| Notes |
- The Waltman Family of Northampton County, By Neil A. Boyer, 12 Jun 2009
A Critique of the LaMance Book on the Waltmans
Over the years, there have been numerous criticisms of the LaMance book The House of Waltman and its Allied Families, published in 1928, even though most researchers have begun their study of the family with her work. Future work on thn family might well begin with LaMance's work, but it should be considered that the book contained serious problems. Many of the issues cited here relate to people she described as children of Conrad Waltman. More specific commentary on them is provided in Part II and Part III of this work. Here are a few of the comments, corrections and claims about the LaMance book that have surfaced:
Conrad Waltman, the immigrant (Conrad Sr.), is not the Conrad Waltman mentioned in Pennsylvania Archives as having been in the Revolution. The Conrad Waltman who served in the war was his grandson (call him Conrad, Jr.), 1759-1785. Althou7 women have joined the DAR claiming their family history relates back to Conrad Sr., using LaMance as the source, the DAR has now suspended applications making that claim in the absence of further proof. However, women can join the DAR citing Conrad Jr. as the family ancestor. The plaque in the Kreidersville Cemetery that says Conrad Sr. (1715-1796) fought in the Revolution is not correct and unfortunately has been misleading to researchers. It has not been authorized by the DAR and is not a DAR plaque. Apparently it was supplied by the Veterans Administration on the basis of a flawed claim based in part on the LaMance book.
LaMance did not believe that a person named Conrad Jr. existed, and so he is not mentioned in her book at all, despite clear genealogical evidence to the contrary. Conrad Jr. was a son of Valentine Waltman, a son of Conrad Sr.
Peter Waltman (1779-1836) was a son of Conrad Jr., and not a son of Valentine. Peter had three siblings, all children of Conrad Jr. Both Maria Barbara Waltman, who was born in 1781 and married George Gruber, and her brother Johannes Wal, born in 1783, moved to Lycoming County. At least two researchers were exploring the details of their lives in 2008. A third sibling, Elizabeth Catherine Waltman, born in 1784. apparently also survived to adulthood.
Valentine Waltman probably was born before 1733, not in 1742, and must have come to America with Conrad Sr. in 1738. (Conrad?s twin girls, reportedly born in 1738, apparently were not his first children.) Valentine?s wife was named Catherirucker, not Catherine Bieber. It was his son, Conrad Jr., who married Catherine Bieber.
Apparently, Conrad Sr. did not have a son named Andrew/Andreus, born in 1760, as LaMance said. It appears LaMance confused him with the Andrew Waltman, born in 1765, who was the son of Valentine. There is evidence of only one Andrew of thae in the area at that time, and Katherine Waltman likely was too old to have had a child in either 1760 or 1765. The Andrew Waltman who married Margretta Zerfass and fought in the Revolution appears to have been the son of Valentine. LaMance said that Andrew the son of Valentine went to Sabuta, Mississippi, but it appears that the family member who went to Mississippi was not Andrew but John Waltman, born in 1789, a son of Andrew and Margretta.
The date of birth of Katherine Waltman that is shown on her tombstone, 1708, is probably correct. LaMance said it was wrong and should have been 1718, probably in order to make it more likely Katherine had children over such a long period ome. This may suggest that Conrad Sr. also was born earlier than 1715.
Elizabeth Waltman, daughter of Conrad Sr., who married John Dreisbach and is buried in Kreidersville, was totally omitted from the LaMance book.
These are some of the major errors that appear in LaMance?s book, and there were other small ones, mostly related to her claims regarding the children of Conrad Waltman Sr. Besides these, a major omission is any genealogical evidence of y existence of Conrad Sr. He was shown by LaMance and other researchers arriving in Philadelphia in 1738 and being present at the baptism of only one of his children, Anna Barbara, in 1745. But there is no other evidence of Conrad ? no evidence in tax records, oaths of allegiance, church attendance, baptismal ceremonies, wills, land records, burial, tombstone, or anything other records. LaMance implied Conrad lived in the Kreidersville area, but there is no evidence of it, and finding this evidence seems to be a major challenge for future researchers.
See more details of these genealogical issues in Part II of this paper.
An Interesting Puzzle. A special curiosity regarding LaMance's research is that, although she presented herself as the confident expert on the Waltmans, her 1904 book on some of her other ancestors, The Greene Family and Its Branches, d the Waltmans only very briefly. In this book of 394 pages, only pages 247-250 related to Waltmans and descendants (these pages can be viewed on the pdf version of the link above). Most surprisingly, these pages do not mention Conrad Waltman. Instead, they suggest that the progenitor of the Waltman family, Valentine Waltman of Germany, had a son, also called Valentine, who traveled to America with "Miss Bierly," and among their children was a John Waltman, whose "proud little wife" was "Anna Maria Marguerite (Surface)," and they had a son Valentine Waltman, who married Achsa Wilson. In short, this 1904 account omitted the immigrant Conrad Waltman who was the focus of her 1928 book, suggested that the Valentine Waltman who traveled to America was married to "Miss Bierly" (her second book said that it was the immigrant Conrad who married Katherine Bierly), and indicated that the man who married Margretta Zerfass was not Andrew Waltman but "John" Waltman. Thus, there were major errors in her account of the Waltmans in the 1904 book, exacerbated by her account in the 1928 book.
A question is why her 1904 account of the Waltmans was so erroneous, when she was younger (47), presumably more energetic in genealogical research, and had more recent ties to her mother and other ancestors. Since the 1928 book attributedf the Waltman information to Lora's mother and Lora's great-grandmother, Margretta Zerfass Waltman, why did they not provide her with the correct information as she developed her 1904 book? A possible explanation for this is provided by LaMance's descendant Kathy Johnson:
I think that the bulk of the Greene book was written during the latter part of the nineteenth century. Nelson Nichols (Lora's father) died in Ohio in 1865, and around 1878 Lora and her mother Kezia ended up in Missouri. This was a sparsely populated area, and with the two women in the same house there would be ample opportunity for sharing of family history. [Kezia Waltman Nichols died in 1895.] With the publication of the Greene book in 1904, the death of Lora's husband Marcus in 1906, and the marriage of her only child, there was time to concentrate on the other side of the family. Her travels for the WCTU took her all over this country, providing opportunities for research and writing. I have newspaper clippings from 1912 to 1927, from Miami to Alaska, showing her speaking engagements. I have some of her original papers on "The Southern Watkins Family," which she wrote after her son-in-law joined the family. There are 8 pages and she incorporated some of the information in the Waltman book. I imagine that family history was a lifelong passion as it is for so many.
