Andre Barnett
Born:
Died:

Rebecca Barnett
Presumed wife of Andre Barnett
Born:
Died:

Henry “Harry” Barnett
Born: Warsaw, Poland, February 11, 1836
Died: Leadville, May 15, 1914

Sarah R. (Hyman) Barnett
Widow of Levi Hyman (Until his death in 1896)
Married to Phillip/Michael Friedman,
A.K.A. “Mike” Miller (1897-1898)
Second wife of Henry Barnett
(1898- until his death in 1914)
Born: Poland, 1863
Died: Denver, March 2, 1926

Henry “Boots” Hyman
Son of Levi and Sarah Hyman, stepson of Henry
Born: 1885
Died: Leadville, January 9, 1904

Mary (Hyman) (Katz) Moberg
Born: St. Louis Missouri, May 23, 1887
Died: Leadville, August 12, 1953

David Elliot Hyman
Son of Levi and Sarah Hyman, stepson of Henry
Born: Leadville, August 17, 1891.
Died:

Sophia (Hyman) Harris
Born: Leadville, 1894.
Died:

Andre Barnett was the first of the Barnett family to appear in Leadville. His precise familial relationship to Henry Barnett is unclear, but Andre and his presumed wife, Rebecca Barnett, appear to have lived in the home of widow Sophia Hyman from 1898 until their last mention in the Leadville City Directory during 1918. [1] Andre and Rebecca are seldom documented by any other Leadville records. It would be likely that Andre is a son to Henry from a previous marriage. Henry Barnett was born in Warsaw, Poland, on February 11, 1836. He immigrated to the United States and arrived at Portland, Maine, in September of 1852. [2] It is unclear what preceded his migration to Leadville, or his motivations for doing so, but his story there really begins a year prior to his arrival with the trials and tribulations of the widow, Sarah Hyman, whom he would wed sometime between 1899 and 1901. This date is unclear as no records can be found to confirm the specific event. However, Sarah officially divorced Phillip Friedman on June 10, 1898. [3] The last mention of Sarah with the last name of Hyman is from a newspaper article published in September of 1899 [4] (and after her divorce from Friedman). United States census records indicate Henry and Sarah married in 1899, [5] and this is the first documented appearance of him in Leadville. [6] The first reference to Henry in Sarah’s home, located at 115 East 3rd Street, is in June of 1901 and she is then recorded as “Sarah J. Barnett”. [7] The “Barnett” households escape enumeration in the United States census before 1910. [8]

Business Directory listing for S. Barnett in The Herald Democrat.

S. Barnett. The Herald Democrat. Sunday, June 12, 1904. Page 7.

Sarah Barnett’s story is an interesting one. She originally arrived in Leadville during 1889 with her first husband, Levi Hyman. [9] The household had six children. However, the great disparity between the ages of Sarah and Levi, 37 years by most records, would suggest that Sarah was not Levi’s first wife. Only four of these children, Mary Hyman [10] Katz [11] Moberg, [12] David, Sophia, and Henry “Boots” Hyman would ever be recorded in the Barnett household, suggesting that only those four of the Hyman progenies belonged to Sarah. Sarah and Henry Barnett, understandably, would have no children in common with their union given both of their advanced ages. Sarah ran a clothing shop from her 3rd Street residence and was often recorded in the occupation of “tailor.” Henry was known to have had several vocations that included saloon keeper, junk dealer, real estate investor, and a “caller” [13] for the Colorado & Midland Railroad. [14]

After Levi Hyman’s death in April of 1896, Sara briefly married Phillip (A.K.A. Michael) Friedman, A.K.A. Michael “Mike” Miller, a man half her age, during 1897:

