A Casey Family History

I am indebted to Pat Sistare whose research efforts continue to inform this work.

If you are looking for Sistare family data, you should visit Carol Sutton's site. There you can get lots of information on the family history of the Sistare Family. This page is primarily concerned only with Taylor Hemby, AKA Simpson Taylor Sustaire, Taylor Sustaire, etc.

SUSTAIRE - HEMBY
"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."

Sir Walter Scott certainly hit the nail on the head with that immortal quotation, and family researchers everywhere must shake their heads with despair when encountering the relative who has changed his surname!

Certainly in the case of our Taylor Sustaire, the deception appears to have been benign. Records seem to indicate he was a good man, an honest and hardworking man. Surely he was in a hurry to be a man, for he married a 28 year old Millie Ann Hough when he was 17!

While the issue remains debatable among family members, it is the opinion of this compiler that Taylor Simpson Seburne (Whatever combination you prefer!) Sustaire was a Hemby. Not only do I believe he was a Hemby, I believe both he and Hollie may have been HAMBYs. And perhaps most irreverant of all, I'm not so sure that Hollie Elizabeth Hemby Sistair was his mother OR sister. There. I've said it. Those of you familiar with the line will understand my trepidation! :-)

It is understandable that folks doggedly hold on to certain notions concerning their kin. For some in the south, the romantic and historic lure of confederate relatives is strong. For some, the puzzle is too esoteric. For instance, how many of us believe some ancestors are certainly related by blood when in fact sometimes DNA research exposes an adoption? Are these not our ancestors as well?

My maternal lines are fraught with adoptions. Consider the orphan trains of the 19th century. Most of us will never know how many of our kin were taken in by good hearted, generous families, by wet nurses who made motherless children their own bundles of joy. How many young men and women escaped slavery carrying the secret of mixed parentage? The numbers are inestimable!

So take heart, dear SUSTAIRE family. We are the offspring of the stong, of survivors from a stormy century! It looks to me like Taylor Hemby chose a new name, married a woman from a fine family, and took off on a road less traveled.

On a personal note: My grandfather, Taylor Wesley Casey, was the son of Taylor Sustaire's daughter, Louetta. No doubt she named her son out of respect for her father...BUT...would you believe it! He, too, changed his name! Thankfully, this time, it would only be a given name.

To paraphrase Pat Sistair, with some of my own thoughts added, here is what we know (I believe) so far:

1. I can find no instance of any spelling of the name SUSTAIRE except from the descendants of Taylor. This in itself is not so conclusive. My Caseys spelled their name CAZY in the 1900 census. But taken together with other facts, it seems an important clue.
2. If we accept that Hollie Elizabeth Hemby Sistare is first recorded in the 1850 Lancaster District, SC Census (family #192, headed by McAteer), then we might consider her relation to other "Hemby" women in the district who appear to be living without a father (family #126).
3. The Hamby's were from Wilkes Co. North Carolina. Taylor's obituary indicates he was in North Carolina as a small boy.
4. Uriah Hemby, the suggested father of Hollie Elizabeth, has a daughter named Elizabeth, but not Hollie... It appears that all of Uriah Hemby's children were born in South Carolina. They live in Pickens Co., SC in 1850. Seems more likely to me that the Hollie in Lancaster 1850 is the same Hollie in Lancaster 1860.
5. To quote Pat: "The usual form of entry by an enumerator was to write the surname and use ditto marks (") for family members, entering family members from the oldest to the youngest. Taylor Hemby is entered not as a Sistare, but as a Hemby."
   I think this fact stands on its own merit. We all know this. Even when an enumerator didn't list the last name first, as in the case of the 1850 Lancaster, SC census (does anyone else but me think this is the worst census they have ever tried to read?!), the record still lists so called "blood relatives" first, according to age, and other household members last. There is just no getting around this. Taylor is named as a HEMBY in the household of Sistare. Period.
6. The fact remains that Taylor is not listed has a child or heir to Hollie's husband, James Hiram Richardson Sistare's estate.

And so, a NEW family is born!

Then what is the relationship between Hollie Elizabeth Hemby Sistare and Taylor Hemby?

