Monday, January 1, 2018

Gold Tom vs Saltiel

There are many interesting yet informative side stories to the Cotopaxi Colony.  As a historian, we need to review all of them.  As a genealogist, family relationships are critical to understanding history.

While I was in Israel this past spring I found several documents at the National Library.  One of them was a 39 page hand-written court document.  Keep in mind what I brought back was at the least a copy of a copy.  The first 22 pages have been transcribed below.  At page 23, the handwriting changed and I can only transcribe about every 3rd word at this point.  I need to see if I can find the original document which would now be archived in Denver....and in order to do that I must first research what "box" it might be stored in.  That will be a project for this summer when it is warmer and I can travel easier.

In the meantime, the first 22 pages do give us some interesting clues into the history of Saltiel's residence in Cotopaxi:

1)  It appears now that the "dwelling house" was built by Henry Thomas (Gold Tom)

I think everyone has always assumed that Saltiel built the house that we know of today as Vic Miller's place.  But this document shows us that he bought the house that was built by Henry Thomas.  That is definitely a historical change!

Note the term "dwelling house".  In England, in the mid to late 1800s, homes there were identified by using the term "dwelling house".  In all of the documents that I have found, the house that Saltiel (who grew up in London) lived in at Cotopaxi was identified as a "dwelling house".  It is marked as such on the earliest plot maps.

I had often wondered how Saltiel could have built this house so fast....yet taken so much time to have the homes for the Colonists built.  The explanation would be that he, Saltiel, did not build it.

2)  That this "dwelling house" was occupied by Saltiel and 2 young children as of Dec, 1881.

This makes sense. Saltiel had filed for divorce from  Elizabeth and sent her back to NYC.  The records tell us that was in Feb, 1881.  I had previously thought that only the oldest son remained in Cotopaxi.  Now I believe it might have been both of the sons and that she would have taken their daughter, the youngest, with her to NYC.

This still leaves the question as to who cared for these children.  My previous research shows that they were quite young....the 2 boys were ages 9 and 7 in the 1880 census.  Did they attend school?  Was there a school in Cotopaxi in 1880?  Did they travel with Saltiel when he went to NYC?  Did they stay in Cotopaxi and if so who kept watch over them?

3)  That Saltiel purchased it from Thomas on 11/24/1880.

I have this declaration of Saltiels's homestead dated 11/29/1881 and filed 7/17/1882.



4) That this lawsuit precludes this house and personal property in it.



5) The feud between Gold Tom and Saltiel began as early as 1878, which is the earliest we find Saltiel in Cotopaxi and this document gives further evidence to the fact that Gold Tom was already there, had already established mines in the area and was looking to sell them to Saltiel.


I will be posting more evidence of this ongoing battle between Gold Tom and Saltiel over this same $1500 issue that did not end until 2 weeks after Gold Tom was shot and killed in May, 1884.


In transcribing this document, if you see a row of dots......that means there are words or a word in there that I could not determine so I had to leave it out.

There may be misspelled words, but I transcribed it as it was written in 1881.

Because the original document is 39 pages, I am not including it here.

The court number might be 655.

 For this particular court case, there was a temporary injunction staying all proceedings  dated Dec 16, 1881.   But I'll give you a clue....the end result is that the courts found in favor of Gold Tom, awarded ALL of Saltiel's property to him in January 1884.  It's an interesting trail to follow and I'll be posting more in the days to come.

