Friday, November 16, 2012

Maternity, Gender and Class: A Comparison of the Spauldings of Buckland and the family of Hart Lester Pomeroy of Pittsfield, Mass.


by Kate Corbett Pollack

For the past year, I have been transcribing and writing about the letters in our archives written by the Spaulding family of Buckland, Massachusetts. The APHGA also has in its archives a letters collection written by members of the Pomeroy family of Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Dottie H., an APHGA member, and descendant of Hart and Lester Pomeroy graciously lent us the collection which we scanned and photographed and returned to her.   

Portrait of Lemuel Pomeroy.
Readers may know of Hart Lester(1781-1852) and Lemuel Pomeroy (1778-1849). The couple was married on June 2nd, 1800. Lemuel Pomeroy gained prominence as a small arms manufacturer and businessman who was contracted by the United States government and the state of New York in the early 1800s to provide weapons for the military. He was one of Pittsfield’s most wealthy and prominent citizens, and is memorialized in books for his contributions to American history and industry. He also owned a large woolen mill in Pittsfield. I discovered that the APHGA did not have very much in the database about his wife, Hart Lester of Preston, Connecticut. Like many women from her era, researching her life and genealogy is difficult and requires creativity, due to a lack of information. Having access to letters written by the Lester women in the late 1700s is invaluable, and provides a truly fascinating look into their lives. They also mention family members who otherwise may have remained unknown to us. Unlike the Spauldings, who were a rural family of modest means headed by a minister, the Lester-Pomeroys were a very wealthy, socially connected upper-class family. Many of their concerns and experiences were completely different from those of the Spauldings, who lived in the same region during the same era. The brutality of survival did not plague the Lester-Pomeroy family in quite the same way. However, certain things the two families did have in common. While I noticed many contrasts in the lives and letters of these two groups of women, I also noticed similarities.

Portrait of Hart Lester Pomeroy.
The Hart Lester letters include the correspondence of Hart, her sister-in-law Damaris Lord, and a yet unnamed aunt, some written before Hart was married and living in Plainfield, Connecticut, where the Lester family was from. It is also where Reverend Josiah Spaulding (1751-1823) grew up. A 1798 letter written to then 17-year-old Hart Lester by her aunt reveals that Hart was attending Plainfield Academy:

With Pleasure my dear Harty I received your letter…it is very nice, I am very glad to find you are at Plainfield under the tuition of A gentleman whose abilities I think capable of rendering you great advantage, I hope you will pay strict attention my dear girl & not think more of the tutor than you do of your studies, I only give you A little warning Harty as I hear he is A fine young Man, I think he has A fine chance to fix his choice among so many fine girls unless his heart is steel’d, but enough of him…

At first I thought that Hart was being privately tutored by a professor or teacher in the Plainfield area, because women did not usually attend this type of school in the late 1700s. Academies were for men. However, the History of Windham County, Connecticut: Vol. 1-2 in its chapter on Plainfield Academy reports that “the school was organized for both sexes”, and mentions Hart Lester directly:

“It may not be irrelevant to notice among the young ladies, Miss Catherine Putnam, granddaughter of General Putnam of the Revolution, who married Francis Brinely, Esq. of Boston; the Misses Lester of Preston - one of whom married Hon. Lemuel Pomeroy of Pittsfield, Mass.; …with many others who have adorned society by their example and their influence.[i]

Plainfield Academy was founded in 1770. It endured through the Revolutionary War, and gained prominence as a superior academic institution, attracting students from all over the region and abroad. Plainfield through the late 1700s became a lively place full of bright young people from families respectable enough to send their children to the prestigious academy, which charged tuition. There young men were prepared for college, specifically Yale, or business. Young women received enough education, separate from the male population, to be considered eligible marriage material. From History of Windham County:

“Society in Plainfield was quickened and elevated by Academic influence. The brilliant young graduates who served as teachers found in this rural town a select circle of accomplished and attractive young women and usually carried away a wife, or left their hearts behind them.”

Teachers in this era of New England history were young, unmarried men (as I wrote about in last month’s blog post). Hart could not expect to have her own career, and her education served only to make her into a respectable lady who could marry well. The “advantage” Hart’s aunt was speaking of in the above letter was the opportunity for a prestigious marriage, which she did achieve with her betrothal to Lemuel Pomeroy in 1800, only two years after the letter was written. Hart was 19 at the time of her marriage. By 1801, she had given birth to the first of her eleven surviving children. Hart was either pregnant or nursing for the next twenty years of her life. Despite Hart’s wealth, education and social class, her role was ultimately to bear children, as many as possible. Hart’s Congregationalist background taught that this was women’s life purpose. Plainfield Academy was also a Congregationalist (Puritan-Calvinist) school, founded by members of the church. At that time, it was the only religion in the area. There were no other churches, and religion was not kept separate from education, nor was it separate from the state and town governments at this time.[ii] Most areas of Hart’s life would have been affected by her religion, although the letters in the Lester-Pomeroy collection do not mention religion as much as the Spaulding sisters’ do. It is possible that this family did not have the need to cling to it quite as much due to their wealth providing a less grim life for them.