Orthodox Hebrew society circles are in quite a flutter of excitement over the marriage of Mrs. Sarah Hyman and Michael Friedman, sometimes known as Michael Miller. The ceremony was performed by the rabbi of the Congregation Bnesseth [Knesseth], Zunda Greenwald, in the presence of a number of friends. The bride is a widow of some 56 summers, while the groom is almost 28 years old. Friedman has been a devoted admirer of Mrs. Hyman for some time, and during his recent troubles in the justice court she proved to be a good friend by going on his bond and keeping him out of a prison cell. The widow did not apparently desire that Friedman should take her for herself alone, but deeded over to him a large share of her real estate, of which she owns a considerable amount. Although the marriage might be said to be of May and December, both parties to the connubial event appear to be well satisfied and happy. [15]

Unfortunately, the marriage not only failed but appears to solidify Friedman’s plan to defraud the widow out of her recently acquired estate. There is confirmation that the real property mentioned in the above notice, namely Sarah’s home at 115 West 3rd Street, was transferred to Friedman that March. [16] The bond in question was connected to a court case the previous February where Friedman, A.K.A., Michael Miller, swindled Herman Zeiler [17] out of $39, and had also been accused of hiring local boys to steal property for him to resell. [18] Thus it appears that Friedman’s time in Leadville paints a less than flattering portrait of a nomadic grifter who attempted a series of unsuccessful confidence games during his brief tenure in the city.

The following article appeared in the April 23, 1897, edition of Leadville’s The Herald Democrat newspaper:

MRS. HYMAN’S TROUBLES.

Hires a Man to Run a Dye Works and He Takes the Cash.

Mrs. Friedman, nee Hyman, is in trouble again. She added a so-called French dyeing works to her business and installed P. A. Kantor as manager. In the meantime her husband, Mike Miller, or Friedman, returned to his marital allegiance and with a well conceived story of a partnership, about to be established between himself and a small fruit dealing company, obtained a sum of money from the old lady. Kantor also got money with which to buy supplies for the “dyeing works.” Both have disappeared. Miller took out of pawn a suit of clothes, overcoat and a watch and chain before leaving.

Nor do her troubles end here. Her twelve year old son Henry, consumed with disgust at condition of affairs, boarded an eastbound train and, by means of freight cars, brake beams, etc., arrived a few days ago at Victor where he is now stopping with his sister, Mrs. Blackman. His condition upon arrival there is described as anything but prosperous. [19]

How these issues played out in the legal arena is unclear, but Sarah did retain her property. She and Friedman were officially divorced on June 10, 1898, [20] and that same year both she, listed as Mrs. Sarah Hyman, [21] and Andre Barnett are listed as residents of her home located at 115 E. 3rd Street in the 1898 Leadville city directory. [22]

Apparently, there were no lingering impacts to Sarah’s reputation despite the less than wholesome impressions profiled by the press in 1897. Sarah was well liked and attended ladies’ functions and parties around town. [23]

Henry invested in mining ventures, [24] though it appears he was far more interested in the hospitality services. In October of 1899, Henry and Andre converted a portion of the family residence into a pub and opened a saloon:

Advertisement in The Herald Democrat for a new saloon owned by H. Barnett.

New Saloon Open. The Herald Democrat. Wednesday, October 18, 1899. Page 8.

The Barnett family did not avoid further escapades that had to be settled by the Leadville courts, and the following appeared in the August 4, 1899, edition of The Herald Democrat newspaper:

The trouble which has been brewing on East Third street between the Barnett and Maguire families came to a head yesterday in the arrest of Joseph Maguire, who is charged with making dire threats against the life of Harry Barnett. The difficulty is one of long standing, and according to Maguire’s story is caused by and unwarranted invasion of human family. One of those rights is that of enjoying the sunlight, and it is alleged that Mr. Barnett deprived the Maguire family of this inestimable blessing. The two houses where the families belong adjoin each other, and the Maguires say that Barnett, in addition to erecting and unusually high board fence, nailed some scantling to the Maguire building, placed boards across the windows, thus shutting out the daylight from their residence. The young man of the Maguire family, Joseph, is said to have resented this invasion of obliteration of the light of day, and made the threats for which he was arrested.