Here's the first 23 pages of this court case as I have transcribed it:
No 633. Term W 45Cotopaxi Placer Mining Co, et als.vsB. J. Shaffer…Henry HThomas et alt.1881 Dec 16 filed…..clerk
Filed in my office
July 28th 1882
JJattorney …
J….D Freeman sol.
State of Colorado
Fremont County
In District Court
6th District
Dec  1881
The bill of Complaint of the “Cotopaxi Placer Mining Company, E. H. Saltiel, Chas L Henchman, Walter Henchman and Wm Wagner
vs
B. F. Shaffer Sheriff Fremont County, Henry Thomas, A. Macon, J. S. Cox and Macon & Cox Attorneys at Law, all of Fremont County.
Complainants state that said Defendants or some of them have caused an execution at Law in favor of said Defendant Henry Thomas vs Complainant Saltiel on the following property not belonging to said Saltiel to wit, six Ballard Carbines, one Rifle, one Office writing desk, one dwelling house 36 by 32 feet situate in said County of Fremont at Cotopaxi.
That said levy and seizure of said property was made on the 22nd day of November AD 1881 by the Sheriff of Fremont County at the instance and request of Dependents or some of them, a copy of which levy was published as advertisement in the “Reporter”, a Newspaper published at Canon City, Colorado on the    day of    AD 1881, a copy of which advertisement is herewith filed and made part hereof as Exhibit No. 1 to this complaint.  The execu….described this advertisement is in case of Henry Thomas vs E. H. Saltiel…is on ….case of record.  That all the time of said levy and seizure all of said property belongs to and was the property of Complainant said “Cotopaxi Placer Mining Company” and still remains the property of said Mining Company except the dwelling house, which on the 24th day of November last in consideration of $1500 was sold to Complainant Saltiel as a homestead and occupied and claimed on that day by said Saltiel as a Homestead for himself and family of two minor children of said Saltiel as the head of a family and said sale of said dwelling house as a Homestead and the same as such Homestead was duly recorded on the book 13 page 386 of the books of the Recorder of said County at the Clerks Office in said County of Fremont and is by Law exempt from levy and sale by execution at Law as Complainants are informed velieve and so charge said dwelling is not worth more than the sum of nineteen hundred dollars - that the book case and dining or extension table levied on is the property of said Saltiel and are not worth to exceed one hundred dollars, and so exept from levy and sale under said execution.
Complainants further state said Saltiel has no interest in the Cotopaxi Mines levied on by said execution, but that the same belong entirely to other parties.  Seven Eights of said mines are owned by Chas B. Lamb and as ……for Wm J. Palmer, R. H. Lamborn, H. H. Dunforth and one eighths by Charles S. Henchman, Walter Henchman and Wm Wagner.
Complainant Saltiel further states that the pretended Execution under which said levy or seizure were made by said Defendants is fraudulent and void and of no force in Law or Equity because of the fraudulent procurement of the same as follows to wit
In the year 1878 Complainant Saltiel was a mine operator and dealer in mines in the State of Colorado and as such said Defendant Thomas corresponded with said Saltiel in reference to the sale of certain mines and mining property claimed by said as Cotopaxi in Fremont County, and offered said property for sale to said Saltiel by several letters written to said Saltiel by said Thomas two of which bear date at Texas Creek Fremont County Colorado.  Feb 1878 and another dated as above Feb 28th, 1879 and a third dated Jan 10th 1879, a fourth March 10th Post marked March 11th 1879, describing said property and offering  the same for sale at $2500 copies of which letters are herewith filed as Exhibits No 2, 3, 4, & 5 and made part of this Complaint.
On the 18th of March 1879 Complainant Saltiel being at St Louis Mo in the said representation of Defendant Thomas accepted the offer of said Thomas by letter of that date in reply to the said letters of said Thomas and especially to his said letter of Mar 10 1879 Postmarked Mar 11, 1879 saiyn, “I will give you the $2500 for the property if it is at all satisfactory”xxxxxx”You can rely on my purchasing your property if we can agree on date of purchase”.  Said letter is herewith filed as Exhibit No 6. hereto and made part hereof which offer of $2500 said Thomes by letter accepted on the 3rd of April 1879.  Said Defendant further replied:
“Dear Sir______I have just received yours of April 3rd.  I shall not let any one else have the property for less than $5000.  So you see I am waiting on you and will wait until the time named in yours”  which letter is filed marked Exhibit No 7.  On the      day of October 1879 Said Thomas again wrote Saltiel on the same subject saying “he was locating some good looking ground on the other side of the river and wanted to set Charlie (a messenger of said Saltiel) at work to finish an assessment hole in your interest to day, but he is leaving.  I have sunk it 4 feet and you would have to sink only 6 feet further” meaning said Thomas had to locate said property and sunk said assessment hole for Complainant Saltiel by reason of said contract for the sale of all the said interests of said Thomas, in and about Volcano Mountain and Cotopaxi to said last named letter is filed herewith as exhibit No 8.
ON teh 10th of April 1879 said Saltiel wrote said Thomas from St Louis Mo in further execution of said contract inclosing a deed of said property and describing the same to be executed by said Thomas to said Saltiel and also an agreement to be signed by said Thomas - said deed and said agreement to be deposited by said Thomas in a Bank at Pueblo and to be delivered to said Saltiel on the payment at the said Bank of said $2500 for account of said Thomas on or before the 10th day of May 1879.  Copies of said letter, deed and agreement are herewith filed marked Exhibit 9, 10, & 11.
Not receiving any reply to this letter, Complainant Saltiel left St Louis and went to Canon City Colorado when he wrote to said Thomas another letter on the 30th day of June 1879 authorizing said Thomas to draw on said Saltiel for $2000 payable at St Louis see Exhibit No 12, and not hearing from this letter again wrote on the 3rd day of July 1879.  Sending the same by a special messenger “Charley” and making another offer of $500 cash and $1500 to be paid out of any profits that may arise from sales of ores or the reduction or ores from the mines sold by the said Thomas to the said Saltiel, but all such profits shall be exactly in equal proportions to both parties - thus, if one thousand dollars only is made the first year, then said Thomas shall receive only the first year five hundred dollars, and so on in the same manner until such total fifteen hundred dollars is fully paid up.  In witness whereof I have hereto set my hand and seal this 30th day of July AD 1879.