As indicated earlier in this chapter, a fair amount of what was written by LaMance about the Waltmans was greeted with skepticism. She claimed she got the information from her mother, who got it from her grandmother, but LaMance seems teen very liberal in presenting fact and opinion regarding the immigrant Conrad Waltman and his descendants. She was contested strongly on her view that Conrad had served as a private in the Revolutionary War and on her opinion that there never was a Conrad Waltman Junior. As indicated here, Margaret Wilkins presented evidence to the DAR to try to prove that LaMance?s 1928 book had many errors. More detail on this dispute is presented at the end of the next chapter.
LaMance also received mixed reviews on genealogical work that she presented on other families, including the one on the Greene family. [66] One relating to the LeValley family included this comment on a website:
LaMANCE SPECULATIONS (in her books The Greene Family and Its Branches, and Huguenot Pedigrees, and papers in the R.I. Hist. Soc. Library and Salt Lake City). CAUTION: Lora LaMance did a lot of sloppy guessing. She mixed LeValleys with DeVolneys, Le Vallois, and de la Vals. Any LeValley information traceable to her needs further proof. [67]
Another LeValley researcher published the comment that ?Laura LaMance wrote a lot of speculative balderdash.? [68]
Lora LaMance clearly was not deterred from her genealogical mission by any of the criticism. Her book on the Waltmans remains as the main source of information for many researchers, despite the efforts of others to point out problems. Inn to the notes and ?corrections? supplied by Margaret Wilkins, the copy in the DAR library contains a pasted-in page of Errata from LaMance herself. The page noted that much new material had arrived after the first 13 chapters had been sent to the press. It said that LaMance fell and broke her right shoulder at the age of 71 and had to dictate changes to a stenographer, and some errors, presented in the errata sheet, did not get corrected. The changes, however, did not appear to affect the text relating to Valentine or Peter Waltman or their descendants. Nor was the substance changed by comments that she penciled into her copy of the book after it was published.
- The Waltman Family of Northampton County, By Neil A. Boyer, 12 Jun 2009
The Battle of Fort Washington
There was only one ?Conrad Waltman? in the records of the Revolutionary War, and it is not clear if it was the immigrant Conrad (1715-1796?) or his grandson Conrad (1759-1786). In the Pennsylvania Archives, a muster roll of ?Captaimpany, Northampton County, Flying Camp, 1776,? in the War of the Revolution, [38] showed 43 privates and three officers. ?Conrad Waltman? was one of the privates. It is clear that the company was involved in the infamous Battle of Fort Washington on November 16, 1776, but it is not clear whether Conrad Waltman was then with the company, or which of the two Conrad Waltmans it was.
The senior Conrad Waltman would have been 61 in 1776. Some believe that at this age Conrad was too old for military service, and under the existing rules his service would not have been required. Some who think otherwise argue thatcal that a patriotic man aged 61 could have offered his services to help the Revolution and that, lacking military experience, he probably would have been given only the rank of private. The rule was that all fit men between 16 and 50 were required to join the militia, but the oldest in most of the companies was in his mid-30s. As best can be determined, the privates in Captain Rundio?s company were quite young, many in their teens. Peter Rundio (1738-1817) himself was 38, and his first lieutenant, Robert Brown (1744-1823), was 32.
The ?Flying Camp,? of which Conrad Waltman was a member, was created by the Continental Congress on June 3, 1776, as a mobile reserve to defend the ground between New York and Philadelphia. Flying Camp members differed from the rea by expressly accepting service outside of their home states under the command of Continental general officers. The Flying Camp militia members from Pennsylvania were enlisted only through December 31, 1776, and if they had not been captured or killed, it is likely that those in Captain Rundio?s company did not serve beyond that date. The Pennsylvania members were especially active in serving as a reserve for General Washington in protecting New Jersey for his Army, but they also served in the battles of New York, Trenton, Princeton, Brandywine, and Germantown. [39]
It was not until September 10, 1776, that the Standing Committee for the militia for Northampton County met at Easton to make major decisions regarding the company. The minutes [40] reported that Peter Rundio was appointed captain if John Hays, ?who declines going into service on account of the present troubles in his family having lately lost his Daughter, as by Colo. Dreisbach?s Letter to this Committee appears.? Robert Brown was appointed first lieutenant to Captain Rundio, Andrew Boyd (who did not appear in the later muster roll) was appointed second lieutenant, and John McDowell, Junior, was appointed ensign.
A history of Northampton County, published in 1877, said that the county was assigned a quota of 346 men for the militia, [41] and that Captain Rundio?s company of Flying Camp volunteers fought in the battles of Long Island and Fort n 1776. (The Long Island battle actually occurred in August, before Rundio became captain.) The big event at Fort Washington, on the northern tip of Manhattan Island, was described by historians as perhaps the biggest disaster of the war, and it seems clear that Rundio?s company was there. It took place on November 16, 1776.
What happened with the Flying Camp on that highly troubled day at Mount Washington is not recorded. In the confusion of the surrender of 3,000 men, it is highly likely that various military units were merged and intermingled as the ught to defend Fort Washington and then surrendered, and it is likely that unit affiliation was lost, or at least confused. One history said that Rundio?s company ?was in the battle of Long Island, and after the evacuation of New York was left in Fort Washington on the Hudson River under Col. Magaw of Chester County. On the 15th of November, Sir William Howe invested the fort and demanded an immediate surrender and after a day of hard fighting, Col. Magaw surrendered his 2,000 men to Howe . . . . Rundio?s men were imprisoned in a church and left for days without food; many died, etc.? [42]
What appears to be an official account of the battle was printed in the 1877 history of Northampton County:
November 15th, 1776. General Howe sent a flag demanding a surrender of Fort Washington, or all to be put to the sword ? an answer to be returned in two hours. Colonel McGaw, commanding on the Island, having called the Field Officers together, a Council was held, and it was unanimously agreed to return for answer that we were determined to hold the Fort to the last extremity, and to rely on General Howe?s usual clemency in being put to the sword.
November 16th. An attack having began early in the morning, continued until about 3 o?clock in the afternoon, whom the Hessians, being in possession of the hill on the north, the British, Scotch, and Hessians on the east and south, General Howe sent a second flag, with the following summons.
The Commander-in-Chief demands an immediate and categorical answer to his second summons of Fort Washington. The garrison must immediately surrender prisoners of war, and give up all their arms, ammunitions, and stores, of every kd two Field officers to these quarters, as hostages. In so doing, the General is pleased to allow the garrison to keep possession of their baggage, and the officers to have their swords.
