` I feel that I need to inject my two-cent's worth again. Protection of the living is what the 100 year rule is supposedly about. It is designed to protect the living although it also keeps valuable information from us. This is not about that. The old family record in question is such a valuable roadmap for many and should be used as such. The question I have is this--just how would anyone verify data that goes back to the 1300's? If the person were a very well known individual then he might appear in books but the ordinary person is just so much dust. You may know from family stories that so and so in 1598 married so and so but just where is that information recorded now? Until record-keeping became mandatory in each country there will be huge gaps in records. Just a very slim possibility exists that parish records will be found. What about the hundreds of irregular Scottish marriages? The decendants of those people consider themselves just as important as those who appear on church registers. So many countries had customs similar to the irregular marriages, even in the early years of the United States mountain communities without ministers had customs such as 'jumping over a broom' and those marriages ! are not recorded except possibly in family Bibles (if anyone could write). If we limit genealogy to official records then a lot of us cease to exist. What will our grand-children find when they try to find their roots? Somewhere a bit of common sense has to be used. Possibly something as simple as a notation that the information is apocryphal but based on 'family records'. Barb

Hi The 100 year rule and protection of individuals is not the only consideration. I have been doing paid research for a few years now and have therefore amassed a bit of knowledge on a fair number of families. I am, however, bound by professional ethics which dictate that research is the property of the person who commissioned the research. A fair number of files in DGFHS were gathered as a result of paid research and deposited by the researcher, not the owner. We had one case of a member who made contact with someone researching the same name who offered to send her the information she already had. When the material arrived it was found to be a copy of the members own research being passed off as new. The pedigree charts submitted and signed by the member, and available to all members is a much fairer system, and hopefully accurate. At least the originator of the research can be contacted in order to verify sources. In the short period that we have operated the system we have more than double the number of trees than we had on the old system. Regards Ian A McClumpha Researching Family History in Dumfries & Galloway ~ and beyond. Please visit my Website: http://www.imchad.freeola.com -----Original Message----- From: Ron & Barb Ernst [mailto:rjern@rconnect.com] Sent: 13 June 2004 15:37 To: DUMFRIES-GALLOWAY-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [D-G LIST] re family records ` I feel that I need to inject my two-cent's worth again. Protection of the living is what the 100 year rule is supposedly about. It is designed to protect the living although it also keeps valuable information from us. This is not about that. The old family record in question is such a valuable roadmap for many and should be used as such. The question I have is this--just how would anyone verify data that goes back to the 1300's? If the person were a very well known individual then he might appear in books but the ordinary person is just so much dust. You may know from family stories that so and so in 1598 married so and so but just where is that information recorded now? Until record-keeping became mandatory in each country there will be huge gaps in records. Just a very slim possibility exists that parish records will be found. What about the hundreds of irregular Scottish marriages? The decendants of those people consider themselves just as important as those who appear on church registers. So many countries had customs similar to the irregular marriages, even in the early years of the United States mountain communities without ministers had customs such as 'jumping over a broom' and those marriages ! are not recorded except possibly in family Bibles (if anyone could write). If we limit genealogy to official records then a lot of us cease to exist. What will our grand-children find when they try to find their roots? Somewhere a bit of common sense has to be used. Possibly something as simple as a notation that the information is apocryphal but based on 'family records'. Barb --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.703 / Virus Database: 459 - Release Date: 10/06/04 ________________________________________________________________________ FREE local-rate dial-up - no monthly fees! Move over to Freeola for FREE unlimited web space, e-mail & domain hosting www.freeola.com

> I am, > however, bound by professional ethics which dictate that research is the > property of the person who commissioned the research. > > A fair number of files in DGFHS were gathered as a result of paid research > and deposited by the researcher, not the owner. This is a whole different matter and does complicate matters and I would also say there is as much a moral issue as a commercial or legal one. I completely understand the reasoning behind the action DGFHS are taking. All I want to point out is that other institutions would maybe accept the pedigrees that DGFHS considered a low priority due to their space restrictions. Don't get me wrong I think all the FHS do a fantastic job and all the volunteers efforts are greatly appreciated. I think going forward the system in place will work well as ownership is being taken for the content. I just don't like the "nanny" attitude of somebody deciding what is good and bad research - I'll decide for me. I mentioned the 100 yr rule previously as a useful tool for avoiding the need for written permission from living people appearing on the tree. Frankly I think it is irresponsible to put your family tree in th epublic domain with a full descent to yourself. Credit card fraud is simple with a d.o.b. and a mother's maiden name! All my paperwork stops at my now deceased grt-grand-parents. Anywho, this is my last post on the matter - though I find it is a very interesting subject, one to mull over with a nice pint I think! But I don't want to clog the list since my belief that copyright violation is a victimless issue and only becomes "crime" when caught isn't shared by many. Cheers, Pam :-)

Would anyone know the best way to access an obit, or death notice in the 1890s in Dumfries? Also, does anyone know what type of info to expect from such during that time period? Thanks, Marc Archer in Flint, Michigan