger brother who was living with Jacob and Rachel in 1860.

Reuben Jacobs and family 1841 England Census

Reuben Jacobs and family 1841 England Census

Joseph married his wife, Rachael, in 1847, whose maiden name may also have been Jacobs.  (The BMDIndex has two Rachels on the registry page for Joseph Jacobs, so until I can obtain the actual records, I am not sure if she was Rachel Levy or Rachael Jacobs.)

Joseph and Rachel had a son, Solomon, born in 1848, and a son Reuben, born in 1850.  Both were living with Rachel on the 1851 England census.  Rachel was listed as the sister of the head of household, whose name was Abraham Abrahams; his wife’s name was Elizabeth.  I cannot find a Rachel Abrahams on the marriage registry on the BMDIndex, and although I did find an Abraham Abrahams married to an Elizabeth Levy, I also wonder whether the census taker took down Abraham’s name incorrectly since there is also an Abraham Jacobs married to an Elizabeth.

Rachel Jacobs and children 1851 England census

Rachel Jacobs and children 1851 England census

At any rate, the bigger question is— where was Joseph?

My guess was that he was in the US, preparing to move the family to Philadelphia.  I could not find him, however, on the 1850 US census nor could I find him on a ship manifest for that time period.  I did, however, find a Joseph Jacobs on the 1851 England census as a visitor in Birmingham, England; he was listed as born in Middlesex, London, and his occupation was as a general dealer, so my guess is that Joseph was simply away on business the day the census was taken.

Joseph Jacobs 1851 England census  a visitor

Joseph Jacobs 1851 England census
a visitor

Joseph and his family left England and, like Joseph’s sister Rachel, settled in Philadelphia.  It appears that Rachel Jacobs and her three children, Solomon (4), Reuben (2) and Emanuel, who was described as an infant, left in 1853 along with her brother-in-law, fourteen year old Lazarus (L. Jacobs on the manifest).

Rachel Jacobs and children 1853 ship manifest

Rachel Jacobs and children 1853 ship manifest “Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Passenger Lists, 1800-1882”, index and images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/K8CH-1V8 : accessed 20 May 2014), Jacobs, 1853.

Her husband Joseph may not have left until 1854.

Joseph Jacobs ship manifest 1854

Joseph Jacobs ship manifest 1854 “Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Passenger Lists, 1800-1882”, index and images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/K8CC-N1Z : accessed 20 May 2014), Joseph Jacob, 1854

These dates make sense because according to the 1860 US census, their daughter Frances or Fanny was born in England and was six at the time of the census in 1860, but their daughter Esther was born in Pennsylvania and was already two years old in 1860.

 

Joseph Jacobs and family 1860 US census

Joseph Jacobs and family 1860 US census

What seems inconsistent, however, is that Frances/Fanny is not on the ship manifest with either her mother Rachel or her father Joseph.  Perhaps the 1860 census was incorrect, and Frances was born shortly after arriving in the US, but the 1870 census also has her listed as born in England, so more likely she just wasn’t included on the ship manifest. Emanuel Jacobs, however, although listed on the ship manifest, is not included in the 1860 census.  In fact, a later born child was named Emanuel, born in 1866.  So was “Emanuel” on the manifest really Frances? Or did the first Emanuel die?

Sadly, it was the latter.  Emanuel died on May 3, 1860, of heart disease, according to the US Federal Census Mortality Schedule.  The Philadelphia death certificate identifies his father as Joseph Jacobs residing at 150 South Street, so this is definitely the right child since that is where the Jacobs family was living in 1860.  The certificate also says that Emanuel had been in Philadelphia for 2 and 2/3 years, meaning since sometime in 1857 (which seems incorrect unless they lived elsewhere between 1853 and 1857), and although I cannot decipher the age very well, I think it says he was 8+ years, meaning he was born sometime either in 1851 or 1852, which would explain why he was not on the 1851 census, but was on the 1853 manifest.  Apparently, the second Emanuel, born in 1866, was named for the deceased older brother.

Emanuel Jacobs death certificate May 3, 1860

Emanuel Jacobs death certificate May 3, 1860

That does not explain where Frances was, however, when the rest of the family was sailing to Philadelphia.

In 1860 Joseph Jacobs and his family lived at 150 South Street in Philadelphia, not more than a few houses from my great-grandparents who lived at 136 South Street.  He was in business with his brother-in-law, Jacob Cohen, my great-great-grandfather. Although I will track what happened to Joseph and to Lazarus after 1860 as well as research Joseph, Sarah, and Lazarus’ parents in England, for now I will return to the Cohen family and finish their story before returning to my newly discovered family line, the Jacobs.  The tree just keeps on growing.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Hart Levy Cohen and Family 1860 to 1870: A Decade of Transition

By 1860, all my Cohen relatives were settled into life in the US, having been here for about ten years.  Hart Levy Cohen, my three-times great grandfather, was living in Philadelphia with his three of his adult children, Elizabeth, Lewis and Jonas, and his son Jacob was living with his wife Sarah and their nine children, three servants, and one of Sarah’s brothers, Lazarus Jacobs.  The other son Moses was living in the Washington, DC, area with his wife Adeline and their five children.  Much would change between 1860 and 1870.

