> I have been watching the e-mails on DNA testing, just about to > delete any further submissions on the subject when I read your > contribution on the issue, which made sense to me. What I want to > know is if there a facility in the British Isles that you know of > performing the same function? I'd be very interested if there were. > > "Thomas Walsh" <thomas@aldwick39.freeserve.co.uk> Thanks Thomas. As it is I am in Western Australia, right down near the farthest SW tip of the continent. The closest I am to any work being done is the University of Western Australia and through them the various UK and American institutions which you will be able to access more directly yourself. Sorry I am unable to help more, since it is an extremely interesting field. Gil Gil Hardwick <gruagach@highway1.com.au>

Ardis Parshall wrote: > It has been repeatedly stated by several list participants that > commercial DNA testing has resulted in the successful resolution of > numerous genealogical puzzles. Wonderful! But how? Would you, or > any other participant, please have the kindness to pick any > successful story and describe it in a Methods-y way so that I can > understand HOW such testing can resolve a genealogical puzzle? > Please? I do not deny the possibility, but I do not understand. I > am asking for an example, and neither you nor Max nor anyone else is > offering one. > > Perhaps I can do my part in resolving the miscommunication by > illustrating what I am hoping to find. Some possibilities: Ardis, your questions arise from different premises from those used in calculating probability of relationship from DNA. It is on that basis I pointed out to you that you are constructing a Straw Man rather than responding directly to whatever claims may have been made in DNA testing. Indeed, this is a genealogical forum, and as I have already mentioned my position on the matter is that the technique can save a great deal of time and money by narrowing down the range of enquiry. If you have a difference with Max on the issue, perhaps your enquiry of him would bear more fruit were you to address his claims, by which I mean to scrutinise his wording, the questions he has posed and from what premises, and in fairness respond within the same premise. Else you will only ever be arguing across one another, never listening to what the other has actually said, or appreciating the point the other has made, or responding accordingly. Perhaps we should invite Max to restate what it is he has claimed, and go from there. Gil Gil Hardwick <gruagach@highway1.com.au>

> I would say that the United States was created when the Assembly > in Philadelphia declared that they were and had the right to be > free and independent states in June/July 1776. This creation was > ratified when we won the War of Independence. The Articles of > Confederation and the Constitution were two attempts at setting up > a federal government and had nothing in itself to do with Declaring > or Winning independence for the colonies. > > The Articles of Confederations were for the United States of American > just like the Constitution. It was just not a successful govenmental > format. > > Julia Coldren-Walker <FamRSearch@aol.com> Julia, That was actually my thought as well, just wanted some other perspectives. Next question then were all the colonies called colonies? Once they were formed. Or Provinces? Again, just looking for some helpful hints / ideas how other people record the "States" pre 1776-1787 timeframe. Thanks, Kevin Sholder "rdrunner" <rdrunner@siscom.net>

"Max Blankfeld" <max@familytreedna.com> wrote: > I prepared yesterday a few resources to its "skeptical" > members, Having identified myself as one of the skeptics, Mr. Blankfeld has e-mailed me privately. He failed utterly to show me how DNA testing might be useful, but the previous post regarding the Lovelace/ Loveless tests did show how DNA testing can be useful. I note, however, that previous posts regarding the test applying only to a single surname line are the overwhelming reason why DNA tests have little value to most genealogy researchers. My own research involves the descendants of one set of 3ggrandparents, who happen to be from my maternal grandfather's line. Neither Y- nor mt testing would have any pertinence. Most people are generalists, interested in both female and male lines. DNA tests simply have no application to the majority. Elizabeth Richardson "Elizabeth Richardson" <erichktn@worldnet.att.net>

Max Blankfeld writes: > Please, Ardis, > cc to me your e-mail exchange with them, I will certainly be > interested in discussion that will follow. Don't expect me to do the > homework for you. Do it yourself. Excuse me, Max, but YOU made the claim that your DNA tests successfully resolved genealogical puzzles. I have asked you for on-target illustrations; you have not provided a single one. It is not up to ME to do YOUR homework to bolster your marketing hype. Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com

Ardis wrote: > That's what I'd like to read from you -- a single, solitary case > study resulting in the solution of a genealogical puzzle, to the > standards of a genealogist. I would suggest that you consider both positive and negative solutions. Negative solutions would be proofs furnished by DNA evidence that two lines are in fact not related at all, despite persistent rumors that they are. You can see two such solutions on the Blanchard DNA web page http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~blanch-l/bldna.html One of the hazards of DNA-assisted genealogy is the potential for discovering nonpaternity in places where it was never suspected. A case study arising from the Rice DNA project was written up in the Fall 2002 issue of _New England Ancestors_. If you don't have access to that, you can read about the project at the web site: http://edmund-rice.org/ John Chandler "John F. Chandler" <JCHBN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>