Justice Paddock will endeavor to straighten out the difficulty. [25]

The case continued into the following month:

A Neighborhood Quarrel.

There was a “hot time” on East Third street yesterday, according to the stories told in police court last night, but although there had been much quarreling the only one injured was Ms. Finney, a colored servant of Conrad Miller who got her eyes full of coal dust. In police court it was rather hard to get at the facts of the case owing to bad English used by the witnesses and a desire of all to talk at once.

The trouble seems to have been brewing for some time and was between the families of Conrad Miller who runs a blacksmith shop at 117 East Third street and lives three numbers farther down, and Andre Barnett, who lives at 115, between Miller’s shop and residence. Mrs. Finney is obliged to carry coal and kindlings from the shop to the residence and has, according to her story been called names and insulted while in the discharge of her duties. Yesterday Mr. Barnett, according to Mrs. Finney’s story, not only abused her but threw coal at her as well, some dust going in her eyes and pieces hitting her on the head and lodging on her hat. This was reported to Miller who proceeded to tell Barnett that if he and his whole family did not mind their own business that he would exterminate the whole outfit.

In police court there were several amusing scenes. Mrs. Finney was the complaining witness against Barnett and Mrs. Hyman, who keeps house for Barnett had had complained of Miller, the charge being breach of the peace in each case.

Mrs. Finney told her story first and was interrupted several times by the other side until it looked as though the coal, which had been brought into court as evidence, might again be used as a weapon of offense. Miller next testified after which Barnett told his tale of woe, denying having ever abused any one at any time. He swore both by Moses and the ten commandments that he was telling the truth, but Miller didn’t think so and kept interrupting until Magistrate Brenneman found it necessary to fine him $5 for contempt of court and have him removed by an officer.

Mrs. Hyman next testified and displayed a board and an iron rod which she claimed had been thrown at her. She seemed wound up for all night so it was found necessary, as she refused to stop talking when the court ordered her to, to remove her from the room before the case could continue.

After hearing several other witnesses it seemed quite lain that the Barnett family had started the trouble so the head was fined $10 and costs while Miler was let off with his fine for contempt. Mrs. Finney left the court room vowing vengeance upon her persecutors and saying that “If them people doan’ lef’ me be I’ll clean out de whole gang myself.” [26]

This property dispute would land in the Leadville courts once again on June 25, 1901:

SUIT IN EJECTMENT- In the district court last evening the civil suit of Sarah J. Barnett against John Kennan was tried. It was an action in ejectment. The plaintiff claimed that Keenan’s blacksmith shop and the cabin behind it on East Third street intrude upon the Barnett property wight inches in front and two feet, six inches in the rear, and damages in the sum of $1,200 were asked. Col. Sterling made the closing argument for the prosecution and Former Judge Kennedy delivered the closing address for the defense. The jury found for the plaintiff and awarded $96 damages. The defendant may appeal the case. [27]

Rather than await the results of an appeal, the situation appears to have further devolved into violence and was brought before Justice Paddock on September 1, 1901:

CLANG OF THE ANVIL-Yesterday afternoon two warrants were served out of justice Paddock’s court upon Louis Turner, charging him with assault in each case. Turner is a blacksmith living at 117 West (ACTUALLY; “East” ) Third street, and is accused by H. Barnett and wife, next door, neighbors with having assaulted and beaten them. The trouble grew out of a contention of long standing concerning the close proximity of the blacksmith shop of Turner to the residence of the Barnetts. The latter parties objected to the “clang, clang, clang of the hammer on the anvil” and stated their objections to Turner. The blacksmith agreed to remove his shop as distance away. While engaged at this task yesterday he was approached by the Barnetts who “kicked” at his leaving a part of the wall of the shop behind. This angered the wielder of the hammer and he administered (so it is claimed by the Barnetts) a severe thrashing to both man and woman. [29]