Emanuel H. Saltiel
Which letter and proposed agreement are filed as Exhibit 13 & 14 and made part hereof.
Said proposal was a mere mode of paying the $2500 purchase money
……(line cut of by copy machine)…..
2nd payment of $1000 cash $1500 to be paid from the proceeds of the ores to be taken from the mines previously sold to Saltiel for $2500.  The receipt of these propositions was never acknowledged by said Thomas nor was the same ever accepted by him.  On the contrary he held to the original contract of $2500 and no consideration or credit ever passed from said Thomas to said Saltiel for said proposal 13 & 14 the said Thomas retaining the same as part of his correspondence with said Saltiel and for no other purpose or motive known to said Saltiel.
In the mean time said Saltiel was making preparation to pay the said purchase money agreed upon of $2500 and to erect works for the reduction of the ores of said mines and to that end obtained the cooperation of a Capitalist and Constructor of said works and machinery for smelting and reducing said ores to whom said Saltiel sold a half interest in said mines and thereupon in consideration of …..benefits….consideration of the sum of fifteen hundred dollars in cash and one thousand dollars to be subsequently paid or accounted for in other dealings with said Thomas the latter at the request of Saltiel on the 31st day of July 1879 made a deed of said property to said Saltiel & Harrison.
The nominal consideration for said deed was $10,000 but the real consideration was that of the original contract $2500 and of this fact said Thomas was fully informed at the time said deed was made.  Said deed is filed as Exhibit 15 hereto.
And thereupon thereafter other dealings occurring between said Thomas and said Saltiel and said Saltiel having expended and advanced a considerable sum of money for said Thomas at his request for a gun amunition supplies & implement on or about the 21st day of April 1881 said Thomas and said Saltiel met at the Ranch of said Thomas near said mine and accounted together of and concerning all of their said dealings about said mine and other properties, guns, implement supplies money advanced to said Thomas who was in want and obliged to borrow money of said Saltiel as admitted by him in his said letters to said Saltiel (ex 13 & 14) and thereupon it was agreed that said Thomas, in consideration of one thousand dollars should make to said Saltiel two deeds conveying to said Saltiel the properties, rights and interests therein described, real, personal and mixed and deliver up to said Saltiel all the……. of title to the same, location certificates of mines and proposed agreements not consumated, all of which were forever concluded by said deeds.  Said deeds were drawn and agreed upon by and between said parties at the Ranch of said Thomas in Fremont Co, and it was then further agreed that siad parties should take the Railroad nearby and go to Canon City before Orson G. Stanley, notary public, where the aid Thomas would acknowledge the execution of said deeds and deliver the same together with said other …..of title to said mines and mining properties and said pretended agreements to said Stanley for the use of said Saltiel and the said Saltiel agreed to delivery to said Stanley a sight draft on a Bank in Colorado Springs for $1000.00 payable to the order of said Thomas, all of which was done in Ex 16, 17, & 18.
Said Stanley delivered the sight draft for $1000.00 and said Thomas acknowledged and delivered said two deeds and delivered location certificates no Colo 7 but fraudulently failed to deliver said pretended agreement of Feb 30th 1879, and said Stanley not knowing that said pretended agreement was in existence and the same being fraudulently and falsely secreted and with-held from him, accepted the deeds and location certificates and paid the money by the draft of $1000.00, which was paid by the Bank to Thomas.
And there-upon said Thomas expressed to Stanley his entire satisfaction with said settlement saying he had been paid for all his mines and mining property so sold to said Saltiel, and intended to leave Colorado and prospect in New Mexico and else-where
Said Saltiel and said Thomas were met at their request by said Stanley at the depot of the D&RGRWCo and the said agreement of final settlement made known to said Stanley there, who acted for both parties in what he did in the premises and Saltiel continued his journey eastward on said Railroad in the full confidence that said Thomas would deliver all the said papers including said …….agreement, and said Saltiel never knew that said paper had been withheld nor that said Thomas had claimed any right or titles to the same as an obligation,  for value of said Saltiel until he was sued on the same in the county court of Fremont County by said defendants as hereafter stated.
Complainant Saltiel has recently been informed, believes and charges that said Thomas, after he had received said $1000 from said Stanley told said Stanley he still held said …….agreement for $1500 and offered to sell ……….Stanley refused to accept  That same thereafter said Thomas proposed to said Stanley as a lawyer to assign to said Stanley a half interst in said pretended claim if said Stanley would sue upon said claim and procure judgement theron, which said Stanley refused as said proposed contract was in violation of the laws of Colorado prohibiting maintenance and obtaining money under false pretenses, that after said corrupt offers of said defendant Thomas to said Stanley were made and rejected said Saltiel, while enroute on the rail road from Cotopaxi to New York was intersepted and served with a summons in a ……..to be a…..by said Henry Thomas ….said …..based …said …..claim, which in it face was without consideration.  ………….
which record of said suit in the County court of Fremont County is refered to as of record in said Court and made part hereof.
