NameHannah Knapp568
Birth9 Jul 1790, Massachusetts85
Census28 Sep 1850, Stout’s Grove, McLean, Illinois569 Age: 60
Death1853, Illinois570 Age: 62
Cause of deathCholera570
FatherSgt. Daniel Knapp (1753-1836)
MotherHannah Savage (1757-1838)
Birth25 Jan 178785,562
Birth MemoFrom Jana Wellman Ulrich
Census1810, Unadilla, Otsego, New York563 Age: 22
Census1820, Unadilla, Otsego, New York564 Age: 32
Census1830, Nelson, Portage, Ohio565 Age: 42
Death4 Sep 1833, Garrettsville, Portage, Ohio566,562 Age: 46
BurialBaptist Cemetery, Garrettsville, Portage, Ohio90,562
OccupationFarmer, businessman [Glassworks co-owner]567
FatherNoah Trask (1755-1830)
MotherDeborah Walbridge (1760-)
Marriage26 Nov 1807, ? Otsego, New York85
ChildrenLyman W. (1808-1863)
 Lucy (1811-<1820)
 Hannah (1813-1856)
 Calvin S. (1816-1841)
 Laura Louisa (1818->1843)
 infant (1819-)
 Daniel K[napp] F[reeman] (1821-1894)
 Lucinda (1823-1849)
 William (1827-)
 Charles Phillips (1829-1830)
Birthabt 1780, Bernardstown, Somerset, New Jersey
Census1840, McLean Co., Illinois571 Age: 60
Deathabt 1840/1850 Age: 60
OccupationNelson township treasurer (1816)
FatherChristopher Redden (1753-1838)
MotherMargaret Grant (~1755-)
Marriage4 Dec 1834, Portage, Ohio572
Notes for Hannah Knapp
We see two Hannah Trasks getting married in Portage County in 1834 (probably one Hannah (Knapp) Trask, since she had several children to take care of, and a daughter Hannah Trask). The Warner, Beers & Co., History of Portage County, Ohio, lists her as one of the founders of the Congretational Church in Garrettsville in 1834 (p. 463). The land records in Portage Co. show the Reddens selling their land shortly thereafter. They appear in the McLean Co., IL, 1840 census records. D.K.F. Trask married there in 1841 as well as Laura and Lucinda Trask. Note that there were TWO Trask-Maxson weddings there in the 1830s-1840s. This increases odds of the Trasks being brother/sister, as well as the Maxsons.

1850 U.S. census of McLean Co., IL, shows Hannah Redding (ae. 61, born MA.), living with Lucy Ann Maxson (ae. 8) and Freeman Park (ae. 2) in Stout's Grove, which is where D.K.F. Trask's children were buried. She is listed only about 3 families ahead of the listing for D.K.F. Trask, who has Sarah A. and Lydia A. Maxon living with him.

Pioneer Women of the Western Reserve states that she came to Ohio in 1824. This is consistent with what we know.

LDS Ancestral file is source for the 9 Jul 1790 birthdate.96
Medical Notes for Freeman (Spouse 1)
His death was described as sudden.
Misc. Notes
There are a number of Trasks living in Unadilla, New York, near Noah Trask at the time of the 1820 census. All of these other than Freeman are know to be sons of Noah, which lends significant support to Freeman also being a son of Noah.

He was signing deeds in Otsego Co., New York, by 1813 along with his wife Hannah and with William Trask and the latter's wife Eunice. He is last seen on a deed/mortage in Otsego in 1821. Banyer (1906) states that he was living in 1810 on the old Morgan Lewis farm on Flax Island Creek and operated a saw mill there. Myers (1976) states that the farm is owned (1976 ?, or possibly repeating Banyer's 1906 information) by Everett Shaver. The Morgan Lewis mentioned bought the place in 1851. The dam for Freeman Trask's sawmill is still visible. This is at the base of lot No. 135 in Myers' map of Otego. Note that the lot numbers here can't be easily reconciled with the early deed descriptions, which put the land mortgaged by Freeman and Hannah Trask as the western 200 acres of lot No. 138. The sawmill is mentioned as being in the southern half of this, as there was a lease for one-third of it with William Trask, begun in 1816 for 16 years. That was mentioned in the 1819 mortgage but not the 1823 mortgage (possibly implying that William died 1819-1823).