A week later there was another update:

TOO ILL TO APPEAR-The hearing of Louis Turner on the charge of assault and battery, which was to have taken place yesterday before Justice Paddock has been postponed. A physician appeared in court at the time set for the trial and testified that Mrs. H. Barnett, whom it is claimed Turner knocked down, was too ill to attend as a witness. As soon as she is physically able to come upon the streets the case will be heard. [30]

The dispute would continue on into 1902. On January 22, 1902, the following appeared in The Herald Democrat newspaper:

IN COUNTY COURT-Judge McLeod yesterday granted a continuance in the case of the city of Leadville against H. Barnett. The case was set for hearing for yesterday. Barnett though his attorney, Colonel Sterling, informed the court that owing to sickness he was unable to appear. Costs to the amount of $20 were charged the defendant in the granting of the continuance. The case is taken on appeal from the police court. [31]

The following appeared in the March 28, 1902, edition of The Herald Democrat:

A dispute over a strip of mother earth, six inches wide, has resulted in a law suit that has already been tried in two courts and may eventually get to the court of appeals.

As a matter of fact the dispute about this bit of soil had been settled but the aftermath gave rise to the present litigation. The original quarrel was between Mrs. Hyman Barnett and a man named Miller. The two parties had adjoining ground, but it was shown in the district court that Miller’s blacksmith shop lapped over six inches onto Mrs. Barnett’s ground. This did not appear to be such a serious trespass, as property here is not as valuable as on Broadway, New York. But Mrs. Barnett wanted her rights to the inch and last summer Mr. Turner, who rented the shop, proceeded to move the building the necessary six inches. Then Mr. and Mrs. Barnett found that they had some more rights. They claimed that the side of the building was part of the realty, and that the wall must not be touched.

“All right,” said Miller, “we will saw off the wall and build a new one.” So he began to build a new wall after sawing away the old one, and work was progressing when Barnett found that he was going to have difficulty in getting the big slice of wall away. He tried to make a bargain with Mr. Christmann to do the work, but there was a failure to agree on prices, and finally Barnett picked up a couple of men to do the work for less. Barnett brought the men, whom Turner and Miller described as “hoboes,” into the blacksmith shop to get action on the old wall. Then the blacksmith and Miller discovered that they had some rights, and as their neighbors had been busy insisting on theirs they concluded to do likewise. Therefore they ordered the men out of the shop, ordered Barnett out and said that the intruders interfered with their own building operations. It appears that the Barnett family kept running in and out of the blacksmith shop in a state of great excitement, and finally a row ensued that attracted a crowd of about two hundred people. The result was that Mrs. Barnett fell down a cellar and broke several ribs, Barnett for calling names had his head punched, and there was a general settlement of scores and an adjustment according to the primitive code, of the whole matter.

The assault case against Barnett first came up in police court where he was fined as being the aggressor. He took an appeal to the county court, and all afternoon the matter was thrashed over. A couple of the children of Mrs. Barnett were put on the stand, who stood the direct examination very well. A girl about seven years old could tell almost to the minute what had happened, knew the hour when the fuss began and when it ended, although the affair occurred last summer, and could say “yes and “no” very properly to all the questions of Col. Sterling, Barnett’s attorney. City Attorney Bouck had the little girl hopelessly muddled by a few well directed questions and then said: “Well, little girl, it was a long time ago and you don’t remember much about it, do you?” The child said she didn’t and left the stand.

Judge Mcleod affirmed the findings of the police court and Col. Sterling announced he would probably take the case to the court of appeals in order to get the judgement reversed, if possible. [32]

Article in The Herald Democrat reporting about the legal dispute by six inches of overlapping land claims between Mrs. Hyman Barnett and “a man named Miller”.

Six Inches of Earth. The Herald Democrat. Friday, March 28, 1902. Page 8.