That at the time said summons in said case was served on said Saltiel, he was on his way by rail to the City of New York on mining business of great importance to himself an d others whose rights of property to a large amount he represented in commercial and financial circles in said City of New York and was compelled to be there, and could not remain to personaly superintend the defense of said action but afterwords retained said Orson G. Stanley, an attorney at Law at Canon City to attend to the same, and file his, Saltiel’s, answer thereto.  Supposing said Stanley from his knowledge of the aforesaid settlement between Thomas and Saltiel would be able to make the proper defense and further reposing confidence in said Thomas that he would not falsely testify that said pretended agreements such as was a bonafide agreement 
(another row cut off by copy machine)
unpaid.  The Stanley not understanding said agreement of settlement in all its particulars as heretofore stated filed an answer for said Saltiel to said suit on said pretended agreement not fully con…said Saltiels defence as by reference thereto will moe fully appear and when the trial of said case came on for hearing before said County Court said Saltiel was so severely ill in the City of New York that he could not leave nor return to said Canon City to attend said trial, and so was from such sickness compelled to rely on the contents of said deed of April 21st 1880 and the honesty of said Thomas to tell the truth about his fradulent possession and holding of said paper in all of which said Saltiel was deceived by said Thomas, the said Thomas appearing by agreement with Macon & Cox as a sole witness for himself and said defendants in said case and testified as Saltiel is in………..valuable consideration in Law and in fact and that the same remained due and unpaid and that said Saltiel had received $10,000 in the….sold said mines and ores refered to in said pretended agreement, and put it out if the power of said Thomas to enforce his pretended lien on the ores of said mines described in said agreement and also that said Thomas testified at the instance and request of said Macon and Cox to all other matters and things necessary to insure a recovery on said pretended agreement.  While said Macon & Cox on their part by said Macon made affidavit as of his own knowledge to the contents of their complaint and that said sum of $1500.00 claimed thereby was due and remained wholly due and unpaid and also made another affidavit of the same import for an attachment against the property of said Saltiel which the said defendants fraudulently obtained and levied on the property of said Saltiel…….were had by said defendents in said case that on the said false testimonies of said Thomas in the absence of said Saltiel a judgement was rendered by said County Court in said case against said Saltiel for $1500 and costs of the suit.
That thereupon said Counsel o f said Saltiel aided by John D. Freeman - additional counsel employed by said Saltiel at a cost of $250.00 moved the court for a new trial of said case which motion with the affidavits of said O. G. Stanley and said Freeman then filed on the reason of said motion and were all sufficient as said Saltiel is advised believes and charges to require of said Court the granting of said new trial.
Nevertheless the said motion by the procurement of said defendents Macon and Cox was overruled and a new trial erroneously refused and appealed from by said Saltiel as of which papers….and the record thereof are herby referred to as of the record therein and made part hereof.
That only   days were given to said Saltiel to file his appeal bond in said case - that within the time limited by the Court said Saltiel filed a good and sufficient bond in said case for said appeal but on the objection of said Macon & Cox said bond was refused and by agreement between said Macon & Cox and said Saltiel the latter was allowed additional tim to get another good name as surety for said bond, which said Saltiel procured and filed said bond in said Court on the    day of   1881 there being no special time agreed upon within which said additional security should be obtained & filed the said Macon & Cox professing that good security was all that they desired and so complainant charges that he obtained said additional security and filed said bond and that the same was filed within a reasonable time and that defendants were not injured by said delay.
In the meantime the said Macon & Cox not regarding their said agreement in reference to said additional security ordered out an Execution on said judgement so fraudulently obtained and had the same levied on the property of said Saltiel and the other complainants as herein before stated and said Macon & Cox also …..to be issued a writ of garnishment on said judgement - garnisheeing and attaching in the hands of one Chas. B. Lamborne a debt of about $22,00000 more due by said Lamborne to said Saltiel which garnishment was Executed on said Lamborn before said other property had been levied on by said defendants thus making an excessive levy of $20,000.00 or more and complainant Saltiel fur-states that since the making of said levy on said property. 
(cut of by copy machine)
came from his Ranch near Cotopaxi in Fremont Co where he resides & made corrupt proposals to one of more attorneys in said Canon City offering them one half of all that they could recover of said Saltiel by suit at Law on said pretended agreement with said Thomas to testify in the case so as to procure judgement on for said sum of $1500.00 and said attorney or attorneys to bring the suit and prosecute the same to find judgement and be responsible for costs in the same.
That one or more of said attorneys so applied to by said Thomas refused to accept a retainer on these terms but that said defendents Macon & Cox were lastly applied to by said Thomas proposing the same or similar terms to them which they accepted.  And thereupon a contract was entered into as complainant Saltiel is informed believes and charges whereby said Macon & Cox in their character at a firm of practicing attorneys at Law in consideration that said Thomas assigned to them a half interest in said pretended agreement and the proceeds of the same after judgement therein to be obtained by them they the said Macon & Cox as Attorneys at Law would institute suit on the same and prosecute said suit to judgement and Execution theron and the seizure and sale of the property of said Saltiel to satisfy the same and all costs thereon.  And that said Thomas on is par undertook to testify in the case in substance that said pretended agreement was entered into by and between said Thomas and said Saltiel for a valuable consideration and that the same was all due & unpaid and to testify to such other things as said Macon & Cox should require of him to obtain judgement said pretended agreement complainant states only the said ……of this agreement as he is 