This indicates to me that the lot numbering in the Morris Patent area of Myers' map may be in error.

Supposedly in 1815 he went to Allentown, Pennsylvania, to sell cattle for T.R. Austen and failed to return. Austen allegedly later found him living peaceably in Ohio under the name of Isaac Brown. This does not agree with the facts in any matter other than that he moved to Ohio. I note that S.B. Blakely (1883) has several stories about T.R. Austen which lead me to believe they are apochryphal.

He is supposed to have moved to Ohio about 1824-1825. He appeared on Portage County, Ohio, deeds by 4 August 1825 in Thorndike (later Brimfield) Twp. and tax lists not long after that. His first residence was not far from Atwater, which helps explain how Lyman W. Trask and Lucy Mix met.

He is likely the “F. Flask” listed in Unadilla on the 1810 census. This is on the same census page as Daniel Knapp.

The age distribution of people in the 1820 census return is: male under 10 years 1, 10-16 years 1, 16-18 years 0, 16-26 years 0, 26-45 years 1, over 45 years 0; female under 10 years 2, 10-16 years 0, 16-18 years 0, 16-26 years 1, 26-45 years 0, over 45 years 0. This corresponds to Calvin S., Lyman W., and Freeman, then Laura Louisa and Hannah, finally Hannah (mother), though the latter’s age is reported slightly low.

The age distribution of people in the 1830 census return is as follows: males under 5 years, 2; 5-10 years, 1; 10-15 years, 1; 40-50 years, 1; females under 5 years, 1; 10-15 years, 1; 15-20 years 1; 40-50 years, 1. This corresponds to Charles Phillips and William, then Daniel K.F.; then Calvin S. [though he was slightly older], and then Freeman. On the female side the age is slightly low for Lucinda, then ok for Laura Louisa and also for Hannah.

Interestingly, he bought the property from Asa Sawyer, Jr., who is presumably some relation to Catherine Sawyer, of Southington Twp., Trumbull Co., who married his son Calvin S. Trask. This provides a means for their meeting. He sold that property on 18 May 1829, and subsequently moved to Nelson Twp., where he apparently rented. He also appears in the school census records with several children in the household. The next year, after he had died, Lyman W. Trask is shown with several children in the household, while according to our family records, he should only have had one child by then. The 1830 census shows only one child in the 0-5 year age range, making it impossible for Lyman to have had several children in school in 1834. This helps support that Lyman is one of his children. Also Daniel K. F. Trask named one of his sons Lyman W. and Calvin S. Trask's son William Calvin Trask named one of his sons Lyman W. Incidentally, Calvin S. is buried adjacent to Dr. Lyman W. Trask.

So there is various evidence in the names of relationships between the Trasks:
William Trask
Freeman Trask (son), m. Hannah Knapp (dau of Daniel Knapp)
Lyman W[illiam?] Trask (gson)
Hannah Trask (gdau)
Calvin S. Trask (gson)
Lucinda Trask (gdau)
Laura Louisa Trask (gdau)
Daniel K[napp?] F[reeman?] Trask (gson)
Hannah N. Trask (ggdau)
Lyman W. Trask (ggson)
Lucinda Trask (ggdau)
Laurette Trask (ggdau)
Charles Philips Trask (gson)

LDS Ancestral File data (which calls him "Truman" Trask) is the source of the 25 Jan 1787 birthdate. I had estimated him as 1786 based on census and obituary data. LDS file is also the source of the marriage date. [Contact the submitter.]

He does not have a surviving gravestone, if one existed. He is buried adjacent to his son Charles according to the sexton records for the Cemetery.

He was involved in a lawsuit related to the Franklin Glassworks in Portage County. I have a copy of the article mentioning this and I need to enter it here.