> Hi, Carol: I just got done talking on the phone to the clerk at the Probate Division of Cook Co., IL and she said the first 30 pages or so of the file are mostly receipts and she couldn't find anything that had addresses on it. I asked specifically for "A declaration/affidavit of service and she couldn't find one. > The person probating the estate would have been required to give > notice to the heirs listed. So look for the declarations (or > affidavits) of service. A declaration/affidavit of service will > basically state under oath that on such a day the person mailed a > specified document (or documents) to the following people at the > following addresses. You might find one which lists them all, or > they might have been sent in batches, so there might be several. If > addresses wee no known, it might have been notice published in a > local newspaper in the legal notices section fr whatever peirod of > time the law requires. Notice to the heirs of the opening and of > the intended closing of the estate should have been sent prior to > distribution of assets, as well as notice of other actions. Reading through the "final account" again, I did find a disbursement listed to "Official Reporting Service-proof of partial heirship" would this be someplace I could contact or what? > Perhaps the clerk can send you simply a copy of the "docket." This > lists the name of each document filed. You can then obtain copies > of specific documents. I asked the clerk about the docket and she said they were all on the computer, so I asked if I could get a printout and she said they weren't set up for that. Does it make sense that a file from the 1960's wouldn't have a paper copy? > Another alternative is to see if the LDS has filmed probate records > for the county of NM in which you are interested. You can then > ordered the microfilm and review the entire document and make > whatever copies you need. Actually the file is from IL and I searched LDS catalog and they didn't seem to have any probate files for Cook Co. > If you get the docket sheet and don't know what s important or not, > email me. I work for a judge in a court system and used to be a > probate paralegal. I guess the states are different for how they handle probate cases? This accounting that I have has 74 items of cash receipts: stocks, bonds, real estate, savings accounts, the administrator's fee was $11,500.00 plus another $11,500 for the attorney's fee, June 10, 1970. There are the names of 53 heirs, I guess I'm lucky I've got that much information. I hate to pay $120 to get all 400 pages and most of it is receipts and bills that I already have a listing of but that's cheaper than going to Chicago from San Diego. I'd appreciate any suggestions. Thanks a lot for your time and expertise. Evelyn Evelyn Bayna <ebayna@ucsd.edu>

> [snip] > > I contacted the probate office for Cook Co. , IL and they say the > file is 400 pages. That would cost about$125 to have copied. > [snip] The woman in the office was quite helpful and she is going > to look through the file over the next couple of days, but I only > asked her to look for addresses. I didn't know what else to ask > for. [snip]I would think it would be a great find to further my > research [snip]. > > Evelyn Bayna That first part of your last sentence says it all, Evelyn. Since you obviously have been willing to spend money to travel for the sake of your research (which can get quite expensive), I would simply weigh the cost in time and money of "someday" traveling to the courthouse again to actually spend hours examining the entire file and choose for yourself what you want copied from it, vs. the $125 to receive all 400 pages of the file to examine at your leisure in the comfort of your own home, repeatedly as necessary and as you learn more about the value of each document to you. The genealogically-advantageous information that might be included in a probate file that large can be virtually priceless, if it happens to include something that you might search for years and never find elsewhere. Much of the value, however, depends on your particular viewpoint and objectives regarding what genealogy research entails. Some researchers are only interested in finding names, dates, and places of ancestors, while others want to know everything possible about the lives of their ancestors. Whatever your particular objectives, just as we can never totally rely on another's research to follow every possible lead and prove every fact, you cannot rely on a county clerk to have the exact same judgment that you might have in recognizing what to copy and what to leave. Nor can you fully recognize just from the Docket what valuable genealogical information a particular document will have for you. For that matter, you may recognize the advantage of a document a few years from now that you might not recognize today for lack of experience or particular information in your research today. If you have any way to afford it and don't have a less expensive alternative that will allow you to examine the entire file, I would consider $125 for 400 pages of court files a bargain. Unfortunately, courthouses won't let you have an RAOK volunteer borrow the file and take it where they can make copies for only 05 cents a page, but many would cost you at least double what they are charging. If you absolutely cannot afford all of it now, then I would start with the Docket and be selective regarding what you get now, going back for more later as you can afford it. Diane genmail@1st.net