This is the end of page 23 of 39 pages.  At this point it appears the handwriting has changed.  Significantly so that only about every 3rd word can be read at this point. 




*********c2017Cotopaxi-Colony.blogspot.com All content is copyright protected and may not be copied, reproduced, reused or reposted in any manner without permission.

Friday, December 1, 2017

Taking a closer look

This blog is mainly to show other genealogists how I find what I find.  But in doing so, I'm using the Cotopaxi Colony as my project.

And this morning, I made another great find to add to this story!

Here's a copy of the 1841 England Census.


On the 4th line down, I think you can see that it might be J. Lewis Harris, age 20.  However, the transcribers have it typed in as Flavie Harris.

In the top line, I think you can see Rachael Harris, age 50 and then Rachael Hart, age 80.  Again, this was transcribed as Rachael Harres, age 30 and Rachael Bart, age 30.  You would never match this up by just using an ancestry search!

Jane Harris was E. H. Saltiel's mother and is age 15 in this census.  Her brother is Judah Lewis Harris and he was age 20 at this time.

I think a rather important note is that only Flavie and Jane were listed together in this census.  So with the ages of 20 and 15, one might assume they were husband and wife.  So happy I didn't make that assumption!!!

Saltiel's grandmother was Rachel Harris, age 50 at this census and his great grandmother was Rachel Hart, age 80.  I did not have this information prior to this find.

They were living in District 6, St Bottle Without Bishopsgate, Middlesex - all now suburbs of London.

Why is this an important find?  Because I am still trying to prove the relationship of EH Saltiel to ES Hart. They would have been 2nd cousins.

This is HARD WORK!!!  Because you can't rely on transcribers, you have to widen your search, then go to the actual document and read each line.  Who knew that Flavie Harris would lead me to the census record that I needed for this family!!!


*********c2017Cotopaxi-Colony.blogspot.com All content is copyright protected and may not be copied, reproduced, reused or reposted in any manner without permission.

Friday, November 24, 2017

Zadeck (Zedek) family - also spelled Zadek, Zedak, Zeedak, Zadak....



The Zedek family (Zadeck, Zadek, Zedak, Zeedak, Zadak)

I have decided to tackle each family individually and share what I have learned about them. If additional information becomes available, I’ll come back to this post and add to it.

Their name was spelled Zedek while they were in Cotopaxi, but it has evolved to Zadeck over time. Historically, names changed often until the draft for WWI which was about 1914. After that, it seems there were very few spelling changes - thank goodness!!!

Again, the first written record of the spelling we have is from Nov, 1882. Zedek.





Saltiel wrote this in a letter dated Dec 27, 1882:
Two other families, Nudelman and Zedek, will get along well, as the heads of each are fair carpenters and builders, and have industrious families.
Julius Schwartz wrote this on March 2, 1883:

The grounds must not have been so utterly worthless if it is considered, that despite of the circumstances, that potatoes were sown as late as the end of June, and despite of the heavy hailstorms and the devastations of the thousands of grazing cattle, Loeb Zedek, as he himself states in one of his letters, which I annex hereto, has taken up thirty sacks of potatoes. Zedek’s farm is located on Oak Grove Creek, on the very same mean, narrow strip of land, on which, as the two gentlemen remark, “no beast could subsist.”

In the 1925 Spivak interview it lists them as such:

Zedek, carpenter, wife and four boys. Came from Keiff, Russia.

But after 1925, it got a bit confusing. Flora Satt in her 1950 thesis on Cotopaxi, combined Zedek and Nudelman in to one person and listed them as

20. Morris ‘Zedek’ Neeleman, with his wife Rivka, four daughters. That has led to some confusion over the years for other researchers

When I started my research into each family, the first 2 places I searched were census records and immigration records. I got lucky because this family arrived on the same ship as the Shuteran, Schradsky and the Moskowitz families. This manifest lists the Zedek family as such:

Leib Zedek age 30 M born 1852

Riwke Zedek age 28 F born 1854

Baruch Zedek age 10 M born 1872

Chascha Zedek age 8 F born 1874

Jeschaja Zedek age 6 F born 1876

Isaak Zedek age 2 M born 1880

This family arrived in NYC on March 1, 1882, and had resided in Keiw, Russland, before that (Kiev, Poland, today.) They came through Hamburg and London and the ship’s name was “Gemma”.

Because families often traveled together, I have to wonder if the Shuterans, Schradskys and Moskowitz families were related. Were the wives all sisters? That’s going to be a question for future researchers to determine.

In searching the census records, I found this family residing in Chicago in the 1910 census:
Abraham L. Zadek age 60 M born 1850
Rebecca Zadek age 60 F born 1850
Benjaman Zadek age 38 M born 1872
They were living in an apartment at 2600 State Street. It tells us that she had 9 children, 4 are still living. Rebecca and Benjaman were born in Russia, Abraham L. was born in Germany. They all speak yiddish and immigrated in 1878 (a conflict with the ships manifest above). Both father and son are carpenters.

Living at 2626 State Street in Chicago, I found the Isaac Zadek family:

Isaac Zadeck age 30 M born 1880
Etta Zadeck age 27 F born 1883
Stella Zadeck age 8 F born 1902
Roseline Zadeck age 5 F born 1905

This record does not give a year of immigration. It shows that Isaac was born in Illinois, but that his father and mother were born in Russia and spoke Yiddish. Isaac started listing his first name as Edward and by the 1930 census, ha had dropped Isaac from his name.

There is a will dated 9/5/1918 showing Rebecca Zadeck’s son as Isaac. Further research of that will which is only indexed online might show her daughter’s names.

I found an Alouis Zadeck living on 2912 Calument Street in Chicago in the 1900 census. He was married to Rosa and they have a son, Benj, born 1870 in England. And a second son, James, born in 1876 in England, married to Annie Neiman. James could be Jeschaja from the ship’s manifest? And Annie Neiman could be related to the Neiman/Newman’s who lived in Cotopaxi?

The Zadeck family seems to be short lived.

Sons James and Benjamin had no children.

I can find nothing on Chascha who was a daughter.

Their son, Isaac, had 2 daughters.

Stella married Joseph Gottlieb and they had 1 child, Rochelle. I can find nothing else for her.

Rosaline may have married a Soloman. I can find nothing else for her. 

If I learn more about this family, I will update this post



*********c2017Cotopaxi-Colony.blogspot.com All content is copyright protected and may not be copied, reproduced, reused or reposted in any manner without permission.