History of the Franklin Glass Works
Portage County, Ohio
By George L. Miller

2 Summer 2004 Bottles and Extras
Archaeological excavation of the Franklin Glass Works undertaken by Case Western Reserve University and the Western Reserve Historical Society from 1968 through 1970 prompted the need for a clear view of the factory’s history and its relationship to the surrounding community.
Research efforts first focused on the location of the glassworks in Portage County, which in the 1820s was a sparsely settled area of Ohio. Between 1820 and 1830, however, the population of the country grew from 8,654 to 18,747. The number of residents in Franklin Township, where the glasshouse was situated, increased from 348 to 803 in the same period.
Prior to the War of 1812, most glasshouses in America were established east of the Alleghenies, near the centers
of population. The major exception to this was the glass industry that developed in Pittsburgh. The Trade Embargo of 1807 and the War of 1812 made the buying public more dependent on native manufacturers. While there were only nine glassworks in operation in the United States in 1800, at least forty-four were built between 1808 and 1814. By 1820, half of the glasshouses in America had failed, largely the result of the importation of European glass after the War of 1812.
1 Congress responded to this large influx of foreign goods by passing the Tariff Act of 1816, which placed specific duties on black glass bottles and window glass and a 20% ad valorem duty on all other glass.2
However, it failed to protect the American glass industry because of a subsidy given to British glass manufacturers. In 1815 and again in 1816, the English Excise Act of 1812 was renewed. This Act taxed glass that was manufactured and consumed in England. If the glass was exported, however, then the tax was refunded to the manufacturer; in addition, he received a bounty for exporting it.
3 Because of this subsidy, the English were able to compete quite freely with American manufacturers, leading to the demise of a number of American glasshouses.