> <snip> > > It seems that my 3rd great grandfather, Jeremiah Hurst, dropped out > of the sky with a wife & 3 kids in 1810, in time for the census, in > Wythe County VA. Lots of other HURSTs there & nearby who could have > been parents or siblings, but no record (that I've found) of who he > "belongs to". > > <snip> > > Anyhow, I'll post the results of my test when they come, whether > they accomplish what I hope, or not. > > Ernie Hurst <ernie5823@earthlink.net> Finally, a real genealogical use is mentioned: ruling in or out a suspected connection! I do not question DNA's usefulness at that. Nor do I question conventional karyotyping's usefulness for something similar. I can also see some usefulness to it in *documenting scientifically* that Pentz Bentz Pence are the same family, spelt differently. What the hype seems to gloss over is that without something to PROVE/DISPROVE, DNA testing is a waste of money, just as indiscriminately buying birth and death certificates is. As for Ernest's author being less diligent, perhaps it was more that in the mid-1970s an incredible amount of interest in genealogy flowered and resources previously un-thought-of became available. In 1970?, the Mormons opened their Branch Genealogical Libraries, which turned into Family History Centers later on, and with the BGL, we had access to microfilms of material some of us never dreamed existed. Those of us who never did genealogy before a BLG or a Xerox machine existed can't really appreciate how good we've got it. (g) Cheryl singhals@erols.com

> I have been watching the e-mails on DNA testing, just about to > delete any further submissions on the subject when I read your > contribution on the issue, which made sense to me. What I want to > know is if there a facility in the British Isles that you know of > performing the same function? I'd be very interested if there were. > > "Thomas Walsh" <thomas@aldwick39.freeserve.co.uk> B'lieve there's one at Oxford; ask on soc.genealogy.britain for specifics. I've got the URL around here somewhere, but the dust-mites are too thick today for me to spot it. ;) Cheryl

I would say that the United States was created when the Assembly in Phiadelphia declared that they were and had the right to be free and independent states in June/July 1776. This creation was ratified when we won the War of Independence. The Articles of Confederation and the Constitution were two attempts at setting up a federal government and had nothing in itself to do with Declaring or Winning independence for the colonies. The Articles of Confederations were for the United States of American just like the Constitution. It was just not a successful govenmental format. Julia Coldren-Walker FamRSearch@aol.com

All, Is it generally considered the we became the United States when we ratified the US constitution starting with Delaware in 1787 or with the declaration of war in 1776? Thanks, Kevin rdrunner@siscom.net