Monday, November 20, 2017

Krupitzky, Grupitzky, Kroupitsky, Ruhittsky, Grupik, Keripitzky, Krupit, Groupetzky, Kropetzky, Korpitzky, Krupit, Krup line


Yes, in researching the David Krupitzky line, there are at least that many spellings and changes to the surname!  Makes it really hard to research this family.  Not to mention that some descendants claim their ancestors were never part of the Cotopaxi Colony.

Let’s start out with the earliest record, the land deed at Cotopaxi.  This is dated June 20, 1882 and his name is listed as David Grupitzky.









There were 3 weddings in the summer/fall of 1882 at Cotopaxi.  In all 3 wedding certificates, David Grupitzky was the “minister” and he spelled his name that way.  I’ll attach one of those certificates here.  Just click on any of these documents to zoom in and look at them closer.



In the October 23, 1882 letter from Julius Schwarz to HEAS, we find the following mention of David Grupitzky:

David Grupitzky, a man who during the week, shovels the ground and carries lumber, or goes to work, while on Sabbaths he performs the duties of a reader and rabbi,


The next time we see his name is in the 1885 census and he is living in Denver, next to many of the other colonists.  This 1885 census shows his name was transcribed by the census department as being spelled Ruhittsky.  But when you look at the actual writing on the census record, it’s easy to see that it should have been spelled Rupittsky.  The “h” on th eline above is much different from the “p” in his name.

In 1887, the Denver City Directory lists him as a pedler (that matches his occupation in the 1885 census).  David Krupitzky, r, 7th, ur. Wynkoop.  That tells me he lived in the rear of the building at 7th and Wynkoop.  


In the 1888 Denver City Directory, he was a pedler living in the rear of 1628 7th street and he spelled his name Kroupitsky.


In 1890, he spelled his name Krupitzky and was now and Expressman living at 111 Market Street in Denver.

We find the same spelling, occupation and residence in the 1891 and 1892 directories.

Oral family history states that he died in 1892.  There is no 1890 census.  

In the 1896 Denver City directory, we find Mrs. Annie Krupitzky living in the rear of 111 Market street.  We also find her oldest son, Reuben Krupitzky, a salesman for CF Adams Co, living in the rear of 1348 1st Street.

In the 1900 census, his widow, Anna states that she was born in Russia in 1860 and that she immigrated in 1876.  

Their oldest son Rabin was married to Grace and in his census record he states that he was born in 1873 in Russia and immigrated to America in 1876.  Because this concurs with Anna’s census, we can assume that David and Anna were married and immigrated to America about 1876.

I have been unable to locate them in the 1880 census and that is most likely due to the various spellings of their surname.

The next child is Sarah.  She married Morris Breslow and these are her census answers.

Sarah
1900 Census
1910 census
1920 census
year born
1876 Russia
1877 Russia    
1870  Russia
year immigrated
1880
1888
blank




Louis
1900 Census
1910 Census
1920 census
1940
year born
1884 NYC

1886 Colorado
1881 Colorado
year immigrated
blank







in the 1925 Spivak interview, it is “remembered” family “7.  David Korpitzky, age 36.  Hebrew teacher, three daughters and one son one year old.  Came from Kaidanow, Russia.”  Later it states, “Kropitzky was learned in ancient lore and acted both as a rabbi and chazan.  He tied the know of Motel Shuteran with Hanna and of Jacob Millstein with Yente.  One child, a boy of one year, the son of David Kropitzky, died in the colony and was buried there.”

Dorothy Roberts wrote in 1944, “Only one death occurred while the colonists were in Cotopaxi.  A child, one year old, the son of David Korpitzky, died from injures received in falling from a window.”  


That 1885 census shows us:

David Ruhhitsky     age 35   born in 1850
Annie age 30   born in 1855
Reuben                   age 9     born in 1876
Sarah age 8     born in 1877
Luis                       age 1      born in 1884

If the child who died was age 1 in 1882, he/she would have been born in 1881.

But that only gives us 3 children in Cotopaxi, and 1 was a boy, so that is a conflict with the 1925 Spivak report.

We need to keep in mind that 1925 was 41 years after Cotopaxi disbanded.  How much does one remember about their neighbors 41 years ago?  The last record that we have that this family was in Denver was 1896.  We then find them in New York City.  There is no evidence that they corresponded or kept up with any of the people who were in Denver.  So the Spivak report is the memories of those who were at Cotopaxi.  While it’s a great place to start, the reliability is perhaps questionable when it comes to the family members and the ages of their children.

It’s probably more reliable to go with census data (although that also has it’s problems as well).  The fact that there were 4 children is provable if Luis was born before they left Cotopaxi.  

The next problem is their year of immigration.  Almost all of the census records agree with 1876.  There should be a record of them in the 1880 census.  But I have not been able to locate it - probably due to the variety of name spellings.  

I received an email from a possible descendant who had been told that his ancestors settled in 1876 in Cripple Creed.  We have to remember that Colorado became a state in 1876 and was a territory prior to that.  It was originally part of El Paso county and did not become “Cripple Creek” until 1890.  It’s quite possible that there were early minors in the Cripple Creek area, but from all the maps there were no roads.  There was a railroad spur by 1884.  And because we know the train came through Canon City in 1880, we know there was no spur earlier than that.  It is doubtful that the Krupitzky’s were in Cripple Creek in 1876.  Until we locate them in the 1880 census, we simply won’t know.

