Hal, ----- Original Message ----- From: Hal Bradley <hwbradley@bigfoot.com> To: <BRUCE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2000 2:13 PM Subject: subscribe > John Bruce, b. 9 May 1744 in Marlborough, Mass. m. Martha Moore, 8 Feb > 1770 in Bolton, Mass. Martha Moore is probably the daughter of Isaac > Moore and Mary Townsend of Lancaster, Mass. I am trying to prove the > link. Thank you for your help. > > Hal Bradley The LDS IGI is now on-line, and I went there to check these names. I found: Martha MOORE, b. 14 July 1752, dau. Asa Moore and Sarah_____, b. at Worcester, Worcester County, Massachusetts. Batch no. C501641 (an extracted, or actual, record), source, Worcester Town Records, Franklin P. Rice. Of all the "Martha Moores" listed, this is the only extracted record. As for "John Bruce", he may indeed have been the son of Daniel and Bathsheba (Bowker) Bruce, b.29 May 1744, Marlboro, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, source, Marlborough Vital Records through 1850. There were, however, two other "John Bruces" as listed in the IGI: 1.)John Bruce, b. 30 Nov.1745, Framingham, Massachusetts, son of John and Mary, IGI Batch No. C502311, source, Framingham Vital Records through 1850. 2.)John Bruce, b.29 Aug.1749, Woburn, Massachusetts, son of John and Mehitabel, IGI Batch No. C506151, source, Woburn, Massachusetts Vital Records. A note re the Woburn "Bruces": most likely this "John Bruce" was a descendant of George "Brush", or "Bruce", whose descendants also went to Marlborough. Also, there are several instances of marriages between folks at Woburn and at Lancaster in the Lancaster Vital Records, so it would not be unusual for a Woburn "Bruce" to have married someone from Bolton (formerly part of Lancaster). Naming patterns can be a clue...did John and Martha name a son "Daniel" or "Asa"...a dau. "Bathsheba" or "Mehitabel", etc.? A search of the "deaths" in Woburn and Framingham VRs may reveal that one or both of the "John Bruces" born in those towns died young, or the "Marriages" may show one or both having married someone else, and so they can be eliminated, leaving, in all probability the "John Bruce" of Marlboro as your ancestor. The LDS web site is at http://www.familysearch.com Once there, click on "Custom Search", and then on "International Genealogical Index", and enter the names, events, and dates for a search. The Batch no. can be used to search for all entries within that number by entering the surname only, the event, and the Batch number. This may reveal siblings, etc. Actual, or "extracted" records can be identified by the following prefix to the Batch Number: C, E, J, K, M (other than M17 and M18), P, T5, 725, 744, 745, and 754. Anything else is either a Temple Record, a Submitted Form, or from the Ancestral File, and are clues only, NOT actual records!!! This is not to say that the Ancestral File does not have potentially accurate information... recently, the NEHGR (New England Historical and Genealogical Register) identified the wife of my Joseph Clark of Pomfret, CT and Worcester, MA. This information was in the Ancestral File, including her parents, when I checked it a few months ago! What was lacking was PROOF, and the authors of the article in the NEHGR found it. If I should see anything else, I'll let you know. I have the Lancaster VRs here at home, and will check later on to see if there's anything further on Martha. Hope this is of some help to you. Claudia Cridland, a descendant of Thomas/1 Bruce of Sudbury