Wealth and status aside, the lines between the Spaulding sisters and the Lesters start to blur in other areas. The Lester-Pomeroy women may have been wealthy, well-educated socialites who did not worry about having enough to eat or toiling over a burning hearth all day, as the Spaulding women did, but the hardships of childrearing and their limited ability to participate in the public sphere of life isolated them in much the same ways. The reality of childrearing is key to understanding the experience of women from this or any era. Dr. Judith Walzer Leavitt’s essay “Under the Shadow of Maternity”, mentions Mary Vial Holyoke:

“Take, for example, the life of Mary Vial Holyoke, who married into a prominent New England family in 1759. In 1760, after ten months of marriage, she gave birth to her first baby. Two years later, her second was born. In 1765 she was again “brought to bed” of a child. Pregnant immediately again, she bore another child in 1766… during the next twelve years she bore five more children. The first twenty-three years of Mary Vial Holyoke’s married life, the years of her youth and vigor, were spent pregnant or recovering from childbirth. Because only three of her twelve children lived to adulthood, she withstood, also, frequent tragedies… Mary Holyoke had little choice in her frequent pregnancies: her life reveals how the biological capacity of women to bear children historically has translated into life’s destiny for individual women.[iii]

Mary Holyoke and Hart Lester both belonged to upper class New England families. In my genealogical research of New England, what first struck me was the enormous size of families common in the 1600s through the early 1800s. Family sizes were sometimes upwards of twelve children. A second wife in some circumstances would be brought in shortly after the death of the first and continue the pattern of constant childrearing, picking up where the first wife left off. This created gaps in sibling ages of up to thirty years. By the early 1800s, average family size was about seven surviving children.[iv] Throughout the 1600s this was also the average:

“In the early-17th century, women usually married between ages 20 and 23. (The aged [sic] dropped somewhat in succeeding generations and was younger in some locales than others.) They probably spent up to 20 years bearing children and most of their adult life raising them. There were some large families of 10 to 15 children, but the average family had six or seven. Many children died from disease in infancy or early childhood (only about half of Colonial infants reached adulthood). Most couples lost one or more children.[v]

The above information does not factor in the instance of the second wife, however. It is referring to the childrearing of individual women. The addition of a second wife would also mean that she would be responsible for the deceased first wife’s children, of which the average was seven, as well as her own. It is also possible that a second wife would be bringing children from a previous marriage to the new family, and statistics don’t always factor this in. A genealogist will notice these patterns. Family size dropped as developments in women’s equality, public health and access to family planning, among other factors, progressed into the twentieth century. As we have seen in last month’s blog post on Mary Howes, the opportunity for college and career offered some women the choice of a different life, one where they had more control over their own destinies. Hart Lester attended a prestigious secondary school academy, but that was the end of her educational options. The expectation was that it would make her more eligible for marriage to a socially and financially prominent man, and as soon as she graduated, marriage and childrearing commenced. Her role as a woman of wife and bearer of children was not very different from the role of the women of the Spaulding family.

What is also similar in the letters of the Lester and Spaulding women is their bond. Like Mary Spaulding’s sister-in-law Deborah Pomeroy Trowbridge, Hart’s sister-in-law Damaris Lord Lester fills the role of an actual blood sister, and there is no differentiation in how she is addressed, or what her role is: she is a sister to Hart, called one, and treated as one. Deborah Pomeroy Trowbridge was not only a sister to Mary Spaulding Pomeroy; she was considered part of the family by Nancy, Lydia and Deborah Spaulding, as well. What struck me during the course of transcribing the 144 letters of the Spaulding family was this incredible closeness and bond between the women (written about in my December 14th, 2011 post The Spaulding Sisters). No important anniversary was left unremembered by the women, and they wrote to each other through the hardest of times, speaking candidly of death and offering mutual support. Damaris and Hart’s relationship was similar. From a September 21, 1800 letter from Damaris Lord Lester to Hart Lester Pomeroy referencing the death of a friend:

“I received yours [letter] My Dear Sister by Mr. Belcher for which I return you many hearty thanks… I hope you will ever feel inclined to pour balm in the bosom of the afflicted the wisest of all the sons of Adam said it is better to go to the house of Mourning than to the house of feasting, and I think I can truly say for one when I have attended those trying scenes have felt and inward satisfaction very different from the sensations of Mirth & jollity lest us, My Dear Sister bear a part in the joys and sorrows of all our friends…”

Damaris was telling Hart about her personal experience with the mourning process in this letter. Another aspect of the Spaulding and Lester-Pomeroy letters is the scarce mention of the men in their lives. The APHGA has many more letters written by the Spauldings, and it is in their letters where I have noticed this more, mostly because of the sheer amount of material. Evidently, it was not unusual for the time period, as written about by Dr. Carol Smith-Rosenberg in her seminal work “The Female World of Love and Ritual: Relations between Women in Nineteenth-Century America”:

“Several factors in American society between the mid-eighteenth and the mid-nineteenth centuries may well have permitted women to form a variety of close emotional relationships with other women. American society was characterized in large part by rigid gender-role differentiation within the family and within society as a whole, leading to the emotional segregation of women and men. The roles of daughter and mother shaded imperceptibly and ineluctably into each other, while the biological realities of frequent pregnancies, childbirth, nursing, and menopause bound women together in physical and emotional intimacy.[vi]

We are very fortunate to have letters written by these families in our archives at the APHGA, and their examination can contribute exponentially to the study of American History; specifically providing insight into the private world of America’s women in the 18th and 19th centuries. We cannot look up Hart Lester or Mary Spaulding in a history book; we cannot learn about their lives in the same way we can learn about their husbands’. The experience of genders, however, is critical in aiding our understanding of America’s past.