Agreed to: J. Patterson, Adjutant General; Robert McGaw, Colonel of the Fifth Pennsylvania Battalion, Commanding at Fort Washington. [43]
William Paul Deary, a scholar of the military at that time, [44] provided a similar version of what occurred that day. He wrote that in early November 1776, it was clear that the British, having taken lower Manhattan, were going tete the capture of the island, then known as York Island. They would then advance into New Jersey from the northern tip of the island, near Mount Washington. On November 12, American reinforcements were sent forward from Fort Lee, across the river in New Jersey, including 840 from the Pennsylvania Flying Camp. The effect was to increase the Mount Washington garrison by half, to a little over 3,000 men by the morning of November 16. The British and Hessians were coming in superior numbers, about four to one, but General Washington and his colleagues, meeting on boats in the middle of the Hudson River on the night of November 15, decided to hold their positions and not withdraw their troops. By the morning of November 16, the garrison on Mount Washington, led by Colonel Robert Magaw, consisted of about 1,300 continental regulars, 1,100 from the Pennsylvania Flying Camp militia, and about 600 state troops from Pennsylvania and Connecticut. The Flying Camp group included full regiments led by officers Baxter and Swope, and it appears that the Baxter contingent included Captain Rundio?s company.
By 1 p.m. on November 16, Deary wrote, after five British attacks on Mount Washington on three fronts, nearly all of Magaw?s garrison had been driven into Fort Washington itself or its perimeter. Surrender talks began before 2 pt 3 p.m., and at 4 p.m. the garrison marched out and laid down its arms. In the fighting, only 54 Americans had been killed and 100 wounded. British General Howe later reported that 2,837 prisoners were taken, of whom 230 were officers. General Washington and three other generals actually had been on York Island in the morning, but they left in time to avoid becoming casualties themselves.
Deary wrote that the name ?Battle of Fort Washington? is ?misleading, since the small earthwork pentagon that overlooked the Hudson River atop Mount Washington served no purpose except to provide temporary and illusory shelter for thefenders.? He said the battle was ?commonly regarded as the worst defeat for American arms during the eight-year war for independence.? [44] The British moved on. If the Mount Washington garrison had been evacuated in advance, the three thousand men there would have been able to join Washington?s army in New Jersey. Deary said that ?Generals George Washington and Nathanael Greene have long been regarded as the American parties most responsible for the debacle on upper York Island.? However, the battle never received the attention it deserved because the Americans recouped with victories at Trenton on December 26 and Princeton on January 2, and Fort Washington was largely overlooked by historians.
The British apparently were ill-prepared to house and feed the 3,000 prisoners they took at Fort Washington. Many were marched to lower Manhattan where they were incarcerated aboard the infamous prison ships, in churches, in a n one or more sugar warehouses. Both the churches and the prison ships were reported to be horrible places, lacking in food and water. Many prisoners died, and others became very ill. Deary quoted one historian as saying that when an exchange of some of the prisoners occurred on May 6, 1778, ?of the three thousand who were captured at Fort Washington, but eight hundred were reported as still living.? [45]
However, other accounts indicate that a number of the soldiers were paroled. Deary said that most of the officers taken in battle, if not seriously ill or gravely wounded when captured, were put under loose house arrest, at first inty and later on western Long Island, and most survived until they were paroled or exchanged. There is much information about the battle on the internet. For a sampling, search on "Battle of Fort Washington."
What Happened to Rundio?s Company? The details of what happened to Captain Rundio?s company ? and to Conrad Waltman ? are not known. The muster role of the company listed Rundio as captain, Robert Brown as First Lieutenant, John McDign, and 43 privates, including Conrad Waltman. Altogether, they were 46. Lieutenant Brown was definitely one of those captured, which suggests that the entire company was at risk. Mrs. William Brown, of Bethlehem, a daughter-in-law of Lieutenant Brown, provided the author of the 1877 history of Northampton County with a framed certificate in which Brown and his colleagues, writing from the prison ship Judith, pledged to British General Clinton that if released they would not challenge the British authorities. This was understood to permit Brown and others to be paroled. The date of the document is December 10, 1777, which indicates that the group had been imprisoned for more than a year. [46] Brown?s text is as follows, misspellings from the original:
We wose names are hereunder written do pledge our faith & Honour to Genl. Clinton that wee will not depart from ye house wee are plaised in by the Commisary of Prisoners; nor go beyond the Bounds Prescribed by him, and farther that wee will not do or say anything Contrary to the Interest of his Majesty or his Government. [47]
Robert Brown
On Board of ye ship Judith, Decem?r 10, 1777.
It is not clear how many men were covered by this document, or who they were. The certificate held by Mrs. Brown did not show the names that Lieutenant Brown said were ?hereunder written.? Nor is it clear if the men had to remain ip or could walk about freely. An applicant to the DAR in 1918 wrote that Lieutenant Brown had been able to pursue his previous trade as a blacksmith and thus was able to earn money to provide food and other necessities for his men. A profile of Robert Brown, who was later promoted to general, written for the 1877 Northampton County book, described the event this way: Brown had been captured at the surrender of Fort Washington on November 16, 1776. He and his companions had fought for 48 hours without food or water, and when their ammunition was gone, they surrendered. Along with 2,000 others, they were held in a church in New York, where two or three hundred died. Although he was let out on parole, Brown was not released until January 25, 1781 ? more than four years after the battle -- when he returned to Northampton County. [48] Later he was a prominent citizen, elected to the Fifth United States Congress from Northampton County and reelected seven times, serving from 1798 to 1815.
Another account of the prison ship Judith is provided in the story of a famed French volunteer named Dubouchet, who was put aboard the Judith a year later, in October 1777, but apparently during the time that Lieutenant Brown was on
In New York he was consigned to the prison ship Judith, a floating hell, stinking, swarming with vermin, ridden with dysentery, scurvy, the itch. It was very cold weather, and many had their feet frozen. The five hundred prisoners were released from the ?foul cloaca? of the hold at fixed hours, to breathe. ?Even the air was measured out to us.? The prisoners could hardly hope to survive more than a few months. At the daily distributions of loathsome food, feeble struggles took place. ?Woe to him who was too weak to drag himself to the food-issue! He was counted as dead.?
Dubouchet subsisted for twenty-four hours on a piece of bacon and a little oatmeal flour, which he cooked on a shovel. Many committed suicide. When one desperate man jumped overboard the British captain shouted: ?Let him alone! He insists on dying; you must not use force on anyone!? [49]
There is no way to determine if Conrad Waltman was among the group captured with Lieutenant Brown. Nor is there a way to determine if all of the 46 soldiers on the muster roll were actually present at the battle. It is possible thaas taken at some earlier time as simply a general account of those who were once part of Captain Rundio?s company. It does not appear to be a post-battle ?return.?