It is not known whether the issues continued beyond this point as this is the last mention of the incident by the Leadville press, but it was hardly the last mention of the Barnetts in the Leadville news or the courts. On February 15, 1903, Andre accompanied Sarah to answer for David Hyman’s absence from the Leadville public schools:

ARRESTED UNDER TRUANCY LAW- Andre and Sara Barnett were taken before County Judge McLeod yesterday afternoon on a charge of violating the compulsory education law, the charge being preferred by Truant Officer Williams. It is alleged that they have kept David Heyman [Hyman], a son of Mrs Barnett, out of school, although he is of school age and should be in school under the law. The case will be tried this week. [33]

On January 9, 1904, Henry “Boots” Hyman, Sarah’s son who had fallen victim to a sudden illness, died from his ailment:

DEATH OF HENRY HYMAN

Death came very suddenly last night to Henry Hyman, son of Mrs. S. Barnett of 115 East Third street. Mr. Hyman was 19 years old. He had been living in Pueblo, where he was employed until lately. He gave up his position there a few days ago and came to Leadville. He was in apparently good health when he arrived in Leadville, but a day or two after he arrived at home he was taken ill and yesterday his illness took a serious turn and he passed away last night. He was a young man of good reputation and was popular, having many friends who will be shocked to learn of his death. He was a brother of Nate Hyman of this city.

The arrangements for the funeral have not been completed and will be announced later. [34]

Henry “Boots” Hyman and his father Levi rest side by side in Leadville’s historic Hebrew Cemetery.

Photo by RG de Stolfe, October 8, 2014.

Henry Barnett assisted visiting Rabbi Chasson with delivering Rosh Hoshanah services at the Knesseth Israel Orthodox synagogue on September 19, 1906. [35] Mary Hyman married Nathan Katz on October 21, 1906. [36] The marriage was short-lived [37] and reports reveal that Nathan disappeared on January 8, 1907. [38] Mary likely supported herself afterwards working as a servant for Knesseth Israel Orthodox Cantor Nathan Miller and his family. [39]

On March 15, 1907, the following was reported in The Herald Democrat newspaper:

RECIEVEING STOLEN GOODS-If any persons have been mining quantities of brass from their premises during the past week or month or so, they now have a very excellent means of tracing the absent articles. It will be only necessary to go to attaches of the district court and inquire as to the details of a certain case which is now pending, and likely the desired information can be secured.

District Attorney Hogan is handling the case, which involves the arrest of three men and several boys. The men, who are engaged in buying up old metal gave their names as H. Barnett, David E. Hyman and P. H. Block. They are charged with receiving stolen goods. They claim they were innocent of the fact that the brass which they had purchased from certain small boys in the city was illegally procured, and in turn have sworn out warrants for the arrest of the youngsters. Only one of the youths, Charles Peterson, has been apprehended, but the others will likely be taken into custody within a few days. The action is being taken in the district court. Justice Thomas having first handled the case. [40]

On April 30, 1907, Henry stood in Judge Cavender’s courtroom accused of receiving stolen goods during the conduct of his normal business:

…H. Barnett, who it was alleged had received and sold stolen goods was tried and found not guilty.

Barnett is a junk dealer, and it was claimed through the efforts of his stepson, “Boots” Hyman, secured brass attachments and parts of machinery from mining plants, selling the goods to Denver metal buyers.

A barrel of the goods had been confiscated by the authorities after it had been loaded on board a Midland car bound for Denver. Roy Snyder, warehouse foreman at the Midland station testified that the barrel had been received from Barnett and billed out by him. The brass was produced in court, and mine owners and machine shop men identified much of it as having been stolen from their plants.

The evidence was not such, however, as to establish the fact that Barnett had bought the goods knowing that it had been stolen, and the court instructed the jury to return a verdict of acquittal.

Judge Cavender then called the defendant before him, and gave him a lengthy lecture on the subject of receiving and disposing of stolen property.

