In 2005, I tried to identify the parents of Robert T Hunter, knowing his age and also knowing that he consistently said he had been born in Missouri and typically said in Census that both his parents had also been born in Missouri. The problem is the name Robert Hunter, or even Robert T Hunter, cannot be considered anywhere near a unique name.

Nonetheless, I found the household of William W Hunter, age 46, born Jan 1854 living in Kansas City, Jackson County, Missouri in 1900. He was born in Missouri, his father in North Carolina, his mother Missouri. His occupation was given as motorman. His wife was Susie, age 33, born Feb 1867. She was born in Missouri and both her parents in Germany. Their children were listed this way and in this order: Jessie 18 (a daughter), Vancie 13 (a son), Leo Donaldson age 11 described as William’s step-son, Robert born Jun 1893 and Willie age 3.

So this household checked all the boxes including the specificity of the Jun 1893 birth for Robert, still I wished there was some other way to know for sure it was the right Robert Hunter and so I put William W into my report as Robert’s dad, but hedged a little. At the time, I also looked for William in any record after 1900 and finding none suggested he might have died not too long after that 1900 Census. I also made an attempt to identify him in some earlier census living with his parents but there was simply too little to go on to get anywhere in that attempt.

I also felt I could “interpret” the interesting order of the children in William’s household. From experience, I knew from the order the children were reported, with Leo in the middle of them rather than last, it very likely indicated that William had had a first wife with whom he had Jessie and Vancie and that Susie likely was William’s second wife and she had previously been married to Mr. Donaldson by whom she had Leo and then Robert and Willie were the sons of William and Susie. (So first were William’s children, next Susie’s and then the children they had together.) Oh, by the way, in the space used to report each adult’s occupation, for both Vancie and Leo it said “at school”.

Fast forward to 2020 and me looking for Floyd Hunter (Mary Ellen’s father). I basically stumbled upon William and Susie in 1910, in California — the whole family had moved. The database I search, of course, looking for people in Census, is a transcription by someone of the original handwritten Census pages and while I can look at the page and see the name written as Hunter, I can also see how someone else might have read the name as Huetter — and that is the way it had been transcribed on Ancestry.com. Which explains why I never found it before as well I didn’t have any reason to think the whole family had moved.

So, in 1910, we find William T (it really was T, the W in 1900 was a one-time error) Hunter (Huetter as transcribed), age 56, a motorman on a street railway, living in Los Angeles with Susan age 43, Leo D C Donaldson 21 and three Huetter children: Robert 15, William J 13 and Irene L 4. Irene was born in California, all other birthplaces were consistent with what was reported in 1900. We also learn that William and Susie had been married 28 years and she had had a total of five children of which four survive (obviously the four living in this household).

It is the presence of Leo Donaldson in this household plus everyone being basically about 10 years older than as stated in 1900 and the consistency of the stated birthplaces that makes it totally obvious it is the same group of people.

But the problem is Robert — who now I think I have found living with his parents and also living by himself. That shouldn’t be. In his father’s household, he is age 15 and his occupation is an apprentice in the drug industry. The family lives on Hawthorne St. And in the listing of him by himself he was also age 15 and listed as a drug salesman and he lived a few blocks down (or up?) Hawthorne Street. So I believe Robert was reported twice and perhaps was in transition from living at home to living on his own.

And now that I knew where to look, I was able to track the William Hunter family past 1910. In 1920, we find William — his name listed as T Will by the Census taker and transcribed as F Will by Ancestry — age 65, a streetcar motorman, living in Los Angeles with Susie 52 and L Irene 13. And there is a memorial for William T Hunter on find-a-grave which says he was born in 1854 and died in 1938 and was buried in Inglewood Park Cemetery in Inglewood, CA. He is linked on find-a-grave to Susan Hunter (1866-1925) in the same cemetery.

William should have been reported in the 1930 Census since he lived to 1938 but, at first, I couldn’t find him. Understand, since Susan had died in 1925, unless William was living with a grown child, he would be hard to recognize.

But the real question then became where was he in 1880 and before that because now I wanted to identify William’s parents? Ancestry has this way of pointing to different records for someone you have just found in some specific record sort of suggesting it may be the same person. They use the person’s name, obviously, as one way to propose the linkage but I think they also use all the family trees people build on Ancestry and which different records are attached to one specific person in their tree. Essentially, the person who built that tree thought the record being suggested pertained to the same person. (Of course, they might be wrong.)

