The name of this earliest La Rue ancestor came from traditional genealogical research. Take a specific name in a line and follow it backwards generation by generation. This means that I looked at birth, death and marriage records for my parents, then grandparents etc. and on those documents you will find the names of their parents and sometimes where they were born. In this manner I found that my grandfather Roy Hamilton La Rue (1Myrtle Juhlin 2 Ruth Hein) was the son of Wilbur Chester La Rue (Alfaretta Ida Abbott) was the son of Hamilton La Rue (Elizabeth Jane Upham) was the son of John Larue (Rebecca Ballard) was the son of James Larue (Elizabeth Jordan).
Since this will be a La Rue forum, I will not go into the details or the genealogy of their wives. I will give their names. But let me say right here and now, I can trace the wives lines back much further with numerous lines serving in the Revolutionary War and at least 3 lines of descent from the Mayflower Pilgrims!
So, the information that I have gathered from my own research and the contributed information from others for James states that he was born 22 Apr 1758 in Virginia. The year of birth is consistent with early census records which determine his year of birth between 1750 and 1760. I have not found any document which verifies his exact birth date. The location of his birth being given as Virginia agrees with the census questions asked of his children in later years, where these children report that their parents were both born in Virginia. At that 1758 date, Virgina could include also parts of Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, Pennsylvania etc. Some earlier researchers have offered Loudon county as their original source. I have found no documents to substantiate this. I am still looking. Only through the accumulation of many documents and their combined information will we be able to find out more about James & Elizabeth and where they were located before entering Belmont later Guernsey Co., Ohio around 1806.
Other reports from earlier genealogy offer that James and his father Jabez served in the last year of the Revolutionary War. I have no idea where this information came from. So far I have found 1) no evidence that James served in that war and 2) that his father's name was Jabez. The name could be misfiled, they may not have reported their participation (remember, if the American colonists had not won that war, they would have been considered traitors and therefore subject to English law for traitors!) or it is simply wrong. Personally, at this time I think that the information is in error. I think that an early researcher drew erroneous conclusions from information. But, I could also be wrong. The location of the land that James obtained in Belmont later Guernsey County, was in the US Military District Survey, that being land awarded to veterans of the Revolutionary War. Could it have been part of the dowry for Elizabeth from her father? Someone may have felt that this meant that James served in the War. I have not found anything to support or contradict this assumption.
Likewise I have found nothing to support the name of Jabez as his father. In fact, in conventional naming practices of the time, James does not name his first born son Jabez, rather William. And at no later time does he name any of his other 4 sons Jabez. Further, none of his sons pass on the name of Jabez as a given nor a middle name, nor do any of his daughters use the name. This would be very unusual for the time. Personally, I find the name William as the name of his father as a much more likely candidate. And, since it seems as if James and Elizabeth and their children pass along the names of Elizabeth/ Eliza, James, William and Laban, it seems to me that they were not adverse to passing on names to later generations.
About the same time as James arrived in the area, one John LaRue settled there also. In fact, he purchased land in section 13, not far from James land. John seems to be younger, with birth between the years of 1760 and 1770. Earlier researchers said that a brother of James lived with them, and since John does not purchase his land until 1825 he could very likely have lived with them until then. That earlier research also says that they called this brother "Uncle Ned". And that this Ned was a fiddler. What appears to have happened, if I am translating the information from the 1830 census correctly, is that at the death of James, John combined households with his sister-in-law and some of her younger children. The older children were either already married or those who were not, were placed with older siblings. By 1832, John Larrow/Larue Sr. sold his land in section 13 to his possible nephew John Jr., the son of James Sr. And at the Special Court Session in Nov. 1825, where the administrators were named in the estate proceedings of James Larrow/Larue Sr., surety was offered by this John Larrow/Larue Sr. and Stephen Ballard the father-in-law to Jame's son John Jr. All of which I believe supports the theory of John and James being related in some manner. I believe it to be brothers, but cousins is a possibility also.
Further court records and land record research may help add more information. And, the search continues.