“There has been too much of this going on here,” said the judge, “And you junk dealers, if you are not connected with the thievery yourselves, are in a way responsible for it by aiding and abetting the crime in buying his material from boys and unknown parties.

“A few dollars’ worth of machinery stolen from a mining plant may ruin thousands of dollars worth of property. The samples of brass we have here in court show that much of it has not been thrown away and discarded by the owners of the plants, but show that it has been stolen and maliciously taken from the machinery with the evident purpose of disposing of it.

There is no evidence her to show that you were knowingly connected with the theft of this goods, and for that reason I have instructed the jury to find you not guilty. But I want to issue a warning to the junk dealers and second hand merchants, that any repetition of the offense in which it can be shown that there was deliberate attempt made to sell stolen goods will result in the full limit of the law being imposed. I won’t undertake any half way measures, and when I say the full limit, I mean that the extreme penalty of the law will be inflicted.”

Barnett was profuse in his expressions of gratitude to the court, and bowing and smiling left the room.

The bailiff’s gavel sounded and court was adjourned. [41]

Mary was reported living with her mother in the family home by 1909. [42] The couple was officially divorced on the grounds of abandonment in the Leadville court on May 16, 1911. [43] Nathan did not appear in court. [44] The 1910 United States Census records Henry as a 75 year-old tailor. Residents of the home include three of Sarah’s children with deceased husband Levi: Mary Katz along with David and Sophia Hyman. [45]

Henry died of unknown causes in the Barnett’s 3rd Street home on May 15, 1914. He was transported back to Steubenville, Ohio by son H. M. Barnett of Sioux City, Iowa. [46] An autopsy was performed but the results were not published. [47]

Sarah and her daughter Sophia Hyman were not immune from negative press. They appeared in an interesting article published in the January 8, 1918, edition of The Herald Democrat newspaper:

HARRIS SAYS HE’S STUNG- Tracing his wife’s travels to Leadville, A. E. Harris of Modesto, Calif., wrote to the chief of police here in a letter received yesterday which alleges that his wife, formerly Sophia Hyman, “deserted” him and their 2 1/2- year-old child and took all of his bank savings accumulated through five years.

In another letter written to her mother, Mrs. Sarah Barnett of 115 East Third street, Harris said, “True I am a Christian and not a Jew, but she knew that when I married her and taught me to say otherwise to you. ********. Tell her to apply for divorce and I will not appear.”

In the letter addressed to “The Chief of Police, Leadville, Colorado.” Harris wrote under the date of January 4, “I wish to notify the police and citizens of Leadville that my wife, Mrs. A. E. Harris, formerly Sophia Hyman of 115 East Third street, has deserted her home, husband and 2½-year-old child, and taken all my five-year bank savings.

“She has also run up a lot of bills, etc., against me and robbed me right and left. I was a good husband to her, giving her my weekly salary every week.

“I have some of her mail on which she is signing herself Miss A. E. Harris, saying she is a single woman. I refer my references to every merchant and Chief of Police here.”

Harris asked the marshal to have his letters published and signed himself with address at Box 51, Modesto, Calif.

He asked the marshal to call on his mother-in-law and read the letter to her because she cannot read English, and, if her daughter is there, she would destroy it from her, I want her to know the truth.”

In the other letter to Mrs. Barnett, Harris said: “I have notified the chief of police of Leadville about your home, husband and baby, 2 ½ years old. I was good to your daughter, clothed her beautifully. She wanted for nothing. I even bought her a machine. I done everything to make her life happy. I cannot see how she can leave her dear child, who is so sweet and clean. Anything she says against me is not true, but she will probably say something to win your confidence. Mother, there is not a single person in Modesto who will not speak well of me-Board of Trade, chief of police, all merchants here. I am only anxious to prove to you that I was good to her. True I am a Christian and not a Jew, but she knew that when I married her and taught me to say otherwise to you. The girl has gone wrong and I am done with her. Tell her to apply for divorce and I will not appear.