We do know at this point is that the Krupitzky’s were in Cotopaxi in 1882, that they were in Denver by 1885 and that they moved to New York City by 1900.

There is no mention of a wife in Cotopaxi, but there was one, Anne, in the 1885 census.  And until we find the ship’s manifest or records in Europe, we won’t know if she was at Cotopaxi or not.  There are no records of their marriage in Denver so I think at this point, we should assume that she was with in in Cotopaxi.


In conclusion, the ship’s manifest and the 1880 census will be crucial in making any more determinations about this family.   And the fact that there could be even more spellings for this surname!!






*********c20167Cotopaxi-Colony.blogspot.com All content is copyright protected and may not be copied, reproduced, reused or reposted in any manner without permission.

Monday, February 20, 2017

Powerpoint presentation Feb 27, in Canon City

I will be giving my presentation "The Jewish Colony at Cotopaxi" this Saturday, Feb 27, at 1 pm in the back room at Design Ur Memories, 518 Main Street, Canon City

This is the presentation that I will be doing next month in Gush Etzion, Judea, Israel.  This is going to be from a historical perspective rather than a genealogical view.  I plan to cover these issues:

The Cotopaxi area in the late 1800s
Why the Jews wanted to leave Russia
How Emanual Saltiel got involved, what he promised to do, what he didn't do and why.
The past written records and new findings.
The 3 weddings.
The miner's lien.
Saltiel's hotel and who he was.
The cemetery, the records and the road marker.

Those are a few of the things I have been asked to research in the past.

Sorry, this will not be recorded as this is my trial run for the Israeli presentation and I will allow questions at any time during the presentation just so I know what to fix for next month!

If you live in Colorado, I hope you can come.  There are chairs for about 20 people but there's always room to sit on the floor!

Sunday, January 15, 2017

Who writes about Cotopaxi and future presentations

It is interesting who decides to write what about the Cotopaxi Colony.  There is a new article out in Hebrew in a Jerusalem newspaper.  Click here.  You can do google translate and will find it's the pretty standard "story" of what happened based on Flora Satt's 1950 thesis and other popular writings.

I just wanted to remind everyone of a couple of other websites that you can use to ask pertinent questions when someone is telling the "story".

The Jewish Gen Kehilalinks Site has numerous pages of information.  The Family Names Page shows us that Nettie Milstein, daughter of Saul Ber Milstein, arrived on the ship "the Polynesia" on July 16, 1882.  She traveled here with her Uncle, Isaac Leib Shames.  She was part of the second group to arrive in Cotopaxi.

Contrary to the "popular" version of the Colony story, she did not arrive in the US in 1880 at the age of 20.  She came in July, 1882, at the age of 17.....AFTER the first colonists arrived in Cotopaxi in May.

I have written extensively about this in a past blog.   I show the marriage certificate as well as the marriage license application forms which show she was only 17 years old in September 1882, and she needed the consent of her uncle, Isaac Shames, to be married as her parents did not arrive in this country until December, 1884.

Because of her age,  because of the requirement to have a signed consent, and because I have thoroughly searched the records in Gilpin County, Colorado, I do not believe there was a marriage prior to the one in September in Cotopaxi.

And this alters the "common" story to some degree.

This link to the Kehilalinks site that shows the various ships manifests is quite valuable because the far right hand column also shows the inter-relationships of the various individuals.   It can be used to prove ages, year of birth, date of arrival, people who traveled together and so on.  It proves and disproves much of what Flora Satt wrote.  It proves that Saul Baruch Milstein was never at Cotopaxi.

I'm pretty sure that the author of the recent article in the Jerusalem News did not know about my research, or about the Kehilalinks site or this blog.  One more great source of information is  the Cotopaxi Colony site by Nelson Moore.   It should be studied in depth as it contains valuable resources and photos.  It also covers the story about the restoration of the Jewish portion of the cemetery at Cotopaxi.

As a quick update - it may be 2-3 months before there are more posts to this blog.  My research continues.   I am currently working on the real estate aspects of the property owned by the Colonists. That's turning out to be an education in itself!

My sister and I are traveling to Israel for almost 6 weeks starting March 2.  We will be giving a powerpoint slide presentation on the Cotopaxi Colony in Gush Etzion the evening of March 21 and possibly another presentation in Jerusalem that same week.    If you are interested in attending either presentation, email me at jlowe54@gmail.com.

I will do one more post when the dates, times and locations are confirmed.

Nancy Oswald will also be presenting on this topic at the Senior Mini College in Canon City.  You can follow this website to see when they post the date and time for her presentation.

If you have questions about the colony, feel free to send me a note or add a comment to a post.


*********c2017Cotopaxi-Colony.blogspot.com All content is copyright protected and may not be copied, reproduced, reused or reposted in any manner without permission.

Saturday, October 8, 2016

More on the Nudelman house

Back in February, I posted a blog about the Nudelman house - from the standpoint that several documents had been tossed into the trash and then found their way to the local History center.

I've been researching it ever since.  I'd like to verify the location of the house today - if it still exists.

First, that original document found in the trash:





Another document that was pulled from the trash is the sale of the other half of the house, the Chuteran property, the same day.  Interesting that this document was just one page.