Two records suggested by Ancestry as possibly being the same William Hunter are these:

In the 1880 Census, William T Hunter age 26 lived in Jackson Township, Johnson County, MO with wife Mary E 25 and Emma K 5, Martha J 3 and Elcie C 5 months.

And in 1870, a young William T Hunter, age 16, lived with his (presumed) parents and siblings in the same place, Jackson Township. The head of household in 1870 was Richard Hunter 41, his wife was Elizabeth J 40 and they had seven children total including son William T and daughter Martha J age 3.

Great! But was William T in 1880 the same William T in 1870 (well they did live in the same place) but maybe even more importantly was the William T in 1880, a farmer, in Johnson County the same as William W in 1900 in Jackson County, a motorman? (Note there was a Jackson Township in Johnson County and separately a Jackson County. Kansas City, Missouri is in Jackson County. Johnson County is the very next county from Jackson moving southeast.)

A real problem for this particular analysis is the fact that there is no 1890 Census. They took a Census in 1890 but it has been lost in its entirety. William in 1880 was married to Mary and had three young daughters. By 1900 (twenty years later), those three daughters could well have married and were then living with their own family or perhaps had died and so we find William, now with second wife Susie, and what appeared to be two children born after 1880 and before his first wife died. There was no carry-through from 1880 to 1900 except William, but was it the same William?

If it was the same William in Johnson County in 1880 as the William in Jackson County in 1900, then 1890 would tell the story. We would expect to find some or all of his children — by his first wife — from both the 1880 and 1900 Census all in the same household. It would be a slam dunk, but, alas, no 1890 Census exists.

So I clearly needed to find a way to connect these two families as a way to know if it was the same William in 1880 and 1900 and then if I could accomplish that to next consider how to find some substantiating evidence it was the same William in 1870 and 1880. I decided to see what I could find on both sets of children, the three daughters in 1880 and Jessie and Vancie from 1900.

I started with Vancie. When I first saw his name in the 1900 Census, I assumed his name really was Vance and the Census taker had somehow snuck that “i” into his name. But it really was Vancie and that is pretty much a unique name.

In 1910, there was only one Vancie Hunter living in California, his name Vancie O Hunter age 21 born in Missouri as was his father and mother and he lived in Los Angeles. There were, to be sure, other Vance Hunters but only this one Vancie and everything fits. His wife was Nellie and there is a California marriage record of V O Hunter age 18 marrying Nellie I Leahy in 1888 in Los Angeles. His death is listed in the California Death Index, born 17 Nov 1887 in Missouri died 21 Jul 1957 in L.A., his mothers maiden name said to be McCullough.

But now the story gets quite interesting. In the 1900 Census in Missouri, there was just one Vancie Hunter, the one living with William and Susie but there was also a Vance Hunter, but only one of them statewide, his name given as Vance O Hunter. Remember, William and Susie were living in Kansas City in 1900 and son Vancie was reported in their household said to be born in Nov 1887 and said to be “at school.” Remember, the guy I think may have been William in 1870 and 1880 was living in those years in Jackson Township, Johnson County and in 1870 had a sister Martha E age 3 in 1870.

So isn’t it interesting that Vance O Hunter, born in Nov 1887, was living with Martha E McCullough said to be age 33 (but also said to have been born in Jan 1876) in Jackson Township, Johnson County. People’s relationship to the head of household was stated and Vance was said to be the nephew of Martha’s husband (so her nephew too). Also present in the household was Elizabeth J Hunter age 70 said to be Martha’s husband’s mother-in-law.

Everything all came together, thank you Vancie! A few comments:

• Like Robert T Hunter in 1910, I think Vancie was reported in two different places in 1900. It might seem that should be what I call a “discordant note” — a sign that it wasn’t the same person. But I think there was a certain ambiguity in those Censuses. Vancie was a member of William’s household and would be coming home, let’s say when the school term ended, so was reported in Kansas City but I think he really was, on the day the Census was taken, living with his aunt and attending school back where he used to live.
• I first thought Martha E was really Vancie’s sister, the girl known as Martha J in 1880 age 3 not even thinking of Martha E, William’s sister, who was age 3 in 1870. And there is that age discrepancy where she said she was born in Jan 1876 and was age 33. But the stated nephew relationship convinced me this was Martha E and so I guess she was born in Jan 1866 and someone’s arithmetic was faulty.
• Isn’t the McCullough name interesting? The same name given on Vance’s California death record as the maiden name of his mother. (Given by someone else, not Vancie.) I think his mother’s maiden name really was McMahan but I can understand perhaps the source of the error.
• There’s still a small gap. I think Vancie provides the evidence that William T was Richard and Elizabeth’s son and he connects William back to Johnson County. But I would still like to find something more to connect William’s 1880 family to his 1900 family. I thought I had found that when I thought Vancie was living with his older sister, Martha, but it was his aunt instead.
Let me just throw out some other findings:

• William and Mary E had a daughter Emma K in 1880, age 5. The Social Security Application of Emma Viola Curry says she was born in Pittsville, J Missouri (I think the J stood for Johnson County) in 1874 and her parents were William T Hunter and Mary E McMahan. She is buried in Jackson County, MO. Her find-a-grave memorial links her to her mother’s memorial — Mary E (McMahon) Hunter who died in 1889 and was buried in Johnson County.
• Also linked to Mary E as her mother is Elsie C Hunter (1880-1892) buried in Jackson County, MO and it says there she was born in Pittsville, Johnson County.
• And Jessie May (Hunter) Leming (1881-1952) is also linked to Mary E as her mother (though not linked to any father). Jessie was buried in Riverside County, CA. We actually know her as William’s daughter Jessie in 1900 then May Leming in the 1910 Census when she was living with her brother Vancie and said to be his divorced sister.
• The California death record of Jessie May Leming says she was born in 1881 in Missouri, her maiden name was Hunter and her mother’s maiden name was McMahon.
• There is a Johnson County, Missouri marriage record of Mary Mcmahan to William Hunter, they married in Sep 1874.
• There is a Jackson County, Missouri marriage record of William T Hunter to Mrs. Susan Donaldson, they married 7 Feb 1892. (Remember, Mary died in 1889).
So I think the evidence is quite strong. Vancie connects the William T Hunter family to Johnson County (MO), Jackson County (MO) and Los Angeles. His California death record says his mother was McCullough which actually was his sister’s married name but you can understand how someone who actually knew a lot about Vancie confused McCullough with McMahan. And Vancie connects the William T Hunter family of these three places to the Richard and Elizabeth Hunter family of Johnson County.

And Jessie clearly connects William W Hunter of 1900 living in LA with wife Susie to William T Hunter of 1880 living with wife Mary E. She was Jessie Hunter daughter of William in 1900, May Leming sister of Vancie Hunter in 1910 and Jessie May Leming a California woman born in Missouri to a woman whose maiden name was McMahan.

And then almost as an afterthought, I found this: William T Hunter age 72 born Missouri married Beatrice E Brassen age 48 in Los Angeles 18 Mar 1926 (remember Susie had died in 1925) and that marriage record gave the names of William’s parents as Richard T (born NC) and Elizabeth (McKinney) Hunter. It was the third marriage for both Richard and Beatrice. That led to finding William in 1930, he and Beatrice lived in LA. William was a gateman for a steel company.

So I ended up compiling a good bit of information on William’s first wife, Mary E McMahan. But she was not Robert T Hunter’s mother, that was Susan Speck.

There is no question her maiden name was Speck. She and William had a daughter L Irene. Her name was Irene Lucy (or maybe Lucy Irene). There is a California Birth Index record for her giving an 18 Jan 1906 birth (consistent with her age in Census) and saying her mother’s maiden name was Speck. There is also a California Death Index for Irene Lucy England (she married Spencer England) which gives that same birth date and says her father’s surname was Hunter and her mother’s maiden name Speck. She died 26 Jan 1988. (The Social Security Death Index has that same birth date and says she died 22 Jan 1987.) So there is some small discrepancy as to her date of death, but no matter, both her birth and death record given her mother’s maiden name as Speck.

There is a Jackson County, MO marriage record of Susie Speck 26 Apr 1886 to William Donaldson. She was 19. And, of course, when she married William T Hunter (as Mrs. Susan Donaldson), that marriage also took place in Jackson County (in 1892).

Susie consistently said in Census that she was born in Missouri and both her parents in Germany. So when I found that in the 1880 Census in Jackson County, Susan Speek born 1867 (consistent with her age in later Censuses) lived with her mother Catherine age 43 and that Catherine was born in Saxony (Germany), I felt that must be Susie’s mother. But I know nothing more about Catherine or the first name of Susie’s father.