I'm getting into this discussion very late! The information that you are supplying is very helpful. I have some additional inquiries along the same line.
Recently I have been reviewing the 1870, 1860 and 1850 US Census records for Malone, Franklin Co., NY. I have also looked a little bit at some of the neighboring towns such as Constable and Westville.
Apart from anything else, this recent activity has reinforced the notion that prior to 1930 surnames were either absolutely butchered by the enumerators or that surnames were very flexible and many people were not particularly tied to a specific form of their surname. Literacy (or lack of English literacy) may have played a role as well.
I began scanning the 1870 census for the names Lamitie and Lamica. As many are aware these names are related – my grandfather was born a Lamica (at least he appears in the early census records as Lamica) but applied for his Social Security Number and died as Lamitie. As far as I can tell Lamitie is far less common in the census records up to 1930. I did find one Lamitie family in the 1930 Malone census – Raphael Lamitie age 28 and his wife Angeline age 28 had 4 daughters and a son living with them on “Bare Hill” Road. All the rest are Lamica.
In the 1870 census I found that the spelling ‘Lamica’ is rarely correct – from what I can see it is ‘Lamiky’, ‘Lamity’, ‘Lameky’ etc. The hand writing isn’t always easy to read and the spelling is creative to say the least. The family units, however, provide at least a cursory ‘check’ that we have the correct ‘Louis’ (or is the ‘Lewis’?), Peter (Pieter?), or Francis etc.
Then I can across the name LaDuke associated with what might otherwise be thought a Lamica clan. Has anyone else noticed this?
Here is the line of reasoning:
Pieter Lamky (? Lamity ?) age 75 (b. Canada c. 1795)
w. Angeline age 62 (b. Canada c. 1808)
Child – Marsaline (sp?) age 14
Child – Oliver age 8
Francis Lameky (sp?) age 24 (b. NY c. 1846)
w. Olivia (sp?) age 21
Child – Frank age 3
Child – Olivia age 2
Child – Angeline age 1/12
Peter Lamatiee (sp?) age 65 (b. Canada c. 1795)
w. None listed
*Francis age 16 (the ages are off a little but is this the same Francis from above in 1870?)
*Mary age 14
*Zelick (?) age 12 (the name Zelick is also the first name of the person on the next record
*Melinda age 9
Peter LaDuke age 49 (b. Canada the age is off a few years but…)
w. Angeline age 48 (b. Canada)
Angeline age 15 (b. Canada)
Peter Jr age 14 )b. Canada
Andrew age 10 (b. NY)
Mary age 7 (b. Canada – same Mary as above – age is off?)
Francis age 4 (b. NY – same Francis as above – age is off?)
Catherine age 1 (b. NY)
Sophia age 17 (b. Canada)
I’d love to get your thoughts on this. It isn’t the cleanest line from 1850 to 1870 but it looks plausible if not likely. Has anyone ever come across the use of the name LaDuke in the Lamica/Lamitie tree? I know there were a number of LaDuke clans in the area so perhaps this is all coincidence.
On the same census page for 1870 you can also find Mitchell Lameky age 24 and his wife Angeline age 18. On the preceding page in 1870 is Lewis Lamity (Lamiky?)age 36 along with his wife Elizabeth age 36 and their seven children that include Dolphus age 4 (Adolphus – my great-great-grandfather). Incidentally, the Degons with daughter Matilda age 4 (future wife of Adolphus and thus my great-great-grandmother) are just a few pages away.
That should be enough food-for-thought.
I look forward to receiving your insights and thoughts.