What Happened to the Men in Captain Rundio?s company? There are two sources of information. One is the Pennsylvania Archives listing, which indicated that nine of the 43 privates died shortly after their capture, between December d January 14, 1777. Their names on the muster roll of Rundio?s company are followed by ?d. [date].? For example, the listing for one of the nine reads ?Jacob Moritz, d. Dec. 28, 1776.?
The second source is an apparently official document, forwarded to the editor of the 1877 Northampton County history. This is in two parts. The first is a list of Captain Rundio?s Company which is virtually identical with the list os in Pennsylvania Archives, except that the order of names and some of the spellings vary, suggesting the second list may have come from a different source. The other part is headed ?A list of those that died in their imprisonment in New York, 1776.? This list includes ten men, not nine, adding John Dull, who died on January 4, 1777. This full list is as follows:
December, 1776
John Christian, December 25th; Jacob Moritz, 28th; John Diffenderfer, 29th; Benjamin Swartwood, 3d of January, 1777; Ned Lafferty, 4th do [ditto]; John Dull, 4th do; Pharo McGee, 9th do., Jacob Warner, 9th do.; John Handelong, 11th dimer, 14th do.
(Signed) John McDoawl, Ensign, 30th
Endorsed: A list of Captain Rundio?s Company, by Andrew Boyd
The signing of the list is curious. Ensign McDowell seems to have signed it on December 30, 1776, which would have been the day before the term of service for the Flying Camp expired, but the deaths covered by the list continue up t. Andrew Boyd, who ?endorsed? the list, was the man appointed Second Lieutentant in Captain Rundio?s Company at the meeting of the Standing Committee in Easton on September 10, 1776, but his name did not appear on either list of Rundio?s company.
If these lists are correctly interpreted, within eight weeks of the fall of Fort Washington, nine or ten of the 46 men in Rundio?s company had died ? nearly 25 per cent! ? apparently either from wounds of the battle or from illness oment.
However, there is evidence that some of these suggestions of deaths in the Pennsylvania Archives were not correct. At least three of the ten who were reported to have died were still living in the 1800s.
* Isaac Shimer, a private, is listed in the Archives as ?promoted to Lieut. of Capt. Arndt?s Company; d. Jan. 14, 1777.? The well-regarded register of officers in the war, by Francis Heitman, [50] apparently agreed with this conclusion of ey death. It gave this entry for Shimer: ?Isaac Shimer (PA), 3d Lt of Baxter?s PA Battalion of the Flying Camp, 9th July 1776; wounded and taken prisoner at Fort Washington, 16th Nov, 1776 and died shortly afterward.? However, a website of the Shimer family said that after the war, Isaac Shimer became a justice of the peace in Williams Township, Northampton County, and that he lived from 1749 to 1838. This suggests he was 27 when the war began and that the reports of his death in early 1777 were exaggerated. [51]
* Jacob Warner, a private, listed in the Archives as having died on January 9, 1777, is shown in the DAR Patriot files as having died in Nazareth in 1820, at the age of 78. He had been born in 1741, and was thus 35 when the war began. [52]
* John Dull, a private, is recorded, as noted above, as having died on January 4, 1777. However, the on-line card file of the Pennsylvania State Archives shows that he was still alive in 1781, when he did another tour of military duty. Conutors to the OneWorldTree program of Ancestry.com said he was born in 1753 and died in 1835, not in 1777. He would have been 23 when the war began. There are 37 members of the DAR who trace their lineage to John Dull, far more than those who claimed Conrad Waltman as a patriot ancestor.
Regarding the officers:
* Colonel Magaw, who was in charge of the entire garrison at Fort Washington, was captured and paroled. Apparently, the conditions were not severe for him. He was a bachelor, and he had time and opportunity to court and marry his future , Marieta van Brundt, the teenage daughter of a prominent Kings County resident. [53]
* Colonel Baxter, who supposedly had charge of Rundio?s company at Fort Washington, was reported by Heitman to have been killed in the battle on November 16, 1776.
* Lieutenant Brown, as noted above, was not released for four years.
* Ensign McDowell, who signed the list of the deceased quoted above, apparently was promoted after being appointed to Captain Rundio?s company. Heitman identified him as captain of Montgomery?s battalion of the Flying Camp, July to December6, and Lieutenant Colonel in the Pennsylvania Militia, 1777-78. It appears he was not captured.
* Captain Rundio was back at home taking the oath of allegiance in Northampton County on August 8, 1777, nine months after the surrender of Fort Washington, which suggests he was not taken prisoner and perhaps did not even participate in thetle. Peter Rundio apparently got the job by default, as noted above, when at age 38, he was appointed captain as a replacement for John Hays. Four years after coming home to take the oath, in 1781, Rundio was recorded as a member of the Northampton County militia, not as a captain but as a drummer, suggesting that leading men into battle was not his forte.
Was Conrad Waltman Involved? No one is known to have claimed that Conrad Waltman was taken prisoner, but if he was present, he may well have been captured, given the reports of the events of November 16. However, one can speculate, if he was captured, may have escaped or been released before Lieutenant Brown was released. If it was the elder Conrad who was involved, it is possible that he was simply enrolled in the battalion and then sent home because of his mental disability, as LaMance claimed, without having participated in any battles. If Conrad Junior was the man mentioned in the Pennsylvania Archives, it is clear that he was back in Northampton County shortly after the battle, at least by the time his son Peter was conceived in May of 1778, six months later, and by the time he was married on September 15, 1778.
Indication that the soldiers in the Flying Camp may have been younger (and therefore that this was the younger Conrad) comes from the testimony of a Frederick Nagel, of Allen Township, who was only 15 in 1776. [54] Although his namepear with Captain Rundio?s company, Nagle clearly came from the same area as the other recruits. Nagle testified in court in 1837, 61 years later, in quest of a pension relating to his service. He said that at that time he came from Allen Township, that in June 1776 he had become a volunteer in the Flying Camp, enlisting in Lehigh Township under Jost Dreisbach. He had marched into Moore Township and joined the company commanded by Captain Nicholas Kern. They in turn joined with other companies in Easton, under the command of Colonel Peter Kichline, and then went to New York.