Let's consider the following census information:

1850, Lancaster District, South Carolina --

Dwelling No.	Name	Age	Sex	Occupation
126	D. Hemby	30	F	Weaver
126	L. A. Hemby	10	F
126	M. E. ?. Hemby	4	F
126	L. A. Eastridge	17	F
191	E. M. McAteer	35	M	Farmer
191	M. McAteer	25	F
191	?. McAteer	4	F
191	E. ?. McAteer	1	M
191	P. Evans	20	M	Laborer
191	Holly Hemby	14	F
191	M. McAteer	80	F
193	James Woods	32	M	Laborer
193	M. Woods	20	F
193	Tilly Hemby	7	F
193	M. Atkison or Atchison	80	F

Looks like there are Hemby (Hamby) females all over the district! Also, if you consult the actual handwritten census, you will discover that the enumerator was prone to add an extra flourish at the end of some names and words. For instance, "Weaver" looks like "Weaverl". He does it repeatedly throughout the record. I think that accounts for some confusion over what has believed to be the "Steeal" family that Hollie is living with. However, the McAteer family is a known surname in the district, and their family recognize this household as such. Now, let's take a look at these folks 10 years down the road...

1860, Lancaster District, South Carolina --

The previously mentioned Hemby women of dwelling #126, have either married or moved. I can find no record of them in the district. However, there is one record of a Matilda Hemby (maybe the Tilley Hemby of the Woods family?) marrying a Ivon Watson in South Carolina in 1858. Also, Hollie Hemby is now a married woman with a full household.

Dwelling No.	Name	Age	Sex	Occupation
551	J. H. Sistare	25	M	Farmer
551	Holly E.	21	F
551	Matilda J.	2	F
551	John T.	2/12	M
551	Taylor Hemby	6	M

1870, Lancaster District, South Carolina --

Now in 1870, Hollie Hemby Sistare's family is recorded as thus:

Dwelling No.	Name	Age	Sex	Occupation
202	Holly Sistare	33	F	Keeping House
202	Tilda Jane	12	F
202	John	10	M
202	Irvin	8	M
202	Barnum	8	M
202	Rachel Hemby	70	F	PAUPER

So maybe Rachel Hemby, 70 years old, is the mother of Hollie Elizabeth? Maybe. But I doubt it. I've combed through the 1870 Lancaster Census, and almost always an older woman -- no matter how old, is described as "Keeping House". I think this was the usual way to record the occupation of a mother or mother-in-law. I believe that Rachel Hemby was specifically recorded as a pauper because she was related another way, perhaps an aunt. It is still an odd way to record the occupation of an elder, but I understand it was a frequent practice. I'm just not so sure about this particular census. Check out other entries for this area, and let me know what you think. By the way, Rachel Hemby's age is consistent with the 1850, "D. Hemby" from this area...

I have searched high and low for a census entry for Taylor Simpson Seburne Hemby Sustaire in 1870, in many different combinations, with many different spellings, to no avail. We do, however, learn from S.T. Sustaire's Obituary that he and Millie Ann Hough were married on 18 December 1870.

1880, Mecklenburg, Morning Star, North Carolina --

So moving ahead to 1880, we find Taylor Hemby now using the name, Simpson Sustaire. Go figure. His motivation is anyone's guess. Was he a runaway from an unhappy home where felt unwelcome? We might speculate that could be the case if he were Hollie's child by someone other than J. H. R. Sistare. But really, if he were so unhappy with his treatment, why would he choose to use his step-father's name? Was he embarrased to call himself Hemby because he worried he would bring shame to Hollie for what might be an illegitimate birth? That doesn't seem right at all since the family had called him a Hemby "publically" in the 1860 census. And if Hollie was Taylor's biological mother - legititmately, by some very early marriage, then why would Taylor's surname match her maiden name? Why, if he was illegitimate, would Hollie not have tried to hide the fact by calling him "Sistare" or something else?

By the way, all of the children on this census are reported as being born in North Carolina

Dwelling No.	Name	Age	Sex	Occupation
116	Simpson Sustaire	26	M	Carpenter
116	Milliann	36	F	Keeping House
116	John M.	9	M
116	Nancey E.	6	F
116	Lue C.	5	F
116	George N.	3	M

1900, Franklin County, Precinct 4, Texas --

Taylor's first wife, Millie Ann Hough, passed away on 6 Feb 1889. He then married (rather quickly!)Mary Josephine Orril on 3 Oct 1889 in Mount Vernon, Franklin Co., TX. Our ancestor is now recorded as Taylor Sustaire.