One way in which the Americans could compete with English glass producers was
to move their industries to the interior part of the country, thereby placing the cost of
land transportation between their product and the imported glass. A U.S. Senate
committee report from 1816 states “that a ton of goods could be brought 3,000
miles from Europe to America for about nine dollars, but that for the same sum, it
could be moved only 30 miles overland in this country.”4 This high cost of land
transportation appears to have offset the English subsidy judging from the number
of glass factories built west of the Appalachian Mountians after the War of
1812. Certainly, many glassmakers moved west during this period.
Another reason for going west may have been the availability of firewood for
glass furnaces. In 1810, Tench Coxe reported that:
Wood fuel and consequently alkaline salts are to be procured with a profit, because the land from which a glass manufacturer or potter should take them would be greatly increased in value, by the removal of the wood.
Fuel, fire clay, silicates and market would all enter
into the decision of where to build a glassworks.
In 1824 the American glass industry received
further assistance by the passing of a stronger
protective tariff. Between 1824 and 1837, sixty-four
new glasshouses were erected, thirty-three of them
in the Midwest.
7 Eight of these were located in Ohio during the 1820s; one was
the Franklin Glass Works in Portage County.
In January, 1823, the Ohio legislature passed a law
exempting “all mills, all woolen and cotton manufactories, and all manufactories of
iron or glass” from taxation.
8 This exemption, the 1824 tariff, the distance from English competition and the
availability of fuel and raw materials undoubtedly all played a part in the
selection of Franklin Township for a new glass factory.
Aaron Olmstead of Hartford, Connecticut, had purchased all 13,830
acres of Franklin Township from the Connecticut Land Company in
September, 1799, but died before he could develop it. Sometime before September
13, 1817, the trustee of Olmstead’s estate entered into negotiations with Jesse
Farnam and Charles Douglas of Westfield, Massachusetts, who wished to purchase
6,295 acres. Lot 80, upon which the Franklin Glass Works was later built, was
included in the transaction.
9 Through a [Figure 1]
Bottles and Extras Summer 2004 3 series of five deeds, the two men were able
to secure clear title to roughly 90% of the 6,295 acres before their notes of loan were
due in 1822. Although Lot 80 was not among those lots cleared by the deeds, it
does not appear to have reverted to the Olmstead estate because Farnam and
Douglas are named as the owners of Lot 80 in the Portage County land tax records
for 1823, 1824 and 1825. The title to this lot was finally cleared from the Olmstead
estate by a deed to Jesse Farnam dated November 28, 1828.10 Unfortunately,
none of these documents includes specific mention of a glasshouse.
Because of the tax exemption status extended to glass factories, the glassworks
is not named in the Ohio land tax records between 1823 and 1830. The exemption
law was reversed in 1832, but the tax list for that year could not be located. On the
1833 list, however, no improvements are shown for Lot 80, suggesting that the
Franklin Glass Works was out of business by that date.
Farnam eventually acquired an additional 2,900 acres of the township
from the Olmstead estate; the two Massachusetts men were considered in
effect to be “the proprietors of the
township.”11 With their large land
holdings, Farnam and Douglas would
presumably have been interested in
developing their lands so as to increase
its value, especially since improvements
were not taxed until after 1832. One of
the easiest ways to enhance land value was
to clear it of timber. As discussed above,
Tench Coxe recommended building a
glass factory or pottery as a good means
of doing this.
It is significant that both Farnam and
Douglas had previous interests in glass
factories. Both were among the
incorporating owners of the Chester Glass
Works in Berkshire County,
Massachusetts in June, 1814.12 Although
it was a short-lived venture, closing in
1815, Farnam and Douglas would have
come into contact with glass craftsman
and learned something of the business.
The collapse of the eastern market after
the War of 1812 would have created a pool
of unemployed glass workers who could
have been interested in a project that
would establish a glassworks out of the
reach of the cheaper imports.
The success of the Mantua
Glass Works and the
Woodward, Hopkins, and Ladd
Glass Works in Franklin Mills
(Kent) might have suggested to
Farnam and Douglas the
feasibility of opening a
glasshouse in that area.
Whether or not they were
actually involved in the
undertaking is not known,
however. No personal papers
of either Farnam or Douglas
have yet come to light which
might clarify their role in the
founding of the Franklin Glass