[i]  Larned, Ellen D. History of Windham County, Connecticut. Vol. 1-2. Worcester, MA: Author, 1874. Excerpt from Ancestry.com  http://tinyurl.com/bj9dqq5

[ii]  "Town History."Plainfield History.Plainfield Historical Society, 2011.Web. 16 Nov. 2012. .

[iii]  Leavitt, Judith Walzer, and Jane SherronDeHart. "Under the Shadow of Maternity: American Women's Responses to Death and Debility Fears in Nineteenth Century Childbirth." Feminist Studies 12 (1986): 129-54. Rpt. in Women's America: Refocusing the Past. By Linda K. Kerber. New York: Oxford UP, 2000. 184-91. Print. 185.

[iv]  "Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999: Family Planning." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2 Dec. 1999. Web. 16 Nov. 2012. .

[v]  Gormley, Myra Vanderpool, CG. "Colonial Love and Marriage."Colonial Love and Marriage.Genealogymagazine.com, 2004.Web. 16 Nov. 2012. .

[vi]  Smith-Rosenberg, Carol. "The Female World of Love and Ritual: Relations between Women in Nineteenth-Century America." Signs 1.1 (1975): 1-29. JSTOR.Web. 16 Nov. 2012. 9

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

A Tale of Love and Loss at the Onondaga County Poorhouse


by Nancy Maliwesky

On January 3, 1832 Patty Kingman, 41, Huldah Kingman, 14, Jason Kingman, 13, Henry Kingman, 11, Sally Kingman, 7, Lafayette Kingman, 4, and Joseph Kingman, 2, entered the Onondaga County Poorhouse.   The cost of their stay was charged to the town of Pompey[i]. 


On January 17, 1832, 14 year old Huldah received 6 yards of calico, 1/3 yard of lining and thread valued at $1.06, and a pair of shoes valued at $1.50.  She was bound out on trial on January 30, 1832 to William A. Cook.  Her length of stay at the Poorhouse was four weeks.  On January 18, 1832, 13 year old Jason (spelled Jasin in the Poorhouse ledger), received 2 ½ yards of shirting at the cost of 31¢.  He was released March 13, 1832, after ten weeks stay.  On February 2, 1832, 11 year old Henry Kingman received one pair of hose valued at $1.13 and was bound out on trial to R.L. Hess of Syracuse.  His length of stay at the Poorhouse was four weeks and one day.

On February 8, 1832, 2 year old Joseph Kingman received 2 yards of factory gingham and thread valued at 35¢.  On February 20, 1832, Patty Kingman (presumed the mother of this family) received 2 yards of factory gingham and thread valued at 35¢.  She was discharged from the Poorhouse on April 21, 1832 after fifteen weeks and four days stay.  Prior to her leaving the Poorhouse, though, Patty and her family suffered great loss.  On March 27, 1832, Joseph Kingman, 2 years old, died.  On March 30, 1832, Lafayette Kingman, 4 years old, died.  On April 19, 1832, Sally Kingman, 7 years old, died.  The Poorhouse records suggest that the three young Kingman children were buried on the Poorhouse property.  The Kingman family was not alone in their grief, as eleven souls passed at the Poorhouse during the months of March and April 1832.  Ten of the eleven who died were children. 

As the Director of the American Pomeroy Historic Genealogical Association, I am familiar with the early history of the Onondaga County Poorhouse, as Spencer Pomeroy died there on May 2, 1833.  Spencer immediately came to mind when I read in an article in the Syracuse Post Standard on Monday, December 6, 2010 that told the story of an archaeological dig taking place on the grounds of the old Poorhouse when construction on that site unearthed the remains of twenty four people who had been buried behind the hospital in the 19th century.  There have been several hospitals on this site.  The 1928 hospital is the only building still standing at the site.

I contacted Daniel Seib, the chief archaeologist at the site (which was being run by the Public Archaeology Facility at SUNY Binghamton) and expressed my interest in their work at the Poorhouse, and asked what I could do to help.  Knowing of the ledger books at the Town of Onondaga Historical Society, I offered to photograph and transcribe the early ledgers to help identify those inmates who had died during this timeframe.  Ledger books 1 and 2 contain information regarding inmates and expenses at the Poorhouse from 1827 through 1836. The next ledger book in the collection begins with expenses for the year 1856, and then lists inmates starting in 1861, so it is obvious that one or more books have gone missing.  Because of this my research was not complete, and a full inventory of those buried at the Poorhouse site was not available.  If anyone knows where there ledgers are, please contact the Town of Onondaga Historical Society or Jane Tracey, the Town Historian.  While these ledgers have no monetary value, the information contained in the books is important to those researching the area and especially to those people who had family members who were in the Poorhouse.  

 Daniel contacted me on Monday, September 24th to let me know that he would be giving a talk at Onondaga Community College about the Poorhouse dig and their findings.  The lecture was held on Monday, October 1st at 11:20am in Mulroy Hall, room 410.  Appropriately, Mulroy Hall is the H-1 building (the 1928 hospital built at the Poorhouse site).    He also told me that the reburial of the remains found at the site would take place on Wednesday, September 26, 2012 at the Loomis Hill Cemetery in the Town of Onondaga. 