First, the decade started off with two major losses.  Moses Cohen died on October 2, 1860, leaving behind his widow and five young children.  Although the death record I found stated his birth year as 1828, other records would have given him an earlier year of birth, probably around 1823, making him only 37 or so when he died. He was buried in Washington Hebrew Cemetery.

Just three months later, the family suffered another loss when the family patriarch, Hart Levy Cohen, died at the age of 88.  According to his death certificate, he died on December 29, 1860, of old age.  He was buried on December 31, 1860, at Mikveh Israel Cemetery, where many of his descendants would also be buried.

Hart Levy Cohen death certificate

Hart Levy Cohen death certificate

Hart Levy Cohen burial at Mikveh Israel Cemetery December 31, 1860

Hart Levy Cohen burial at Mikveh Israel Cemetery December 31, 1860

One has to wonder whether the death of his son Moses accelerated his demise, although living to 88 in the mid-19th century must have been quite an accomplishment.  Here was a man who had moved from Amsterdam to London as a young man, worked as a dealer in goods, and raised five children before losing his wife and moving to Philadelphia as a man in his 70s.  He had adjusted to two huge migrations and lived a long life.  I wish I knew more about what he was like and who his own (and thus my) ancestors were.  A photograph would also be wonderful.  But I feel fortunate to have found him at all and to have been able to learn something about this man, my great-great-great grandfather.

This was also a tumultuous time in American history.  In February 1861, the Southern states formed the Confederate State of America, and in April 1861, with the attack on Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina, the Civil War began and lasted until April, 1865, when the Confederacy surrendered to the Union Army in Appomattox, Virginia.  Although I cannot find a military record I could verify as being for any of Hart’s sons, I found my great-great grandfather Jacob Cohen’s draft registration, depicted below.  Jacob was listed as having been born in London, living at 136 South Street, where he lived for all or almost all of his years in Philadelphia, and working as a storekeeper.

Jacob Cohen Civil War draft registration 1863

Jacob Cohen Civil War draft registration 1863

I also found a record indicating that a Lewis Cohen enlisted in the Union Army on April 23, 1861, just as the war had started, serving as a private in Company H, Pennsylvania 22nd Infantry Regiment.  The record notes that Lewis mustered out on August 7, 1861. There is also a second record for a Lewis Cohen indicating the he served a private in Company F, Regiment 122 of the Pennsylvania Infantry.   I will have to keep searching to see if I can find any further military records to verify that one of these two Lewis Cohens was in fact my ancestor.  I could not locate any military record for the youngest brother, Jonas, which seems a little strange since he would certainly have been of draft age, being only 32 when the war broke out in 1861.

Since both Jonas and Jacob are listed in the Philadelphia directory for 1861 whereas Lewis is not, it may be that Jonas and Jacob never did active duty during the Civil War.  In 1861, Jonas was listed as a salesman, living at 210 South Street.  In that same directory, his brother Jacob is listed as having a clothing store at 150 South Street and residing at 136 South Street, which may be where Jonas worked. The store was called Jacobs and Cohen and was owned by my great-great grandfather Jacob and his partner, Joseph Jacobs. I will write more about Joseph Jacobs in a subsequent post.

Cohens in the 1861 Philadelphia city directory

Cohens in the 1861 Philadelphia city directory

The business must have both changed and grown by 1870.  On the 1870 census, Jacob’s occupation is described as a “broker,” and the city directories from that point forward more specifically describe him as a pawnbroker.  His son Isaac was also described as a broker on the 1870 census, and his sons Hart and Reuben were both described as “clerk in store,” presumably their father’s store.  This was the beginning of a long and extensive family business as pawnbrokers.

Jacob Cohen and family 1870 US census

Jacob Cohen and family 1870 US census

The business was not the only thing that was growing between 1860 and 1870.  Jacob and Sarah’s family had also grown between 1860 and 1870.  In addition to the nine children they had already had by 1860, Jacob and Sarah had four more between 1860 and 1870: Lewis (1862), Emanuel (1863), Jonas (1864), and finally Abraham in 1866.  Sarah Jacobs Cohen had given birth to at least thirteen children between 1846 and 1866; given infant mortality rates, there could have been a few more squeezed into the “off” years.  By the time her last baby was born, Sarah was already a grandmother, but was not yet forty years old.  She’d been having babies for twenty years.  It’s a good thing Jacob’s business was successful.  But much as I empathize with Sarah and all those pregnancies, childbirths, and the exhaustion that comes with every new baby, plus all the work involved in raising thirteen children, I am really glad that she did not stop.  Their child Emanuel, her eleventh child, grew up to be my great-grandfather.