In the 1829 land tax records,
Farnam is listed as owning all
193 acres of Lot 80 where the
factory was erected, but no
information is given with
regard to the physical plant of
the factory. A note indicates
that taxes had been paid on one
section of the lot containing 53
1/2 acres and one of the 100
acres; 39 acres were
delinquent. This situation
suggests intended sales of land.
Records for 1830 name Samuel
Foster as the owner of the 53 1/2-acre
parcel, but Farnam still owned the other
parcels. The glassworks was located on
the 100-acre section. According to Ohio’s
law, joint owners of land could each
separately pay his own part of the tax
due.13 It is likely, therefore, that there was
an attempt to purchase the site of the
factory, but the transaction was not
completed. In 1835, Farnam sold the
westernmost 148 acres of the lot to
Christian Cackler for $680, or about $4.60
an acre. A land boom was well underway
at that time, but the low price does not
reveal that a glass factory existed on the
property. No mention is made of a
glassworks or any other improvements in
this deed. Cackler later noted in his
published Recollections, “In the year
1824, James Edmunds, Henry Parks and
a brother built a glass factory on the land
now owned by Christian Cackler.”14
According to the 1850 plat book for
Franklin Township, Cackler’s parcel
contained 35 acres of plow land, 98 acres
of meadow and 15.8 acres of woods and
inarable land, probably a marshy area.
Mengas Anderson owned the property
early in this century. When he visited the
site during the archaeological excavation,
he recalled how they would drive the
horses back and forth over the factory area
to break up the brick walls (most likely
the furnaces) with the plow. Because so
little information about the factory site
was contained in the written records, it
was thanks to Anderson and successive
owners who had plowed the land that
knowledge of the glasshouse site was
preserved over the years.
The Factory
On September 10, 1825, the Western
, a newspaper published in
Ravenna, carried the advertisement which
announced the opening of the Franklin
Glass Works [Fig. 1]. The owners named
at the bottom of the notice were Parks,
Edmund and Parks. At the end of three
weeks, the ownership was changed to
James H. Edmunds [Fig. 2]. The
announcement continued in this form for
six months. These were the only
advertisements of the factory to appear in
the Courier for the years checked, which
included 1825, 1826, 1830 and 1831.
Cackler had stated that the factory had
been built in 1824, but it was not unusual
for a year to pass before production could
[Figure 2] get underway. Another bit of evidence
4 Summer 2004 Bottles and Extras
supporting the 1824 date was found in the
records of the Portage County Court of
Common Pleas. Richard and George
Parks, the probable partners of Edmunds,
declared their intent to become United
States citizens in May of that year. That
they had emigrated from Great Britain is
indicated by their renouncement of
allegiance to “any foreign prince,
Pottentate, State or Sovereignty what-soever
and Particularly to George the fourth
of Great Britain, Ireland and Scotland.”15
If the Parks brothers were practical
glassmakers, they must have broken the
English laws restricting the emigration of
skilled craftsmen, laws which were only
repealed in 1824. This declaration, the
1825 advertisements, and Cackler’s
reminiscences are the only sources which
mention the Parks brothers. Cackler,
writing forty years after the event, gave
the name of only one brother, which he
remembered as Henry. None of the
sources checked, however, produced any
sign of a Henry Parks.
While the Parks brothers were in
Portage County as early as May, 1824,
they apparently left before the July 4, 1827
census of white males twenty-one years
and older. If the brothers had been the
capitalists behind the Franklin Glass
Works, they might have persevered to
recover their investment. If their share
of the partnership was in return for
practical glass knowledge, they may have
exchanged an uncertain financial
arrangement for the security of regular
pay for work performed. The newspaper
advertisements indicate the Parks brothers
relinquished their partnership status soon
after the first blow was begun. Even if
they had been bought out, this change
suggest there were financial problems
during the first and critical year of
Nonetheless, the Franklin Glass Works
continued in operation after the Parks
brothers left. Perhaps their skills were
not critical or replacements had been
found. How long James Edmunds ran the
glass factory as sole proprietor is not
In February, 1827, during the second
season of production, Edmunds and
Cackler borrowed $139.47 on a two-year
note from Jesse Farnam.16 This suggests
that Cackler may have been a partner with
Edmunds, although the glass factory itself
is not mentioned. Interestingly, Farnam’s
note called for the payment to be in grain,
or cattle.