On August 26, Nagle said, his group joined still other forces and went to Long Island in boats. The next morning, the battle commenced, he said, and the British came so hard that the colonel ordered a retreat. Nagle said he was ta, along with about 700 others, and they were kept in churches and fed on only green apples. About the first of October 1776, they were put on a British ship, the Julianna, and at the end of October, they were offered a release if they would swear that they would not take arms again, but Nagle and several others refused. They were then taken to Halifax, where they remained for more than two years. He was discharged after being released and reaching Windsor. The story of this Flying Camp battalion is similar to that of Captain Rundio?s company, but the event that Nagle described was earlier, on August 26, and the one attributed to Lieutenant Brown was on November 16, 1776. The ship names also differed, although they were similar: Julianna for Nagle in August, and Judith for Brown in November.
Much attention has been given to the prison ships used by the British in the War. One article claimed that ?more Americans died in British prison ships in New York Harbor than in all of the battles of the Revolutionary War. . . . Thholes of filth, vermin, infectious disease and despair. The ships were uniformly wretched . . . .?
Which "Conrad Waltman" was in the Flying Camp?
LaMance was clear she thought it was Conrad Senior who was in the war. She wrote that at that time Conrad?s brain was troubled because of his family difficulties, and that melancholia gripped him. [56] However, she said, ?old as hey, 1776, when he was 61, he joined the Flying Squadron to repulse the British in New Jersey and Long Island. . . . But it was soon evident that there were too many ?wheels? in his head for a soldier, so he was dismissed and sent home.? She concluded that ?the old Count not only joined the army himself, but all eight of his sons served in the Revolutionary War, three sons-in-law, and sixteen grandsons. We doubt if there is another American family that has a record that equals it.? While there may be doubt about Conrad, it appears to be correct that, at least, eight people, possibly all sons of Conrad, served in the military during the war.
In 1926, when LaMance applied for DAR membership on the basis of the patriot status of ?Baron Conrad Waltman,? she justified it by citing the Pennsylvania Archives record. Her application said there were ?27 soldiers from this one frved in the Revolutionary War, a record without equal in the War.?
It was undoubtedly because of LaMance?s claims that ?Ripley?s Believe It or Not,? a popular newspaper cartoon of the mid-1900s, carried a sketch of Conrad Waltman on February 13, 1941. [57] The cartoon, printed in hundreds of newss the country, said this:
Family descendants who accepted these conclusions placed in the Zion Church Cemetery in Kreidersville, about 1986, a metal marker honoring the senior Conrad Waltman (1715-1796). Immediately next to the marker for Conrad is a German-language tobstone and an English-language metal marker for ?Peter Waldmann.? This is the John Peter Waltman, known as ?Peter,? who was a son of Conrad Senior. Conrad would have been 26 when Peter was born. The markers for Conrad and Peter are about 20 yards beyond the southeast corner of the church, and in 2007 each had a bronze marker and an American flag.
Conrad was believed by LaMance and others to have been buried in the same churchyard, but no grave has been located. However, LaMance also said that Conrad?s son John Peter was the one who established the tombstone for his mother but he did not do so for his father because of the grudge between his wife and Conrad, who never accepted the common low status of Peter?s wife. [58] This seems odd, since LaMance also said that Conrad died at the home of Andrew Waltman, who she argued was also a son of Conrad, and if that were true (apparently it is not),one might think that Andrew would have been the one to erect a stone to his father. Family researcher William Fiedler [59] said he understood that Conrad was buried in a pauper?s grave toward the back of the Kreidersville cemetery, but there is no written evidence for this. An expert on the cemetery said that, if Conrad?s name had been found among the stones or records, it would appear in the church record of burials, but it does not. (The ?Burial Record? published by the church said that the committee that compiled the list of burials found 478 ?unknowns.? They were graves with sandstone markers bearing no inscription. Later, when the graveyard was improved, these stones were removed.)
In any event, the marker that honors Conrad is simply a memorial of honor and not a tombstone or a place of burial. Genealogists with the Daughters of the American Revolution said that a study of the men and women buried in the cee Zion Church in Kreidersville, first copied in 1937 and then revised in 1943, did not mention a Conrad Waltman. The same is true of the church?s own list of burials, compiled in 1940.
Although some observers believed that the plaques honoring Conrad and John Peter were placed there by DAR staff, one of the people responsible for installing them, William Fiedler, [60] said that the plaques were requested of the Fedent through the military affairs office of Northampton County. Fiedler and others presented documentation to certify the participation of Conrad Waltman in the Revolution, and the county forwarded this to Washington and obtained the plaques. DAR staff said that, since about 1985, the DAR has required verification of information placed on its cemetery markers. The plaque in honor of Conrad had not been verified with the DAR, and the DAR said it would not verify it in 2006 without further proof of Conrad?s service. In any event, the marker is not a DAR plaque.
It is understood that the documentation submitted to the Northampton County office to justify issuance of the bronze plaque consisted, in part, of submission of the Pennsylvania Archives listing of a ?Conrad Waltman? as a private in lso submitted was a copy of a letter of May 4, 1928, from the Archivist of the Pennsylvania State Library and Museum, certifying that the name of ?Conrad Waltman appears as a Private on a Muster Roll of Captain Rundio?s (Rundis) Company of Northampton County Militia, Flying Camp, 1776, in the War of the Revolution,? and citing the pages in Pennsylvania Archives where the name appeared. [61] Although those who believe this letter certified that Conrad Senior was the one who was in the War, in fact the letter said only that a person by the name of Conrad Waltman was on the roll, and thus it left open to interpretation which of the two Conrads was the one on that list.
Also noteworthy is a large plaque placed in front of the Zion Church in 1931 by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Liberty Bell Chapter of the DAR. [62] It says: ?This tablet is in commemoration of the services of Revolutionarrs buried in Zion?s Stone Church Cemetery, Kreidersville, PA. This marker is dedicated in grateful recognition of their patriotism, valor and fidelity.? The tablet contains 60 names, one of which is ?Peter Waldman, May 9, 1741 ? Nov. 9, 1817.? This is the only Waldman/Waltman on the plaque. There is no Conrad, which suggests either that the compilers of the list did not believe Conrad served in the War or that he is not buried in that cemetery, or both.
