Nellie's hand-carved stone looks as if it might indicate that she was born in the year 1885. Actually, the year carved there is 1895. It looks as if someone initially made a mistake and tried to correct it. That, combined with natural deterioration of the stone, has caused the distortion of the third number in her birth year.
This problem, along with the fact that Nellie's name is Cox (not Chew) on the stone, has resulted in much confusion among family researchers. No one can positively say now why her stone reads Cox instead of Chew. The problem with the year of birth caused some researchers to believe that this Nellie could not be the wife of Richard N. Chew, because if she was born in 1885, she would have been just 2 years younger than Richard's mother, making her an unlikely wife to Richard. However, when we realize that the date is 1895 and not 1885, we can see that this Nellie, while still quite a bit older than her husband, is a feasible wife to Richard and mother to Billie.
Nellie died just 3 months after the birth of her son, Billie.
This problem, along with the fact that Nellie's name is Cox (not Chew) on the stone, has resulted in much confusion among family researchers. No one can positively say now why her stone reads Cox instead of Chew. The problem with the year of birth caused some researchers to believe that this Nellie could not be the wife of Richard N. Chew, because if she was born in 1885, she would have been just 2 years younger than Richard's mother, making her an unlikely wife to Richard. However, when we realize that the date is 1895 and not 1885, we can see that this Nellie, while still quite a bit older than her husband, is a feasible wife to Richard and mother to Billie.
Nellie died just 3 months after the birth of her son, Billie.
Nellie's hand-carved stone looks as if it might indicate that she was born in the year 1885. Actually, the year carved there is 1895. It looks as if someone initially made a mistake and tried to correct it. That, combined with natural deterioration of the stone, has caused the distortion of the third number in her birth year.
This problem, along with the fact that Nellie's name is Cox (not Chew) on the stone, has resulted in much confusion among family researchers. No one can positively say now why her stone reads Cox instead of Chew. The problem with the year of birth caused some researchers to believe that this Nellie could not be the wife of Richard N. Chew, because if she was born in 1885, she would have been just 2 years younger than Richard's mother, making her an unlikely wife to Richard. However, when we realize that the date is 1895 and not 1885, we can see that this Nellie, while still quite a bit older than her husband, is a feasible wife to Richard and mother to Billie.
Nellie died just 3 months after the birth of her son, Billie.
This problem, along with the fact that Nellie's name is Cox (not Chew) on the stone, has resulted in much confusion among family researchers. No one can positively say now why her stone reads Cox instead of Chew. The problem with the year of birth caused some researchers to believe that this Nellie could not be the wife of Richard N. Chew, because if she was born in 1885, she would have been just 2 years younger than Richard's mother, making her an unlikely wife to Richard. However, when we realize that the date is 1895 and not 1885, we can see that this Nellie, while still quite a bit older than her husband, is a feasible wife to Richard and mother to Billie.
Nellie died just 3 months after the birth of her son, Billie.
Family Members
Sponsored by Ancestry
Advertisement
Explore more
Sponsored by Ancestry
Advertisement