Perhaps the most thrilling news for me was that of the eighty sets of remains discovered at the site, Daniel and his team were able to positively identify three persons based on the research that I had provided them with.  These were the Kingman siblings, Joseph, Lafayette and Sally.  I decided to see if I could find out more information about the Kingman family.  It would be wonderful if we could connect with living kin and share their story.

As the Kingman family’s stay at the Poorhouse was charged to the town of Pompey, I decided to start with the 1830 U.S. Federal Census for Pompey, Onondaga County, New York.  There I found the household of Justus Kingman.  In the household were two free white males under five, one free white male between five and nine years of age, one free white male between ten and fourteen years of age, two free white males between fifteen and nineteen years of age, one free white male between forty and forty nine years of age, one free white female between five and nine years of age, one free white female between ten and fourteen years of age, and one free white female between forty and forty nine years of age.  Using the ages listed in the Poorhouse ledger I was able to match all the children, the presumed mother Patty, and the presumed father, Justus.  Two additional people in the household (both males aged between fifteen and nineteen years) appeared not to have entered the Poorhouse with the younger of Justus and Patty’s children. 

Where was Justus Kingman in January 1832; and why did his wife and younger children end up in the Poorhouse?  Did he die, or was he out of town and some of the family members took sick, so the mother took them to the Poorhouse for treatment?  It is interesting that Jason, who was old enough to have been bound out, was released from the Poorhouse a full month before his mother was.  Where did Jason go?  Were there other family members who took him in?

I was able to find a marriage record for a Jason Kingman, born about 1819 in New York in the “Michigan Marriages, 1868-1925” database on FamilySearch.org.  The marriage place was Perrinton, Gratiot County, Michigan and Jason’s parents were listed at J. Kingman and Pattie Chapman.  Further research identified a short biography of this Jason Kingman on pages 483-484 of the book Portrait and Biographical Album of Gratiot County, Michigan available on GoogleBooks, as follows:
                “Jason Kingman, farmer, on section 20, Fulton Township, is the son of Justus and Patty (Chatman) Kingman, natives of Vermont.  They first settled in Madison County, N.Y., and afterward removed to Tioga Co., Pa., where he died, in 1830.  She died four years later, in Onondaga Co., N.Y.
                “The subject of this biography, Jason Kingman, was born in Cortland Co., N.Y., June 11, 1819, and was 11 years old when his parents removed to Pennsylvania.  When he was 16 years old, having lost both his parents, he was obliged to make a start for himself, and for two years he was employed in farming for others.  He then went to sea as a common sailor, and followed that life until 1853, when he came to Lenawee Co., Mich.  For two years he was engaged in making pearlash.  In 1855 he bought a farm in Lenawee Co., Mich., which he worked for a short time. Selling this place, he purchased in Fulton Co., Ohio, where he lived eight years.  In the spring of 1864 he came to Gratiot County and bought 80 acres of land on section 20, Fulton.  He has since disposed of 30 acres and has 40 acres improved.  In the summer of 1883 he built a finely-planned residence.
                “In Adrian, Lenawee Co., Mich., in December, 1855, he married Miss Mary J. Cooley, who was   born in Orleans Co., N.Y., Jan. 13, 1834.  Her parents, Justus and Clarissa (Baker) Cooley, were natives of the State of New York, and came to Michigan in an early day, settling in Medina, Lenawee County, where they yet reside.
                “Mr. and Mrs. Kingman are active members of the Methodist Episcopal Church.  He is a member of the Masonic Order.  Politically, he has always supported the Republican party, but being very pronounced in his temperance views, he casts all his influence with the Prohibitionists.[ii]

A check of U.S. Federal Census records for Jason Kingman, born about 1819 in New York, and living in Michigan by 1853, did not provide any clear evidence that Jason had any offspring.  Jason died July 10, 1901 in Fulton, Gratiot County, Michigan[iii].  He was buried in the Fulton Center Cemetery in Perrinton, according to FindAGrave.com.

I also checked the U.S. Federal Census records for Henry Kingman, born about 1820 in New York.  Only one record was found.  According to the 1850 U.S. Federal Census for Perry, Shiawassee County, Michigan, a Henry C. Kingman, 29 years old, born in New York, was living with presumed wife Amy Kingman, 21 years of age, born in New York, and presumed children Daniel Kingman, 1 year old, born in Michigan, and Frances E. Kingman, 3 years old, born in Michigan.  Also in the household was Elizabeth Brant, 10 years old, born in Michigan.  Henry was identified as a farmer with real estate valued at $400.  Subsequent searches of later census records failed to identify this family, although a genealogist researching the wife of Henry C. Kingman stated that his wife had remarried about 1852, so Henry may have died soon after the census was enumerated.

Huldah Kingman was bound out to William A. Cook in 1832.  I have not been able to find any trace of her after that date.  She may have married and thus changed her name, or she may have died.  I am hoping that the former is the case and that someone connected to Huldah will read this blog article and contact me!

It was in researching Daniel, the son of Henry C. Kingman, that I had a real breakthrough, and by which I developed a better understanding of this family.  I found a burial record for a Daniel Kingman on FindAGrave.com.  According to this record, Daniel was born in 1847 and died in 1895 and was buried in the Oak Grove Cemetery in Morenci, Lenawee County, Michigan.[iv]  I checked for other Kingmans buried in the cemetery and found, amongst others, William P. Kingman born 1816, who died in 1902.  Attached to this record was an image of William’s death certificate, and his parents were identified as Justice Kingman, born in New York, and Katarah Lotimer, born in New York.[v]  Could this be one of the older brothers who did not enter the Poorhouse?  If so, why was his mother’s name different than Jason Kingman’s?  A quick check of a Kingman Genealogy[vi] on GoogleBooks helped to answer this question.  Keturah Latimer was the wife of Mitchell Kingman, and the mother of Justus Kingman.  Perhaps the informant on William’s death certificate was confused about William’s mother’s name. 

It seemed interesting to me that Daniel Kingman, son of Henry C. Kingman, would be buried in the same cemetery with his uncle William.  As I delved more into this family, I realized that the Daniel Kingman who was buried in the Oak Grove Cemetery was actually the son of William.  This family, as many other families of that time, had distinct naming traditions and the same names keep popping up.  This makes sorting the families a bit of a challenge!

So far I have been able to identify and trace three children of Justus and Patty Chapman (all sons), 11 grandchildren, 9 great grandchildren and 3 great, great grandchildren.  William P. Kingman settled first in Shiawassee County and later resided in Lenawee County.  Jason Kingman resided in Lenawee, Fulton and Gratiot Counties and Henry was found in Shiawassee County.  If you are descended from Kingmans born in New York State and if any of the names and places in this article match your ancestors, please contact me. I would love to share the story of this family with living descendants. 

Kingman children re-interment
Joseph, Lafayette and Sally Kingman were re-interred, with 87 other souls, in the Loomis Hill Cemetery in the Town of Onondaga, New York, on Wednesday, September 26, 2012.  The remains were buried next to the remains they were originally found with, so, like the first time these children were buried, they are once again "shoulder to shoulder", or perhaps more accurately, they are now "box to box".  In a sad state of affairs, a decision was made by the agency funding the archaeological research to bury the bodies in the banker's boxes they were being stored in while at the research facility.  All we can do now is remember and honor these people, known and unknown, and hope that their descendants are able to find their new resting place.  I wish we could have identified all of the people buried in the Poorhouse Cemetery, and now re-interred at the Loomis Hill Cemetery.  Perhaps someday we can.   


[i] Onondaga County Poorhouse Ledger 1, pp 45-46, Town of Onondaga Historian’s Office, Onondaga, New York
[ii] Portrait and Biographical Album of Gratiot County, Michigan (Chicago: Chapman Brothers, 1884)
[iii] “Michigan Deaths and Burials, 1800-1995,” index, FamilySearch https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/FHNV-5Z5: accessed 25 Sep 2012), Jason Kingman, 1819.
[iv] Find A Grave online {www.findagrave.com], record created by With_Respect,_Always, Record added Jun 8, 2009, Find A Grave Memorial # 38071573
[v] Find A Grave online [www.findagrave.com], record created by With_Respect,_Always, Record added Jun 8, 2009, Find A Grave Memorial # 38071607
[vi] Kingman, LeRoy Wilson, Isbell and Kingman Families; some records of Robert Isbell and Henry Kingman and their descendants, (Gazette Printers: Oswego, 1840)

Monday, October 8, 2012

Mary W. Howes, Lucinda Pomeroy and Electa Wing: Early Pomeroy Family Graduates of Mount Holyoke Female Seminary and Pioneers of Women’s Education.


by Kate Corbett Pollack

Higher education for American women was either not an option or was severally limited for much of the country’s early history. From the Colonial era to the mid-1800s, women rarely went beyond grade school or being tutored at home. While both of those sources of education could be of very good quality, the opportunity to continue on to college as men did was not available, nor was becoming a teacher or principal of a school.  Teachers, school administrators and those in academia were male. Even at the local one-room school house, teachers were primarily young, unmarried men. Colleges for women were scarce or nonexistent, depending on the region of the country, till about 1840. By the late 1700s, a few Female Seminaries had opened in the United States, but remained either educationally lacking or inaccessible to women for many reasons, some of which will be touched on in this article. For New England and New York women, the opening of Mount Holyoke Female Seminary in 1837 in South Hadley, Massachusetts, created a new opportunity to receive a college education that was the same curriculum as a man’s, something that was previously almost unheard of. Some families embraced this change, such as the family of Lucinda Pomeroy, an early Mount Holyoke graduate. Others, like the families of Mary W. Howes, related to the Southampton Pomeroys[i], and Electa Wing, a cousin of Mary’s (both of Buckland, Massachusetts), did not, nor did they provide the financial means for their daughters to go. For women like Mary and Electa, coming up with tuition and finishing college was almost impossible, and indeed, most who attended Mount Holyoke Female Seminary in its earlier years were not able to graduate[ii]. For the majority of the students, obstacles like those experienced by Mary and Electa were contributing factors. Mary, Lucinda and Electa did graduate, however, and all three went on to work as teachers or college administrators, continuing the vision of Mount Holyoke’s founder, Mary Lyon, that her students work to make education available to women all over the country and the world.

Mary W. Howes may have grown up in this home in Buckland, Massachusetts, or close by. Across the street is Mary Lyon Church, where Mary W. Howes’ grandfather, Reverend Josiah Spaulding, baptized Mary Lyon in 1822. Further down the street is the house where Mary Lyon taught school. Among her students was Mary W. Howes’ father, Ezra.
Mary W. Howes (1823-1910) was the first woman in her family who was able to go to college. The possibility became real with the opening of Mount Holyoke Female Seminary (now Mount Holyoke College), in Mary Howes’ region of Massachusetts[iii]. Mary’s family saw its male members go to college almost as a matter of course, with patriarch Reverend Spaulding, Mary’s grandfather, graduating from Yale in 1778[iv]. Although she was the daughter of a judge, and her family had money, Reverend Spaulding’s wife and Mary’s grandmother and namesake, Mary Williams (1756-1823), could barely write. This was not at all uncommon for women of her era. The family was Puritan. Protestant founders Martin Luther and John Calvin thought that a woman’s place was in the home, and after the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, the tradition among adherents to this religion was that women did not need much of an education. Prior to this, Catholic women whose families had enough money could receive education in convents, which were almost like private schools, and were allowed to have certain leadership roles in the church and community. Reverend Spaulding and Mary Williams’ children were educated, and only son Josiah was sent to Williams College, but the Spaulding sisters (all of whom were born in the late 1700s) did not receive much instruction beyond secondary school. Unlike their mother, they could write legibly and well[v], but were expected to take care of the household and other family members, and to get married and have children, often when they were still teenagers. Higher education was not deemed necessary for Mary’s mother, Lydia, and Aunts. Their lives took an extremely different course from their male counterparts. Letters between Isaac Pomeroy, Mary Howes’ Uncle, and his brother Rufus, discussed completely different things than letters sent to Isaac’s wife Mary Spaulding from her sisters. The men and women in the Buckland and Southampton Spaulding and Pomeroy families of this era lived in two very separate worlds. Women did not participate in the public sphere of life such as college, career, civic duties or Church leadership. Their world was the private one of home and family. Their husbands were rarely mentioned in any of their letters, and it seems that they almost do not exist. The men mentioned the women even less, if at all. While Rufus and Isaac discussed politics, education, careers and theology (Rufus studied to become a minister), Mary Spaulding and her sisters spoke of their difficult lives taking care of children, their homes, and various family members. They wrote of religion, but not in quite the same way- for them the thought of Heaven being a place where they can finally be happy was a central theme. They did not have the education to be able to discuss theology, an enjoyable intellectual exercise for their male relatives and their husbands. The women’s lives were intensely focused on the immediate concerns of daily survival in an era that was rife with disease and offered little in the way of medicine or labor-saving technology. The majority of the Spaulding and Pomeroy women in the family died before they were 55, because they were so worn out from childbirth and hard work[vi]. There was virtually no other lifestyle they could have had, and it had been this way in their families for centuries.

Mary Lyon Church, originally called the First Congregational Church of Buckland. This is where Reverend Spaulding preached his Puritan-Calvinist doctrine to most of the inhabitants of the town from 1794-1823.

The young women of the next generation, the daughters of the Spaulding sisters, looked to any available escape from this way of life, although most of them befell the same fates as their mothers[vii]. Mary W. Howes, the only surviving child of Lydia Spaulding and Ezra Howes, saw education as a chance to get far away from Buckland, and to pursue her own intellect, something she thoroughly enjoyed doing. Like certain other young women of her generation, Mary Howes chose to deliberately forgo courtship, marriage and childrearing in order to focus on her own endeavors and ambitions. A woman of her time could not do both. This is why college held such a great appeal to students like Mary. Her education could provide for her into the rest of her life, allowing further escape from the drudgery of housework and expectation of almost constant pregnancy and childbirth. The early deaths and struggles of all of her aunts, her mother, and most of her cousins were not lost on Mary Howes.

The kitchen hearth in the home where Mary W. Howes’ mother grew up, in Buckland. The same style of hearth would have been in the homes of Electa and Lucinda, and used by their mothers, grandmothers and great grandmothers. For centuries, this was where many early American women spent much of their lives, toiling over a blazing fire in order to cook and do housework. It was very hard work and often wore women out before their 50th birthday. College and career provided an escape from this life. Mary Lyon designed Mount Holyoke to be as accessible as possible to women of all financial backgrounds.

Many other young women in the area were of the same mind as Mary, and had witnessed the similar struggles of their closest women relatives. Among the first students to attend Mt. Holyoke Female Seminary were four Pomeroys- Jerusha (1837-8), Lucinda (the only one among this early group who graduated, in 1844), Lydia B. (1842-4), and Miranda (1841-2)[viii]. At this time in particular, support for educated women was still minimal, and coming up with tuition could be a challenge. Often young women relied on their fathers to pay it, as he would be the only family member who earned an income. Many fathers were not inclined to do so, despite Mount Holyoke’s low rates. The idea of women going to college was very new, and some fathers did not understand how it might benefit their daughters. In an 1845 letter to Mary Lyon from her niece, Electa Wing[ix], the young woman told her aunt of her difficulties in procuring tuition money from her father:

Dear Aunt…It is still my settled wish to return next year and complete the course of study, I cannot tell definitely what father will do for me relative to means. He speaks favorably of my returning and thinks he can perhaps assist me some, he has been gone from home almost the whole of the time since we returned, so that I have had scarcely no time to spend with him on the subject he went again early this morning, but I succeeded in finding a moment to speak to him, and asked him whether he felt able and willing to assist me some, he said in reply that he was owing some money, has lost considerable and expected to lose some more, but said he, “I will think of it, I am in haste this morning but I will think of it”...this is to me as favorable as I shall expect.


Stained glass window memorializing Mary Lyon (1797-1849) at Mary Lyon Church, Buckland, Massachusetts. Mary Lyon grew up in Buckland and first taught school there before going on to found Mount Holyoke Female Seminary in 1837 in South Hadley. Her endeavors made it possible for Lucinda Pomeroy, Mary W. Howes and Electa Wing, among many other young women, to attend college and receive and excellent education. All three became teachers and school administrators upon graduating. They were among the first generation of American women teachers.

Despite this difficulty, Electa was able to graduate from the Seminary and went on to have a teaching career, due in part to Mary Lyon providing her with the money and support to do so. She obtained a paid teaching job in Ohio, but sadly only lived to be 29 years old, dying in 1847, but not before she taught at Ohio schools, bringing education to young women in areas that did not previously offer it. She continued to write to her Aunt Mary Lyon up to her death.[x]

Mary W. Howes also had difficulty coming up with enough tuition to attend the seminary long enough to graduate, despite her father’s wealth. Ezra had been instructed in Mary Lyon’s Buckland classrooms when he was a boy, but did not feel that his own daughter should receive the same educational opportunities as he had. In an 1843 letter to her Aunt Mary Ann Pomeroy of Southampton, and her cousin, Mary Ann Jr., Mary wrote:

I so much desire [education] having attained but little more than a solitary grain from an overflowing storehouse, which I think can be opened to me if my funds were sufficient; by close investigation and patient study, and this I should accomplish [should] my friends view the importance of it in the light it appears to me; two hundred dollars with the two years of time would allow me to graduate at South Hadley, and this amount of money could not procure for me a greater amount of enjoyment in any other way…[xi]


Other letters from Mary to her cousins reveal that Ezra was not supportive of her education, and she consistently had to appeal to the women in the family for support. In a July 28th, 1845 letter written from Mt. Holyoke Seminary from Mary to her cousin Deborah S. Coleman (the daughter of Mary’s aunt Nancy Spaulding):

My dear cousin Deborah,

I have just received a letter from home Which contained not very grateful intelligence. It was in reply to one I wrote requesting Father to come and the cause of it not being very thankfully said was the he considered it very doubtful about his coming & how I am going home is a mystery. Forgive the encouragement that you should be here at examination as rather at anniversary and Mrs Pomroy with her usual kindness and accommodation proposed the same thing last spring.

Further research is needed to reveal which “Mrs. Pomroy” Mary is referring to. This Mrs. Pomeroy is mentioned again, later in the letter:

I want very much myself to take a school, but have not as yet… I wonder if I could possibly get a school in Westhampton If Mrs Pomeroy is acquainted there I wish she would do me the favor of a recommendation at least.

It is most likely that Mrs. Pomeroy was a relative who supported Mary’s education, and contributed to her being able to actually graduate. She also seems to have had connections in education, as Mary thought she might be able to get her a teaching job. While Mary’s father would not even do her the courtesy of picking her up from school and returning her home for summer vacation, leaving her stranded and worried during her final examinations, some of Mary’s women cousins seemed to be more understanding. Mary wrote to them frequently about her studies and her life. Her 1843 letter in which she appealed to her cousin and Aunt for funds also mentioned that she had a teaching job in nearby Sunderland. This job, however, was not enough to pay her tuition. How she was ultimately able to come up with the money is a mystery, but Mary graduated from Mount Holyoke Female Seminary in 1846, one year before the arrival of Emily Dickinson. Her life and career took her on many great adventures, and she traveled all over the United States and the world. In the 1850s, Mary worked in rural southwestern Alabama opening colleges for women during the height of slavery, and what she saw there influenced her thoughts on Abolition. She joined the congregation of Abolitionist minister Albert Barnes in Philadelphia after leaving the south in about 1857. During the Civil War, she was a nurse in the Union Army under the renowned mental health reformer Dorothea Dix, and in the 1880s was a member of the congregation of the famous Abolitionist preacher Henry Ward Beecher (the brother of Harriet Beecher Stowe),in Brooklyn, New York. By that time she had married Peter Goddard of Buckland (in 1865) and became mother to his son, Dr. Frederick Leland. The couple also adopted a son named August the year they were married. The entire family relocated to Sitka, Alaska, in the early 1900s to open a therapeutic hot springs Sanitarium, which still exists today and is called Goddard Hotel. Mary remained in contact with Mount Holyoke until the end of her life, corresponding with their librarian and Memorandum Society up to her death in 1910.


Lucinda Pomeroy had more family support to attend college than Mary or Electa. Her parents encouraged her and her sisters’ education. The eldest of the eight surviving children born to Oren and Lucinda Pomeroy, of Somers, Connecticut (a city that borders Massachusetts near Springfield), Lucinda was always encouraged to learn. Her mother, also named Lucinda (b. 1801), was a teacher of adult women at her church in Somers, and considered an inspiration to the town. The elder Lucinda’s father, Capt. Samuel Pomeroy of Somers, was a well-loved teacher, and encouraged his daughter. Lucinda married Oren Pomeroy, a Deacon and her second cousin, in 1822. Lucinda (Jr.) was born in 1823, the same year as her future classmate Mary Howes, and was an intelligent child. Her mother made sure to tutor Lucinda, and she was enrolled in the best grade school available. Lucinda’s younger sisters also attended Mount Holyoke; Sarah Catherine Pomeroy and Harriet Strong Pomeroy (who became a teacher), both went.[xii] This family provides evidence that once college became available for women, some parents jumped at the chance to be able to send their daughters, although this was not the usual circumstance.

 Lucinda graduated from Mount Holyoke in 1844, and went on to teach in Freehold, New Jersey; Lockport and Pekin, New York, and West Stafford, Connecticut. Like Mary Howes, Lucinda was following Mary Lyon’s wish that graduating students continue her mission and bring educational opportunities to young women all over the country and the world. She died in Connecticut in 1895 at age 71.[xiii]

These three Pomeroy family women came from different backgrounds and had their own unique experiences with pursuing education. Each is an example from American history of the type of journey women from their era took in order to obtain their educational goals. We can look to their lives to understand how American women approached the new opportunity of college and career just as it was beginning to become available, and the resourcefulness that was so often required in order for them to do so. All three women were also among the early movement of teachers in the 1830s-1850s who traveled to other states and helped to found female seminaries where there previously were none. This was hard work and required that they go out of their element, to places where they did not know anyone and people were unused to women educators and administrators. It is in this way that they were reformers and pioneers. Reform takes the work of many, and is very slow. Today, educated women the world over can look to Mary Lyon and her students and colleagues with gratitude. In the developing world, the obstacles Mary Howes, Lucinda Pomeroy and Electa Wing faced are still very real hurdles for millions of women today. Education is still out of reach for many American women for some of the same reasons faced by women of Mary, Lucinda and Electa’s era. We can look to their legacy and remember that their work must be continued.




[i] Her Uncle and Aunt were Isaac Pomeroy (1781-1815) and Mary Spaulding (1785-1839).

[ii] General Catalogue of Officers and Students of Mount Holyoke Seminary, 1837-1887. Hadley: Mount Holyoke Seminary and College, 1889. 15-155

[iii] Other Female Seminaries had been open in New England before Mount Holyoke. Litchfield Female Academy (1792), Hartford Female Seminary (1823), and Ipswich Female Seminary (1828) were open in the area, but were not as close as Mt. Holyoke.

[iv] John Farmer Esq., A List of the Graduates, and Those Who Have Received Degrees, at all of the New England Colleges, The Quarterly Register VII (Feb 1835): 307
[v] Based on their letters in the collection of the APHGA.

[vi] Mary Spaulding Pomeroy d. 1839, age 53; Nancy Spaulding Coleman d. 1840, age 51; Deborah Spaulding d. 1845, age 51, Lydia Spaulding Howes d. 1836, age 39, (Josiah lived to be 81).

[vii] Mary Ann Pomeroy (Mary Spaulding Pomeroy’s daughter) d.1864 (age 49), Thankful Coleman (Nancy Spaulding Coleman’s daughter) d. 1853, age 37(the sisters’ other children died in childhood); Mary Ann Pomeroy, Jr. (Mary Ann Pomeroy’s daughter) d. 1861, age 24 (Mary Ann Pomeroy’s other children died in childhood).

[viii] Catalogue of the Memorandum Society of Mount Holyoke Female Seminary for Thirty Years, Ending 1867. Northampton: Bridgman & Childs, 1867. 73.

[ix] Mary Lyon’s sister, Jemima (born at Buckland, 1787) married into part of the Spaulding family. From a February 6th, 1826 letter to Mary Spaulding Pomeroy from her sister, Nancy Spaulding Coleman:

Uncle Tobey had a fall from his barn shed last November the week before thanksgiving he fell on to his head and shoulders and his life was despaired of for some time but he has gotten better it was the same day that Bathsheba was married to a Mr Wing a widower with four children he lives in the center of the town of Hawley.

Bathsheba Tobey married Benjamin wing in 1825. Benjamin died ten years later, and Bathsheba then married his brother, Elisha. Elisha’s first wife was Jemima Lyon, Mary Lyon’s sister, and Electa’s mother. Electa was born in 1818. Jemima died in 1838. In 1840, Bathsheba and Elisha were married, making Bathsheba Electa’s stepmother. Mary Williams Spaulding’s sister, Deborah Williams, and Deacon Isaac Tobey were the parents of Bathsheba. Deacon Isaac was the Uncle mentioned in the above letter. See: Lyon(s), A.B., M.D., and G.W.A. Lyon, M.D. Lyon Memorial. Detroit: Wm. Graham Printing, 1905. Print.271-273.

[x] Ludwig, CR. "Correspondence of Electa Wing Class of 1846." Correspondence of Electa Wing Class of 1846. Mount Holyoke College, Mar. 2000. Web. 05 Oct. 2012. .

[xi]  $200 in 1843 would be about $6,250.00 in 2012.

[xii] Commemorative Biographical Record of Tolland and Windham Counties Connecticut. Chicago: J.H. Beers & Co., 1903.
[xiii] Lucinda’s brother, Oren Day Pomeroy, graduated at the College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York, and became a professor there. He held a position as the president of the American Otological Society and the New York Academy of Medicine, and owned the largest Otological clinic in the world at the time.