Meanwhile, Jacob and Sarah’s two oldest children, Fanny (Frances) and Joseph, were already on their own by 1870.  Fanny, the only child born in England, had married Ansel Hamberg in 1866, according to the 1870 census, and in 1870, she and Ansel were living with their three daughters, Bertha (1866), Sarah (1867), and Hannah (1869).  Like her father Jacob, Fanny’s husband was employed as a pawnbroker.  Had he and Jacob met in the trade? Did they work together?  It appears from the city directories that Ansel was working at a different address, but perhaps there was some connection between the two stores.

Fanny and Ansel Hamberg and family 1870 census

Fanny and Ansel Hamberg and family 1870 census

Fanny’s younger brother Joseph was still living at home and working in the clothing business at 225 S. 2d Street, not too far from his family’s home in 1868.  By 1870, Joseph was married, and he and his wife Caroline had a one year old son Harry.  Joseph was working as a tailor, according to the 1870 census and he and Caroline were living in the same ward and district as his family and had a domestic servant living with them.

Joseph and Caroline Cohen and family 1870 US census

Joseph and Caroline Cohen and family 1870 US census

Like their brother Jacob, his siblings Lewis, Elizabeth and Jonas were also working in the retail business during the 1860s. In 1862 Lewis and Elizabeth were both listed in the Philadelphia city directory as clothiers living at 210 South Street.

Lewis Cohen and Elizabeth Cohen in the 1862 Philadelphia directory

Lewis Cohen and Elizabeth Cohen in the 1862 Philadelphia directory

In 1863 Jonas and Lewis were listed next to each other in the Pennsylvania Septennial Census as salesmen.  In 1867, 1868, 1870 and 1871, Elizabeth was listed as a clothier in the yearly Philadelphia city directory, and Lewis was listed as a salesman in 1868 and as a pawnbroker in 1871 (Jonas was not listed in either directory).  Both Elizabeth and Lewis were living at 119 South 2d Street, not far from where their nephew Joseph was working.

I could not find Lewis, Jonas or Elizabeth on the 1870 census, but apparently that census was terribly flawed, resulting in a second count in some major cities, including Philadelphia.  Even with a second count, it seems that the census taker missed those three Cohens.

Down in Washington, DC, Moses’ family had to adjust to his untimely death in 1860, leaving behind four children under ten in addition to his twenty year old son Moses, Jr.  Moses, Sr.’s widow Adeline supported the children by working as a merchant, selling second hand clothing, according to Washington, DC, city directories in 1867, 1868 and 1870.  By the time of the 1870 census, Adeline was still living with the four younger children, Hart, Rachael, Jacob, and John, but Hart was employed as a pawnbroker and Jacob as a clerk.  On the census Adeline is described as “keeping house,” so perhaps by that time her sons were supporting her.

Adeline Cohen and family 1870 US census

Adeline Cohen and family 1870 US census

Adeline and Moses’ oldest child, Moses, Jr., married Henrietta (Yetta) Loeb on August 16, 1862.  According to his 1863 Civil War draft registration, he was, like his cousins in Philadelphia, working as a clothier. Tax rolls for 1864 and 1865 list him as a “retail dealer.”  On the 1870 census, he was working as a clothier, and he and Henrietta had three children, Augusta (six), Myer (four), and Jacob (four months).

Moses Cohen, Jr. and family 1870 US census

Moses Cohen, Jr. and family 1870 US census

Thus, by 1870, although Hart and his son Moses had passed away, their families were thriving.  Hart’s four children in Philadelphia were all gainfully employed as merchants, starting in the clothing industry and eventually some of them becoming pawnbrokers.  Similarly, Moses, Sr.’s widow and children were also involved in the clothing and pawnbroker businesses in Washington, DC.  Jacob, my great-great grandfather, was well-established with an ongoing business in Philadelphia, and his children were following in his footsteps.  He and Sarah still had many young children at home in 1870, including my great-grandfather Emanuel.  The family was still living in Ward 4, but that would start to change as the next generation started to go out on their own, as we will see when we follow the family from 1870 to 1880.

That, also, would be a decade of transition for the family as Hart’s grandchildren became adults.  These grandchildren were almost all first-generation Americans, not immigrants.  Their story is an American story from start to finish.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta