: >It's fairly likely that your ancestors didn't move > far, but on the other hand your one could be the one who moved > from the south of England to the Mearns about 1700. Unlikely, > I > agree, but you can't exclude the possibility. > Where can I find more about this reference to moving to the > Mearns? Sorry, that was a purely hypothetical ancestor of Wallace's - trying to underline the point that jst because he was married in the Mearns in 1739 doesn't necessarily mean that he didn't move there from the south of England. Anne

Ah! Appreciate the answer. I know that I have to find my proof in Canada if it exists. Sue On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Anne Burgess: > : > >It's fairly likely that your ancestors didn't move > > far, but on the other hand your one could be the one who moved > > from the south of England to the Mearns about 1700. Unlikely, > > I > > agree, but you can't exclude the possibility. > > > Where can I find more about this reference to moving to the > > Mearns? > > Sorry, that was a purely hypothetical ancestor of Wallace's - > trying to underline the point that jst because he was married in > the Mearns in 1739 doesn't necessarily mean that he didn't move > there from the south of England. > > Anne > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >