I have a relative named JANET CRAWFORD (who hasn't?) who was born in BEITH, AYR in the early part of the 1800's. There are at least two born at this time and the problem is to sort out which is which. There is one born in 1804 and the other in 1807. As she was married in 1822 at DALRY to DAVID WHITEFORD the 1804 one would seem to be the logical choice as that would make her 18 at the time of marriage. If it were the other one she would only be 15. Her children were, in order of birth, JANET 1823, ROBERT 1824, MARGARET 1829, ELIZABETH 1831, JEAN 1832,JAMES 1835, MARY 1837, EUPHEMIA 1839, DAVID 1842, CATHERINE 1845. I have endeavoured to prove which are her parents using the Scottish naming pattern and this doesn't seem to work. JANET (1804) has parents ALEXANDER & MARGARET (LOUDON) and there is no sign of any Alexanders in any generations. JANET (1807) has parents WILLIAM & JANET (Robertson) again with neither fitting the pattern. The only other possibility (????) is a marriage of JAMES CRAWFORD & JANET DICKIE 1793 in DALRY. I can find no trace of children to this couple. What makes the marriage a feasible one is that the original Janets (1804,1807) have a grand daughter named JANET DICKIE RALSTON. This may all seem garbled but it may help an enquiring mind help me solve the problem. George

Hi George, I don't think there are any relationships here. Are these places in Scotland? We are Irish/Scots I think. My Gr.Gr Grandfather Robert Crawford came to Port Hope in Upper Canada about 1830. He claimed to be born in Ireland in 1800 and married a Martha Boyd b. 1807 from Co. Cavan, Ireland. Thanks for trying. Bob. Robert T. Crawford Researching Crawford, Pugh, Creasor, Gyles, Rathbone, Mott, > I have a relative named JANET CRAWFORD (who hasn't?) who was born > in BEITH, AYR in the early part of the 1800's. > > There are at least two born at this time and the problem is to > sort out which is which. > > There is one born in 1804 and the other in 1807. As she was > married in 1822 at DALRY to DAVID WHITEFORD the 1804 one would > seem to be the logical choice as that would make her 18 at the time > of marriage. If it were the other one she would only be 15. > > Her children were, in order of birth, JANET 1823, ROBERT 1824, > MARGARET 1829, ELIZABETH 1831, JEAN 1832,JAMES 1835, MARY 1837, > EUPHEMIA 1839, DAVID 1842, CATHERINE 1845. > > I have endeavoured to prove which are her parents using the > Scottish naming pattern and this doesn't seem to work. JANET (1804) > has parents ALEXANDER & MARGARET (LOUDON) and there is no sign of > any Alexanders in any generations. > > JANET (1807) has parents WILLIAM & JANET (Robertson) again with > neither fitting the pattern. > > The only other possibility (????) is a marriage of JAMES > CRAWFORD & JANET DICKIE 1793 in DALRY. I can find no trace of > children to this couple. What makes the marriage a feasible one is > that the original Janets (1804,1807) have a grand daughter named > JANET DICKIE RALSTON. > > This may all seem garbled but it may help an enquiring mind > help me solve the problem. > > George > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to CRAWFORD- > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message