Another consideration is the genealogical study of the Bieber/Beaver family, which attributed the military service mentioned in Pennsylvania Archives to the younger Conrad Waltman (1759-1785) but said (incorrectly) that the youngs a son of the immigrant Conrad. The 1939 book, on page 651, in a list of the children of Michael Bieber (1740-1832), said this:
Catherine Bieber, born October 29, 1761. She was confirmed ?Jubilate, 1776? (viz., Lutheran record, Zion?s (Stone) church, Kreidersville, Pa.) m. Sept. 15, 1778, to Conrad Waltman, Jr., b. Feb. 7, 1759, d. Dec. 3, 1785 (viz., Christ church record, Shoenersville, Pa.) Conrad Waltman, Jr., was a son of the Immigrant Conrad Waltman. Conrad Waltman resided in a portion of Northampton Co. designated ?Trockenland,? i.e., dry land, so called because in dry spells it was exceedingly felt, even causing earth to crack. The exact spot is not known to me, but was around Shoenersville or Catasaqua region. [63]
Conrad, Jr., was a Revolutionary War soldier, viz., Penna. Archives, Fifth Series, Vol. III, p. 537, and Vol. XXIII, p. 455. Issue 2 sons and 2 daughters.
Applications to the DAR
The genealogist Margaret Wilkins first applied for membership in the DAR in 1943 based on the assumption that she was descended from Conrad Senior and that he had been a private in the Revolutionary War. She then said her line ran fown through his son Valentine, and Valentine?s son Peter. However, she wrote to the DAR on October 10, 1950, to provide a page of corrections to the LaMance account. Peter was the son of Conrad Junior, she said, and not the son of Valentine. Conrad Junior, according to Wilkins? changed DAR application, was the son of Conrad Senior, and Valentine was not included in her line. (Dorothy Waltman Ware?s application to the DAR in 1978 said the same thing.)
Further, Wilkins wrote in 1950, it was wrong for LaMance to say that ?the old Count not only joined the army himself,? since it was Conrad Junior who had been mentioned in the Pennsylvania Archives and not Conrad Senior. Wilkins? pations was pasted inside the copy of the LaMance book in the DAR library in Washington ? possibly by Wilkins herself ? and it was still there in 2006. The page was also included in the library?s Conrad Waltman patriot file.
Byron Waltman wrote in 1962 that the LaMance claim that Conrad Senior was a member of Washington?s army at the age of 61 had been recorded in the DAR as an error, the name being confused with that of Conrad Junior. The 2003 edition atriot Index included four Waltmans who had been designated as ?patriots? ? Andrew, Conrad Junior, Michael and Peter -- but did not include Conrad Senior. [64]
The record on Conrad Waltman Senior at the DAR Library in 2006 said, in one computer file, ?Patriot Deleted.? A newly established computer file on Conrad Senior was then marked ?FAMPCS? ? Future Applicants Must Prove Correct Services meant was that, although, as of March 2006, the DAR had approved the membership of 17 individuals who based their applications on the presumed participation of Conrad Waltman Senior in the Revolutionary War, it would accept no more unless it was proven that Conrad Senior actually had participated in the War. [65] Nine of these 17 members (including LaMance) had traced their lineage through Andrew Waltman (believing him, apparently erroneously, to be a son of Conrad) , four through his daughter Margaret, one through his son John Peter, one through his son Hiram Michael, and two through his ?son? Conrad Junior (Wilkins and Ware), although it appears that Conrad was not the son of Conrad Senior either.
Following the interaction with Margaret Wilkins, the DAR decided to accept applications based on the participation of Conrad Junior in the war, accepting the view that the Pennsylvania Archives was referring to Conrad Junior and not nior. In 2006, there were four DAR members who had based their applications on the patriot status of Conrad Junior, including Margaret Wilkins (after she revised her application) and Dorothy Ware (both through Joseph Waltman, son of Peter Waltman), genealogist Irene Diehl Konrad, of Florida (through Mary Waltman Meyer, a daughter of Peter), and Pamelia Trupiano Bennett Carter, of Michigan (through Rebecca Waltman Hinckle, another daughter of Peter).
The evidence may be considered inconclusive regarding Conrad Senior?s service in the War, but it would appear very difficult for future DAR applicants to prove that he was in fact the private listed in the Pennsylvania Archives. Thegainst Conrad Senior having been in the War are these:
-- the belief that he was too old at 61 to have joined (even though it has been shown that some men aged 60 and older were involved in the War);
-- the belief that, between two men with the same name, it was more likely that the other Conrad Waltman, then 17, was the actual participant. (Evidence of the participation of 15-year-old Frederick Nagle, above, strengthens this the youthful age of several other members of Capt. Rundio?s company. If the older Conrad had been born in 1705, as argued by those who believe his wife was born in 1708, as written on her tombstone, then he would have been 71 in 1776, clearly beyond military age.)
-- the Beaver genealogy, which clearly says Conrad Junior was the private in the War;
-- the concurrence of later genealogists in these viewpoints;
-- the absence of research findings demonstrating the presence of Conrad Waltman Senior in normal genealogical records;
-- the lack of solid verification for the Kreidersville Cemetery marker asserting that Conrad Senior was the ?Conrad Waltman? who was a private in the War;
-- the decision of the DAR staff to delete Conrad Senior as a ?patriot? and to require further proof before revising that view; and
-- the DAR decision, after considerable research, to allow applicants to base their lineage instead on the military service of Conrad Junior.
DAR officials concede that they are not omnipotent and that the information in a DAR file is not necessarily dispositive of the military status of a presumed patriot. Despite this caveat, it must be said that most of the DAR recordluable in examining the information developed by others in their genealogical research and in providing clues for further examination. The DAR staff clearly has become stricter as time proceeds in regard to the degree of proof it requires. All of the genealogical issues are open to further debate and proof, but it would not be easy to prove a different result for Conrad Senior.
- The Waltman Family of Northampton County, By Neil A. Boyer, 12 Jun 2009
The Genealogical Problems
Genealogists have focused on several major issues relating to the Waltman family:
* First is the question of whether the ?Conrad Waltman? who is recorded as serving as a private in the Revolutionary War was the immigrant Conrad Waltman (1715-1796) or a later Conrad Waltman (1759-1785).
* Second is whether the younger Conrad Waltman (referred to here as Conrad Junior) was a son of the first one. Some believe he was. Some believe he was a son of Valentine Waltman, who was a child of the first Conrad Waltman (Conranior), and that therefore Conrad Junior was a grandson of the first Conrad. LaMance believed the second Conrad Waltman did not exist at all.
* Third is the question of when Valentine Waltman was born, and where. LaMance said he was born in 1742 in America, but genealogist Hannah Roach thought he must have been born before 1733, although this is before the immigrant Conraltman traveled to America in 1738.
* Fourth is whether Peter Waltman (1779-1836) was the son of Valentine Waltman or of Conrad Waltman, Junior.