The third blowing season, from the fall
of 1827 to the spring of 1828, apparently
did not produce enough profit to continue
producing glass. The chief evidence for
this was found in the September 6, 1828
issue of the Western Courier, where the
following announcement was published
by the Commissioner Insolvents:
Notice: Will be exposed to sale at
public venue at the glass works in
Franklin on the 15th day of September
next…four hogs, a quantity of oats,
utensils for making glass, also farming
& other utencils, &c…these articles were
assigned to me by James H.
Edmunds…for the benefit of…creditors.
– The said James H…will make
application to the next court of Common
Pleas to be holden at Ravenna…on the
eighth of September next for the benefit
of the act for the relief of insolvent
During the summer months when
glassblowing had ceased, furnaces were
repaired and raw materials and fuel were
acquired for the next season. That
Edmunds applied for insolvency in the
early fall may mean that he could not
obtain the necessary supplies or labor
force to begin full production.
Edmunds was apparently able to
recover from this insolvency, probably by
acquiring new financial sources. In a suit
brought by Freeman Trask, Cackler and
Issac Crank, or Grant, are named as
partners of James H. Edmunds. The suit
was over a due bill, issued November 13,
1829 for $20 worth of material supplied
to the Franklin Glass Works.17 This
suggests that the 1829-1930 season of
glassblowing had begun, but how long
production lasted is not known. A garbage
pit to the north of the Franklin Glass
Works contained an 1830 American large
cent indicating that someone, possibly
Edmunds, was living at the premises into
1830, if not later.
In January, 1830, Jesse Farnam
brought suit over the loan of $139.47 cited
above. Cackler and Edmunds argued that
Farnam was not available and did not
appoint an agent to receive the grain or
cattle, which they were ready to pay.
Moreover, they claimed that:
The said Jesse Farnam at the time of
the commencement of this suit was
indebted to them in the sum of two
hundred dollars for money by them paid
laid out and expended for him and for
money by him and received to and for
their use, and for goods by them sold and
delivered to him, and for work and labor
by them done and performed for him.
This suggestes that Farnam had some
relationship or agreement with the
Franklin Glass Works. Unfortunately,
Farnam did not answer this charge and
the case was dropped. Farnam is not listed
in the advertisements or named in Trask’s
suit as a partner, but this role may have
been as landlord, receiving some part of
the product as rent. Perhaps he had given
money to have his vast land holdings
cleared of timber. Farnam’s previous
experience with the Chester Glass Works
may have made him wary of investing,
and so he made a loan instead.
Glass may have been made into 1831,
but the omission of the factory from the
1833 tax list implies that it was definitely
out of business by that time. A number of
factories may have figured in its closing.
When the Franklin Glass Works was built,
it was safely removed from foreign
competition. However, there were two
other glass facilities in Portage County,
at Mantua and at Franklin Mills, which
would have also been competing for the
market in the Western Reserve. There was
also strong competition from glasshouses
in Pittsburgh and Zanesville. With the
completion of the Erie Canal in 1825, and
the Ohio Canal in 1832, the Western
Reserve was no longer isolated, and glass
from the east could easily and cheaply be
shipped west via the canals. Even before
the Erie Canal was finished, window glass
from Geneva, New York, was being
advertised as far west as Detriot.19
In 1832, a survey of American
manufacturers was conducted by the
House of Representatives to evaluate the
need for a new tariff. Almost all of the
glass manufacturers who responded said
that glass prices had been falling for a
period of six or seven years, the result of
domestic competition.20 There is some
evidence that this decline in prices may
have been accomplished – at least in
Franklin Township – by increasing
problems in securing wood fuel for the
glass furnaces. Although difficult to
document, the introduction of pressed
glass must also have altered the market.
The profitability of glass factories in Ohio
was also diminished by the removal of the
tax-exempt status in 1832. At what point
these economic forces would have brought
about the collapse of the Franklin Glass
Bottles and Extras Summer 2004 5
works is not known, but it was probably a
furnace failure that tipped the scales and
ended the enterprise.
Archaeological excavation of the well
at the Franklin Glass Works yielded
fragments of one of the glory holes, large
crucible shards, and large boulders of
glass – one of which was so large that it
plugged up the well. These are obviously
the resulting debris from a major furnace
failure, which must have been the coup
de grâce