Dwelling No.	Name	Age	Sex	Occupation
208	Taylor Sustaire	46	M	Farmer
208	Mary J.	38	F
208	Willie R.	16	M	At School
208	Thurman	2	M	At School
208	Seaborn	7	M	At School
208	Opal	1	F
208	Tilda J. Mullis	42	F

It is significant that "Tilda J. Mullis" has come into Taylor Sustaire's household at this time. The census describes her as a Widow, and a sister to the head of household. Matilda Sustaire had married Stewart M. Mullis in Union County on 25 March 1884, just 3 months after having signed the deed of conveyance for her father's property in January 1884. Now the census seems to tell us that Stewart has died. Think about it, though. Taylor's wife, Millie, had also died. Pat Sistare has concluded that Tilda J. may have been there only to report to Taylor about Hollie Elizabeth's death, but why would she do that? The mail was up and running nicely in 1900. I'm guessing that Tilda came to help with Taylor's children and perhaps grieve for her own loss. Pat also believes that Tilda remarried later to a Stewart Blakeney in Union County, NC, and Marlon Sustaire believes that Tilda died in Texas. That's one I'll have to research on my own... As for Tilda being reported as Taylor's sister, I think that was just a matter of convenience, an easy explanation, and also probably the way they genuinely felt about one another.

1910, Franklin County, Purley, Texas --

This seems to be Taylor's last known census. He was 66 years old and living next door to his son, Thurman. I know there is conflicting information on this census concerning where he was born and where his parents were born, but in this case I'm chalking it up to the enumerator or the informants. I love Franklin County, Texas, but I have seen more errors in the 1900 and 1910 records than anywhere else. It is almost like one person from the neighborhood just reported the information to the enumerator, guessing they had most of it right!

Dwelling No.	Name	Age	Sex	Occupation
16	Taylor Sustaire	66	M	Farmer
16	Josie	48	F
16	Seburn	17	M	Farmer
16	Opal	11	F

Taylor Sustaire died in 1925. He was a well-loved and respected man of the community.

OBITUARY FOR S.T. SUSTAIRE, Published in Optic Herald 3 Jul 1925 Died: 23-Jun-1925
"No county ever produced a nobler and truer man than S. T. Sustaire. He was a housebuilder by trade and learned many of our best workmen their first knowledge of the steel square but his sage advice and cheering words are closed to us forever. He his gone to that house not made with hands. He was born in South Carolina October 16, 1853 and moved to N.C. when a small boy and from there to S.C. when a small boy and from there to Texas February 22, 1884. He married Millie Hough December 18, 1870. 6 children were born to the, 4 of whom are living: Mrs Lizzie Lindley of Newsome, E.H. Sustaire of Lone Oak, G.N and W.R. of Saltillo. His first wife died February 6, 1897. On October 3, 1889 (This may be a typo in the paper) he married Miss Josephine Orrill and 7 children wer born to them, 3 of whom survive: R.T. Sustaire of Vinson, Okla., Mrs. Opal Comer of Groesbeck and S.T. Sustaire Jr. of Dallas. He was put away in the Purley graveyard last Wednesday by a host of friends and relatives."

It is my humble opinion that the real mystery here is the "WHY", not the "WHO". It is obvious Taylor was a Hemby, but he began a new family of Sustaires. I believe Taylor Hemby was a happy boy who enjoyed good relations with his extended family. Matilda Jane Sistare even came to spend time with him much later in Texas. I think that J. H. R. and Hollie fully intended to raise Taylor as a son, and encouraged their children to feel that way as well. But, I'm only guessing here, I believe that Taylor got into some trouble and HAD to leave home. Think about it. He was known as Taylor Hemby. He changed his last name and his first. The new spelling of S-U-S-T-A-I-R-E only indicates to me that he was not literate. I believe he esteemed his connection to the Sistare family above all else, maybe even needed the "good" reputation the name provided. After moving his family to Texas, he began using the first name Taylor once more. But never again did he use the name Taylor Hemby. There must have been a reason...

It is my hope and my full intention to spend the next year or so trying to develop my database of Hemby and Hamby names. But first I would sure like to see some newspaper and court records for South Carolina/North Carolina 1860 - 1869! Good luck in your Taylor Hemby searches. Let me know if you find anything!

DECENDANCY REPORT FOR TAYLOR HEMBY / TAYLOR SUSTAIRE
SOME OBITUARIES FOR THE SUSTAIRE FAMILY

Sign my Guestbook View my Guestbook

© 2004-06 Lisa Casey Perry
Some of the decendancy reports were generated with Legacy 5.