As will be indicated below, the answers appear to be these:
Conrad Waltman Junior (1759-1785) definitely existed.
Peter Waltman (1779-1836) definitely was the son of Conrad Waltman Junior.
Conrad Waltman Junior probably was the son of Valentine Waltman.
Conrad Waltman Junior (1759-1785) most likely was the ?Conrad Waltman? who was in the Revolutionary Army, and not Conrad Waltman Senior (1715-1796).
Valentine Waltman?s birthdate and birthplace remain a mystery, although he clearly lived in the Schoenersville area, north of Allentown, southeast of Kreidersville.
The whereabouts of Conrad Waltman Senior (1715-1796) during his lifetime remain a mystery. LaMance is the only person to claim evidence of his life, and all of that seems to be hearsay.
- The Waltman Family of Northampton County, By Neil A. Boyer, 12 Jun 2009
The Genealogical Problems
Genealogists have focused on several major issues relating to the Waltman family:
First is the question of whether the ?Conrad Waltman? who is recorded as serving as a private in the Revolutionary War was the immigrant Conrad Waltman (1715-1796) or a later Conrad Waltman (1759-1785).
Second is whether the younger Conrad Waltman (referred to here as Conrad Junior) was a son of the first one. Some believe he was. Some believe he was a son of Valentine Waltman, who was a child of the first Conrad Waltman (Conranior), and that therefore Conrad Junior was a grandson of the first Conrad. LaMance believed the second Conrad Waltman did not exist at all.
Third is the question of when Valentine Waltman was born, and where. LaMance said he was born in 1742 in America, but genealogist Hannah Roach thought he must have been born before 1733, although this is before the immigrant Conraltman traveled to America in 1738.
Fourth is whether Peter Waltman (1779-1836) was the son of Valentine Waltman or of Conrad Waltman, Junior.
As will be indicated below, the answers appear to be these:
Conrad Waltman Junior (1759-1785) definitely existed.
Peter Waltman (1779-1836) definitely was the son of Conrad Waltman Junior.
Conrad Waltman Junior probably was the son of Valentine Waltman.
Conrad Waltman Junior (1759-1785) most likely was the ?Conrad Waltman? who was in the Revolutionary Army, and not Conrad Waltman Senior (1715-1796).
Valentine Waltman?s birthdate and birthplace remain a mystery, although he clearly lived in the Schoenersville area, north of Allentown, southeast of Kreidersville.
The whereabouts of Conrad Waltman Senior (1715-1796) during his lifetime remain a mystery. LaMance is the only person to claim evidence of his life, and all of that seems to be hearsay.
- The Waltman Family of Northampton County, By Neil A. Boyer, 12 Jun 2009
Conrad in America
LaMance contended that Conrad's parents were heartbroken that their son would not return to Bavaria, and several times they sent him small kegs of gold to pay his transportation home. (It is not clear how LaMance knew these details,s no supporting documentation and only her claim that this information was passed down through her family, in particular her mother?s recollections of conversations with her grandmother.) [28] For four years, LaMance said, Conrad flatly refused to leave his commoner wife to return home, and his father Valentine then urged him to bring back the entire family. While they could not be presented to the court or to society, they would be made welcome at home. According to the recollections of LaMance's family, Conrad concluded that he would be humiliated if his family was ignored by the nobility when he returned. But in a spirit of reconciliation with his father, he named his most recent child, born in 1742, Valentine Waltman, after Conrad's own father. (Valentine?s birthdate is in dispute, as will be detailed in the next chapter. Some believe he was born about 1732 and came to America with his parents in 1738. Also, it is possible that Conrad's daughter Eleanor was born in Europe about 1730, and she may also have traveled to America with her parents. These possibilities raise doubts about LaMance's stories of Conrad's flight to America.)
LaMance indicated that Conrad traveled frequently to Philadelphia, basically for the purpose of gambling, but she was unclear about the location of his home. She never actually said the homestead was located in Kreidersville, but r that from her book. Kreidersville is in Allen Township, Northampton County, Pennsylvania, on the border with Lehigh Township. [29] The little village is south of what at one time was Route 45. By 2006, it had been renamed Route 248. The town is about one mile east of the Lehigh River and the border with Lehigh County, about two miles north of the town of Northampton, ten miles north of Allentown, about four miles west of Bath. LaMance said that Conrad?s new home ?was a large but plain log house in a frontier land, with what he considered peasants for neighbors, and occasional Indian visitors dropping in upon him.? It is clear that family members lived near Kreidersville, for they attended Zion (Stone) Church in Kreidersville and the Emmanuelsville church only two miles away. The website of the Dreisbach Family Association at one time contained an interesting history of Zion Stone Church in Kreidersville, with photographs, but the link does not always work. See also this site. (One of Conrad Waltman's daughters, Elizabeth, married a Dreisbach.)
Various records also suggest that the family stayed in different communities, including at least one in Bucks County, possibly before reaching the Kreidersville area, as they journeyed north from Philadelphia, their port of entry, orary basis after reaching the Kreidersville area. There is evidence that they lived in Bucks County in the area around Bedminster, east of Quakertown, during the period 1745-1760. This comes from the baptism record of their daughter Anna Barbara in 1745, the marriage of their daughter Elizabeth in 1758, and the baptism of two sons of Elizabeth in 1759 and 1760. Their son Valentine reportedly married Catherine Br
- The Waltman Family of Northampton County, By Neil A. Boyer, 12 Jun 2009
The Story of the Davy
The LaMance story is that, like many of his Frundsberg ancestors, Conrad fell in love with a commoner, Katherine Bierly, born in 1718 in Bavaria. LaMance said their marriage would have been illegal in Germany, due to the rule of ebr equal birth. ?Royalty could not marry nobility, and nobility could not marry commoners. The Bierlys were commoners.? [17] Both Katherine?s parents, who were very religious, and Conrad?s parents strongly opposed a marriage.
Frustrated by this opposition, in 1738, when she was 20, Katherine and a maid fled to Holland. (Five of her siblings had already sailed to America.) Conrad met Katherine there shortly afterward, and they were married, according to fusing the urgent pleas of his parents to return to Bavaria, LaMance wrote, Conrad took Katherine to Amsterdam, and in July of 1738 they sailed aboard the vessel Davy, commanded by William Patton. [18] On the 25th of October, 1738, they arrived in Philadelphia, and in time traveled northward to the eastern portion of Pennsylvania near what today is Allentown. [19] Conrad signed the list of passengers with an ?X? (his mark). [20] LaMance wrote that, after their arrival in America, ?now Katherine was a legal wife. None too soon, for late in the year she gave birth to twins.? The twins, Katherine and Margaret, were born on Christmas Day, 1738.