of the glasshouse. A glass
furnace full of hot glass represents a large
investment in fuel, crucibles and labor.
If it fails – if several pots break, or if the
furnace collapses – it is often enough to
bankrupt a glassworks. From Edmund’s
own financial insolvency and the
partnership changes, it seems that the
Franklin Glass Works was no great
financial success. The collapse of the
furnace broke the willingness of the
investors to advance any more money.
A Note on James H. Edmunds
Census records indicate that James H.
Edmunds was born between 1780 and
1790, but the place of his birth, and where
he learned the glass trade, have not been
determined. The 1820 census for Chester
Township, Berkshire County,
Massachusetts lists a John Edmunds and
a Thomas Edmunds, who may have been
related to the Edmunds in question.
A venture in which Edmunds may have
been involved was the Zanesville White
Flint Glass Works, which published the
following advertisement in the Cincinnati
Gazette for May 2, 1820:
Zanesville White Flint Glass
Manufacturing Company, Edmunds,
Bingham & Co., respectfully informs the
public that they have commenced the
above business in its various branches,
on the improved plan, and from their long
experience, both in Europe and American,
feel justified in saying that the glass
manufactured at their works shall not be
inferior to any made in the United
A major difference between the
Zanesville factory and the Franklin works
is that the latter enterprise did not
advertise, nor presumably manufacture,
“white flint glass.”
It could not be proved that the
Edmunds cited in connection with
Zanesville is James H. Edmunds of
Franklin Township. The 1820 census for
Muskingum County, where Zanesville
was located, does not list anyone named
Edmunds. Only heads of household are
specified, but Edmunds may have boarded
with his parents. There is a John Bingham
listed in Brush Creek Township, for
example, whose household contained two
men between 16 and 18 years, two
between 26 and 45 years and one over 45
years of age. From the Portage County
census of 1830, it is clear that James
Edmunds was between 40 and 50 years
old at that time, so it is plausible.
However, according to the census taker,
no members of the Bingham household
were involved in manufacturing.
The only personal statement of James
H. Edmunds that has survived is a toast
that he gave on July 4, 1825: “By Mr.
Edmunds, - The clay of the West, not
inferior to any clay in the known world.”22
This salutation, one of many patriotic
toasts, may refer to Henry Clay, one of
the driving forces behind the protective
tariff of 1824. Given his business,
Edmunds must have delighted in the pun,
because the toast can also be interpreted
to mean the clay from which the crucibles
for melting glass were made. A resistant
fire clay was required for these crucibles
and deposits of this type of clay are rather
rare. Availability of crucible quality clay
was an important attraction for the
industry in the Western Reserve.
In March, 1831, Edmunds was charged
with forgery in the Portage County Court
of Common Pleas. The case was
continued until the May, 1832 term, when
the prosecuting attorney dropped the case.
Unfortunately, the nature of Edmund’s
alleged forgery is not described.23
Farnam’s suit agains Edmunds and
Cackler indicates that Edmunds remained
in Portage County at least until March,
1833, but his whereabouts after that date
are unknown.
Products of the Franklin Glass Works
Most of the glasswares made at the
Franklin Glass Works were bottles, flasks,
tumblers and milk pans patterned in dip
molds, having a plain or swirled rib
design. A small quantity of sherds from
some three-piece mold blown bottles were
also recovered. The color of the glass
ranged from light aqua to an olive green
and from a light amber to brown. All of
these colors could have resulted from
varying amounts of iron in the glass and
the degree of oxidation of reduction
involved in processing each batch. Rims
on milk pans were usually folded over
while others vessel rims tended to be only
fire polished.
Other Franklin Glass Works
David S. Brose of the Cleveland
Museum of Natural History has his report
describing the factory excavations and the
glass produced by the Franklin Glass
Works. The collections from the
excavations have been turned over to the
Western Reserve Historical Society in
Cleveland, Ohio.
Collections from the house area of the
Franklin Glass Works were analyzed by
Meredith Moodey for her masters thesis
at the College of William and Mary. This
thesis was completed in 1987.
The following articles contain more
information on the excavation and
artifacts from the Franklin Glass Works:
George L. Miller and Silas Hurry,
“Ceramic Supply in an Economically
Isolated Frontier, Community: Portage
County of the Ohio Western Reserve,
1800-1825,” Historical Archaeology, 17,
No. 1 (1983): 80-92.
George L. Miller and Meredith
Moodey, “Of Fish and Sherds: A Model
for Estimating Vessel Populations from