“Your son, A. E. Harris.”

In a footnote, he added: “Notice her clothes I bought her and everything she has I paid for.” [48]

David Hyman was one of more than 540 Leadvillians who returned home after serving in Europe in the First World War. [49] Both he and his mother were recorded living at their 3rd Street home in the 1920 U.S. Census. Sarah is listed as a tailor and David is described as a hardware store salesman. [50]

Sarah (Hyman) Barnett remained in her Leadville home until 1924 [51] when she and David moved on to Denver. [52] She died in a horrific accident in Denver on February 27, 1926:

DENVER, Feb. 27.-Mrs. Sarah Barnett, 63 years old, died at the Denver General hospital at 8:00 o’clock Saturday morning of burns incurred Friday night in her home at 1740 Humboldt street, when her clothing was set on fire by the flames from ceremonial candles.

Mrs. Barnett had lighted six candles in the rites of the blessing of the lights, and age old Friday night religious custom among followers of the Jewish faith, and placed them on a table in the kitchen of her home.

She stepped on a chair to lower a blind at a window behind the table, and accidently brushed her dress into the flames of the shrine. [53]

Sarah R. (Hyman) Barnett is interred in Leadville’s historic Hebrew cemetery near first husband, Levi Hyman. There is no reference on her headstone to the name Barnett. However, her Jewish genealogy records indicate that she still carried the Barnett moniker at the time of her death. [54]

Sarah’s funeral was held in Leadville on March 2, 1926. Although she was interred in Leadville’s historic Hebrew cemetery, the funeral was conducted by orthodox cantor Maurice Miller but neither of Leadville’s two synagogues were used for her memorial service:

The rites of the Jewish Faith were performed yesterday afternoon over the remains of Mrs. Sarah Barnett at the Moynahan-O’Malia mortuary chapel and at the grave in the Jewish cemetery where she was laid to rest.

“She was a good and virtuous woman,” spoke M. [Maurice] B. Miller, who conducted the services, in a brief eulogy. “Her Passing is mourned by many friends.”

The pallbearers were M. B. Miller, [55] A. [Abraham] Sandusky, [56] Jake Sandusky, M. [Moritz] Mankuss, [57] Morris Stager [58] and J. Mankuss.

Mrs. Sarah Barnett was born in Vilna, Russia. Coming to America when quite young, she lived in Leadville for forty years prior to her removal to Denver two years ago on account of failing health.

She came to a tragic death last Friday evening when some candles she had lighted as part of a pre-Sabbath religious ritual, ignited her clothing. David Hyman, her son, attempted to extinguish the flames, before they burned his mother but was too late. She died the following morning.

She is survived by a daughter, Mrs. Sophia Harris, of California; another daughter at Leadville, Mrs. Walter Moberg; two sons, David E. Hyman, 1740 Humbolt street, Denver, and Nathan Hyman, 1532 Jackson street, Denver, and a granddaughter, Ada Harris who witnessed the accident Friday. The four children attended the funeral. [59]

Mary Katz later married Leadville miner Walter Moberg in 1915. [61] The couple remained in Leadville for the duration of their lives with Mary passing at Leadville [62] on August 12, 1953. She is interred in Leadville’s historic Hebrew cemetery. [63] It is not clear whether Walter Moberg was Jewish, but he was buried separately in the Ancient Order of United Workmen section of Leadville’s Evergreen Cemetery. [64]

Grave marker of Sarah Hyman in the same cemetery group as Henry Hyman and Levi Hyman.

Photo by RG de Stolfe, October 8, 2014.

Modern replacement grave marker for Mary (Hyman) (Katz) Moberg. However, the spelling of “Molberg” is in error and should be “Moberg”.

Photo by RG de Stolfe, October 8, 2014.