The year 1738, when Conrad Waltman sailed, has been reported as a devastating year for trans-Atlantic travel. Large numbers of Germans, especially from the Palatine, converged on Holland anticipating ship transportation to America. ept in holding areas for long periods of time, and many became ill before being sent on to England. Often they were transferred to other ships for the passage across the Atlantic. A newsletter entitled Beyond Germanna [21] has provided some of the ?horror stories of sufferings and death? aboard these ships.
There had been a steady increase in the number of Germans sailing for Philadelphia ? 268 in 1735, 736 in 1736, and 1,528 in 1737, according to a report in this newsletter. Despite this, shippers were not ready for the massive numbs who sought to sail in 1738. The report said that the first wave of Palatines in 1738 reached Dutch territory in April and was sent to a holding area near St. Elbrecht?s chapel below Kralingen. The ships did not begin moving until June, and in the meantime much disease had broken out among the prospective passengers at Kralingen, who were by then called the ?Kralingers.? Exceptional crowding then occurred within the ships. Upon arrival in Philadelphia, the captains of four ships reported the combined deaths of 425 people during the crossing. Another report said that most of the deaths were blamed on dysentery, head sickness and violent fever. A letter dated October 18, 1738, from Philadelphia, a week before the Davy arrived, said that about 1,600 people had died on the 15 ships that had arrived so far that year. Writers in Philadelphia called 1738 the Year of the Destroying Angels.
The Davy, which carried Conrad Waltman, left Amsterdam for Cowes, in southern England, in July, and then crossed the Atlantic, and it was part of this series of ships that was afflicted in this way. One might assume that Conrad Wale his wealth, could have been among the Kralingers who had to face this ordeal. The document cited above, Beyond Germanna, included this paragraph, in part drawn from the Pennsylvania Gazette:
The ship Davy qualified in the port of Philadelphia on October 25th. The next day the Gazette revealed the horrible story of the voyage. The captain, both mates and 160 passengers died at sea. It was the ships carpenter, William Patton, who bought the ravaged vessel up the Delaware. Patton listed 74 men, 47 women and no children as the remaining passengers but only 40 of the men were well enough to come to the courthouse. In this context, the Gazette commented for the first time on the general situation, Most of the Ships which bring Dutch Passengers this Year have been visited with a Sickness that has carried off great numbers.
Most reports of the arrival of the Davy in Philadelphia identified William Patton as the captain, but if the report above is correct, Patton was actually the ship?s carpenter and was only captain by default after the real captain pere are differing reports on how many people were on board the Davy. The report here said a total of 121 ? 74 men and 47 women. The classic book on Pennsylvania German Pioneers, by Strassburger and Hinke, provided lists of the names of immigrants into Philadelphia. It said there were 141 passengers on the Davy, including 94 men and 47 women. Another report listed 95 people on the Davy, all men. [23] Still another said there were 180 passengers, but it provided a list of only 40 names. [24] If the account above is correct, these 40 might have been the ones who were well enough to go to the courthouse to take the oath of allegiance. Of these, one was ?Conrad Waldman,? and he was one of 18 who signed with an ?X? and had their names written by a clerk.
Where was Katherine? LaMance contended that Conrad Waltman?s wife, Katherine Bierly Waltman, journeyed to America with him aboard the Davy. But did she? There is no Katherine on any list of the Davy?s passengers. There are only m
Normally, the absence of female names on a ship?s passenger list would not be surprising, since it was the practice in the mid-1700s that these lists contained the names of only the males over age 16. It was much later in that centun and children were regularly included in the lists. However, the organization ProGenealogists, a family history research group in Utah, has begun to publish on its website passenger lists from this period that include some names of women and children, [25] and it has published a list for the Davy that includes women. Its website in early 2006 said the Davy carried a total of 141 -- 94 men and 47 women. Its list included the names of children aged as young as six months, which would indicate that the Gazette quotation above (?no children?) was not correct. It also included names of female passengers. Most interesting was that its list of females on the Davy did not include ?Katherine Waldman? or any other ?Katherine? (except for two unrelated children with their parents), nor did it include any ?Bierly.? This raised the question of whether Conrad and Katherine actually sailed on the Davy together, whether they ran to Holland and then together to Philadelphia, as LaMance said.
The ProGenealogists explanation of its inclusion of the names of some women and children, and the non-listing of others, is that its lists began with the Strassburger and Hinke lists of males over 16 and then added women and childrent only to the extent that accepted research by other genealogists had verified that those women and children had been aboard. No official record exists of all the passengers on the ships, and ProGenealogists has said its list, at best, would be only be partial in regard to women and children and most likely never complete. Thus far, there is no proof that Katherine Bierly Waltman was on the ship, or that she wasn?t.
LaMance reported [26] that in the period 1725-32, four Bavarian brothers and a sister ? all named Bierly ? traveled to America. She said they left behind another sister, Katherine Bierly, the one who married Conrad Waltman. [27] Thcount that Conrad and Katherine traveled together may be correct, but it may also be possible that Katherine went to America with her brothers and met Conrad Waltman there. Perhaps later research will confirm that Katherine was on the Davy with Conrad. Perhaps it may also address the suggestion (in the next chapter) that Valentine Waltman, a son of Conrad and Katherine, was born a number of years before the 1738 sailing of the Davy, and the possibility that he may have traveled to America as a child. Currently, there is no record of Valentine either traveling to America or being born in America.
- Was of German nobility. His wife Katherine lived on the Waltman estate, but was not of nobility. They married in Holland, so there marriage was not recognized in Germany as legal. They came to America in 1737, and had a large family, but Katherine had to take over almost all of the work, as work was "beneath" Conrad. He considered the
residents peasents. He entertained himself by gambling but he usally lost everything he had. He was the only heir in the family and his parents kept begging him to return home, but he wouldn't leave Katherine. They sent him money, which he gambled away. Eventually the family estate in Germany went to the 'Crown.' Conrad's favorite son, Nicholas, was killed in the American Revolution
and this unsettled his mind to such an extent that he never recovered, for many years he was incurably insane. Katherine took care of him as long as she lived, then the youngest son did. All eight of his sons served in the American Revolution. Also during the Revolution two well known vistors stayed with there old friend Conrad Waltman, they being; Baron Johann DeKalb and Baron Von Steuben, who where stationed at Valley Forge for the winter.
|
1705 - 1796 (91 years)
: Address
: Location
: City/Town
: County/Shire
: State/Province
: Country
: Not Set