Minimal Vessel Counts,” Historical
, 20, No. 2 (1986): 59-85.
I would like to express my gratitude to
the numerous people who helped in my
research of the Franklin Glass Works.
First, I would like to recognize the
financial backing provided by the Western
Reserve Historical Society, which enabled
me to gather the material for this history.
The gifts of James F. Courtney, Mrs.
Warren H. Corning and other members
of the Committee to Restore the Franklin
Glass Works, made this research possible.
My report is an extension of Case Western
Reserve University excavations, which
were funded by a grant from the Kettering
Family Foundation to David S. Brose. In
addition to the funding I received, I would
like to thank the several people who were
the most helpful in my research. Both
James Courtney and the late Duncan
Wolcott were very helpful in the beginning
stages of this project when I needed it
most. Jim’s advice on my interpretations
of various legal documents from the
Portage County Court House saved me
from making several errors in the
6 Summer 2004 Bottles and Extras
interpretation of those records. Virginia
Hawley and other librarians at the Western
Reserve Historical Society pointed out
many sources I would have overlooked.
John Shoup, of Kent, Ohio, was a
storehouse of information about Kent’s
history, which he generously shared with
me. Arnold R. Pilling, my mentor Wayne
State University in Detroit, read early
drafts of the history and made helpful
suggestions. To all of these people, and
others, I owe a debt for their support and
1 McKearin, George S. and Helen.
American Glass (New York: Crown,
1948), pp. 132-133.
2 McKearin, American Glass, p. 133.
3 Jarves, Deming. Reminiscences of
Glass-Making (1868, repr. Ed. Great
Neck, N.Y.: Beatrice C. Weinstock,
1968), p. 83
4 Quoted in George Rogers Taylor, The
Transportation Revolution 1815-60
(“The Economic History of the United
States,” 4; New York: Harper & Row,
1951), pp. 132-33.
5 White, Harry Hall. “Migrations of
Early Glassworkers,” Antiques, 32, No.
2 (August, 1937): pp. 64-67.
6 Coxe, Tench. A Statement of the Arts
and Manufactures of the United States
of America for the Year 1810
repr. Ed. New York: Luther Cromwell
Co., n.d.), p. xliv.
7 McKearin, American Glass, p. 135.
8 Chase, Solomon. The Statutes of
Ohio and of the Northwestern Territory
Adoped or Extracted from 1788 to
1833 Inclusive
, 2 (Cincinnati: Corey
& Fairbank, 1834), p. 1258.
9 Portage County Deeds, 4: 261, 298.
Portage County Court House (hereafter
10 Portage County Deeds, 4: 300; 5: 72-
73; 7: 42-43; 11: 240.
11 Cackler, Christian. Recollections of
an Old Settler
(Ravenna: Record
Publishing Co., 1964), p. 22. This
book reprinted newspaper articles
written by Cackler in the 1870s.
12 McKearin, American Glass, p. 592.
13 Portage County Land Tax Records,
Kent State Univ., Library, State of
Ohio, A Compilation of Laws, Treaties,
Resolutions and Ordinances…which
relate to land in the State of Ohio…to
the years 1815-16
(Columbus: George
Nashee, 1825), p. 432.
14 Portage County Deeds, 20: 597.
Cackler, Recollections, p. 20.
15 Portage County Court of Common
Pleas, Journal 4, p. 146. PCC.
16 Portage County Court of Common
Pleas, Vol. 15-O, p. 134.
17 Portage County Court of Common
Pleas, Vol. 13-M, p. 136-39.
18 Portage County Court of Common
Pleas, Vol. 13-M, p. 136.
19 Detroit Gazette (June 4, 1824).
20 United States House of Executive
, Vol. 223, House
Documents, Vol. 7, Pt. 2, Documents
308, pp. 523-32.
21 Quoted in McKearin, American
, pp. 232-33.
22 Western Courier (July 9, 1825).
23 Portage County Court of Common
Pleas, Journal 5, March term 1831, p.
251; May term 1832, p. 432.
Note: This article first appeared in The
Glass Club Bulletin
of The National Early
American Glass Club, No. 152, Spring,
1987, pp. 3-9.
Figure 1:
Advertisement of the Franklin
Glass Works, published in Ravenna’s
Western Courier (September 10, 1825),
with Parks, Edmunds and Parks named
as owners. [Photo courtesy Western
Reserve Historical Society.]
Figuire 2: Advertisement placed three
weeks later, with only James H. Edmunds
named as owner. [Photo courtesy Western
Reserve Historical Society.]
George L. Miller
Senior Laboratory Analyst
Office of Excavation and Conversation
Colonial Williamsburg Foundation
Williamsburg, Virginia

Birth: 1787
Death: Sep. 4, 1833 
Age 46 yrs
Baptist Cemetery
Portage County
Ohio, USA
Plot: R05 G06 
Created by: ProgBase
Record added: Nov 01, 2009
Find A Grave Memorial# 4381329438
Notes for Richard (Spouse 2)
Richard was chosen as treasurer for Nelson township in 1816 when it was set off from Hiram township.

He is listed in the 1840 U.S. Census of McLean Co., IL, but Hannah Redding is living with two young children (ae 2 & 8) in 1850. So he probably died 1840-1850.
Portage Co., Ohio, Marraiges, v. 1, shows a Richard Redden marrying Nancy Jacobs on 17 Sep 1818, possibly his first wife.
Last Modified 13 Jun 2011Created 4 Jul 2012 using Reunion for Macintosh