 The typed version of the Chuteran document:

11232
Bill of Sale
Solomon Chuteran to
W. S. Hart
Filed for Record Aug 7, 1883 at 6 o’clock pm
Jno Wilson Recorder

This indenture made on this the Thirtieth day of April in the year Eighteen Hundred and Eighty three.

Witnesseth that I the undersigned Solomon Chuteran of Cotopaxi, in the County of Fremont, state of Colorado, do for and inconsideration of One Dollar, lawful money of the United States of America and other valuable consideration received hereby, sell, assign, transfer and set over to Eleazer S. Hart of Cotopaxi, same state and county aforesaid a certain frame house or dwelling situated in Cotopaxi as aforesaid, and heretofore occupied by myself and  my family as a dwelling which said dwelling was erected for my use and benefit and I delcare that I have the full right and authority to sell and transfer the said building, which is situated on grounds leased for the purpose near the track of the Denver and Rio Grande Railway on the northerly side of said railway track and distant about five hundred feet easterly, from the present site of the Cotopaxi Hotel and adjoining the House of Joseph Nudelman.  I do further hereby sell and transfer assign and set over to said Eleazer S. Hart the furniture in said dwelling house, consisting of one kitchen stove with appurtenances and utensils, one bed, one table, 3 chairs and other miscellaneous articles.

In witness whereof I hereby affix my hand and seal this the thirtieth day of April, in the year 1883.

S. Chuteran

Witness Joseph Bardine

State of Colorado
Fremont County ss

Personally appeared before me the subscriber and acknowledged this as his free act and deeds, and wishes it to be recorded as such.  Witness my ahdn and seal this the 30th day of April A. D. 1883.  G. H. Rummel seal, Justice of the Peace

For value received I hereby assign all of my right and title to the property acquired by this instrument except the goods as mentioned and conveyed to with the household goods to Mrs Susan A McCoy.

Witness my hand and seal this the sixteenth day of August A. D. 1883  E. S. Hart, seal, Witness G. H. Rummel.

Personally appeared before me the subscriber and acknowledged this as his free act and deeds and wishes it to be recorded as such.  Witness my hand and seal this 16th day of August A. D. 1883.  Z. T. Banta seal, Justice of the Peace.

Down the left side of the page:


For value received I hereby assign all my right and title to the property acquired by this instrument of writing to Mr Epptein. This assignment has not been accepted, has not been conveyed.  E. S. Hart, witness H. S. Tooling.

I have not been able to locate all of the documents that I am looking for but I do have some that refer to this as the "McCoy double house".  As soon as I have a complete "trail" I will come back and update this post.  But it appears that this was 2 families living under a common roof with a wall adjoining their residences...the houses were attached to each other.

It is also evident that the houses were built on land leased from E. H. Saltiel.

In my later documents, the land was sold by O. B. Carroll to A. A Sloan.  Then Sloan sold the double house and the land to W. A. Hendricks.  Hendricks sold it back to Sloan who sold it to Kate Gorman in 1895.  I do not have documentation yet as to how it got to Carroll from McCoy.....or who it went to after Gorman.

Couldn't I just to a title search?  No - that won't work for most of the houses in Cotopaxi.  For most of the houses, sometime between 1910 and 1950...the owners all went to court to prove their ownership.  And by doing such, they didn't have to go back and verify the earliest ownerships.  They would stand on the court house steps in Canon City and literally call out every possible owner's name.  No one showed up and the judge awarded the property to the current owner.

That or they simply had it re-declared under the Federal Land act.

And yes, this may be wasting my time, but I have to wonder.  With these 2 documents are "new" questions.  

1)  Were the Nudelmans and the Chuterans related?  People rarely lived this close together if they weren't.

2)  Did both of these families leave Cotopaxi in April, 1883, when the houses were sold?  Or had they built another house on the land they farmed that was south of Cotopaxi?

I have found no documents showing the sale of any of the plots south of Cotopaxi.

3)  In both documents, the property was "sold" to E. S. Hart who then "sold" them to Susan McCoy.  Was Hart acting as an early realtor in western Fremont county?

4)  It does not appear that the furniture was transferred to McCoy.

5)  This does tell us some of the furniture they had.

6)  The sale was for $1 and "other valuable considerations."    This is a common phrase used and could mean anything.  Did they just want to dump the property?  Was it worth nothing since they didn't own the land it was on.  What would a 49 year lease be worth?  How much would you give for a duplex that sat on a 49 year lease and you didn't know if the lease could be renewed or not?

7) Who did McCoy sell the place to?

Interesting questions!

One thing I do know is that neither Nudelman or Chuteran  were listed on the miner's lien.  It would be doubtful that Saltiel paid them and not the others.  Thus, most likely, they did not owe Hart any money at his store.  

These documents also show us that:

Joseph Bardine was a witness
G. H.. Rummel was the Justice of the Peace
Z. T. Banta was a justice of the Peace
and there was a Mr. Epptein
and a witness H. S. Tooling.

What were their relationships with the Colonists?  with Saltiel?  with Hart?

This is a prime example of how researching local documents can give you clues as to where to go next with your research, whether it is related to your family tree or not.











*********c2016Cotopaxi-Colony.blogspot.com All content is copyright protected and may not be copied, reproduced, reused or reposted in any manner without permission.