Hello, folks. I have been reading with some humor and some dismay all the posts regarding the usefulness (or the lack thereof) of commercial DNA testing for genealogical purposes. It almost sounds to me like there are some holdovers from the OJ Simpson trial jury who are subscribed here <vbg> I'll start with this: My name is Greg Lovelace, and I've been researching the Lovelace and Loveless families, primarily in the southeast US, for about 13 years now. I consider myself a genealogist at least at the advanced intermediate level. I know I'm no expert, otherwise I'd be able to somehow make a living out of genealogy, and I haven't figured that out yet! After discovering online genealogy years ago and meeting many other researchers through the internet, I decided to form and administer the Lovelace List, first on the old Indiana U servers, and later at Rootsweb. The list has been in operation since 1996. There are several excellent genealogical researchers on the list as well as many who just like genealogy as a hobby. Those of us researching Lovelaces and Lovelesses in the southeast US come from several families, all of which we believed were related somehow. But, as with many families having roots in colonial times, we were unable to find paper records which would support our belief. Most of us were facing brick walls in the late 1700s and early 1800s. The subject of DNA testing arose on the list a couple years ago, and then resurfaced late last year. After much reading and consultation with the folks at FamilyTreeDNA, we devised a sampling plan to try and answer some of the questions we had concerning our various families. To date our project has tested 21 participants, and we have discovered some interesting things, confirmed some of the things we believed, and refuted others. Our results page is located here: http://www.satmel.com/dna/index.html So far we have been able to group our family into two distinct groups, one tracing back to Halifax Co., VA and the other to Montgomery Co., MD. The earliest dates we have for the Halifax line lie in the 1690s. The Montgomery Co. line goes back to the early 1700s. You might be asking how we know these things... Well, we're lucky in that most of us match exactly (25 markers out of 25) with one of the two groups. The VA group has 5 participants who are exact matches on the 25 markers, and the MD group has 9. In addition, there are 4 different groups containing a total of 5 subjects who match at 24/25 markers with the MD group, and one person who matches on 23/25 with the MD group. These are lines which branched off the main MD line which had a mutation at one or two of the markers. This whole thing is a lot easier to see... Go to the second page of the website: http://www.satmel.com/dna/results.html Something we did not see, and that Bennett Greenspan of FTDNA pointed out to us, is that the subject whose DNA differs from the MD group at 2 markers only differs from one of the other MD subgroups at 1 marker. This implies that one of the MD subroups was the line of origin of that 2-marker difference. We have also found out that one of the subjects, who we suspected to tie into the MD group through the group who ended up in Rutherford Co., NC is actually not a genetic relative at all! This is one of the "non-paternity" events that we find often happened with our ancestors. Right now we don't know the nature of the event, but it is evident from the test that, while this man carries the name Lovelace, he is either not a Lovelace genetically or he is a representative of an as-yet-undiscovered branch. Let me also say that we have excellent paper records documenting our genealogy back to the earliest ancestors we have listed on the results page. The third and final page of our DNA website outlines our various proven lineages back to many of those ealriest ancestors: http://www.satmel.com/dna/more_details.html There is still work to do, and we knew that before entering into the DNA study. We were told going in that legwork and old-fashioned genealogy detective work would still be necessary to establish the links. What we know now is that there are two unrelated groups of Lovelaces/Lovelesses, and that one of the groups has several offshoots. This is proven by the DNA matches. Now we of the MD group can concentrate our traditional research on those lines, ignoring for the moment the VA lines (and vice versa). Then when the time comes to leap back across the ocean to pre-colonial times (if that time ever comes!), we can start looking in jolly old England. Now there are a couple problems we have encountered in our study. First, the cost is nothing to sneeze at. We've used the 25-marker yDNA test. The group rate for that test is $169 for each test subject. Those of us who can afford to do so have paid for our own tests and, in some cases, have been reimbursed in part from others on our lines who were interested in having the tests done. There are still many folks who would like to be test subjects, but who cannot pony up the cash to do so. We're just beginning to take up collections for those folks, and hopefully we will have Lovelaces and Lovelesses from New England, Canada, and Australia participating soon. The other problem, and this is more pressing, lies in finding male Lovelaces or Lovelesses willing to be tested. In many of the lines we'd like to investigate, the list subscribers (and hence the interested genealogists we have access to) are removed in time from the Lovelace/Loveless name and have no known male cousins who carry the surnames. We're beating the bushes in these families, trying hard to discover test subjects. Hopefully, again, we will have more in the coming months and years as our researchers hit the streets, the internet, and the phone books looking for cousins. Now I'm not sure that any of this will satisfy any of the skeptics who have been questioning the genealogical value of DNA testing. All I can say is that we as a family are satisfied with our results. We have learned a lot as a consequence of this study, and we hope to add more subjects and learn even more. Thanks for you time and for listening. Be sure to visit the links above. Seeing the results is much better than me telling you about them. Peace, Part of the Tree, Greg Lovelace Greg Lovelace <gregl@starfishnet.com>

I am trying to map the 1881 British census. The area of difficulty I am experiencing is with Middlesex(London) where the only location reference given is a street address. I need the equivalent of a parish reference (Westminster, Whitechaple etc.) to map the distributions of a particular family name. Does anyone know of a source that will give the locational reference from the census code "place #" for Middlesex? I will be away for a few days I can be contacted : Howardmathieson@yahoo.ca

Evelyn Bayna wrote: > I just got back from a successful trip to NM, photographing > gravestones and gathering photos and papers from relatives. One of > the papers I found was a "final account" for an estate for May READ. > She had acquired quite a sum of worth for 1961 and the list of heirs > was over 32. My husband's grandfather, a paternal cousin, received > 1/4th 1/6th of 1/2 estate. I contacted the probate office for Cook > Co. , IL and they say the file is 400 pages. That would cost about > $125 to have copied. I have the "final account" that states page > 240 on the first page and lists assets and heirs. There are no > addresses for heirs or genealogical evidence on these pages. My > question, does anyone know what I would ask for that would show how > the heirs are related? The woman in the office was quite helpful > and she is going to look through the file over the next couple of > days, but I only asked her to look for addresses. I didn't know > what else to ask for. Would there be a chart or family tree? What > would a genealogist submit for a probate heir search as results that > might be in this file. I would think it would be a great find to > further my research if this estate already paid someone to do a > search back for all these cousins. One thing to ask is whether Illinois distributes intestates per stirpes or per capita and either way, ask if it counts those who predeceased her. (Then, ask a lawyer for the specific differences; I _think_ I understand what our lawyer said, but when I write it down, it doesn't make sense. (g) ) Cheryl singhals@erols.com

Richard A. Pence wrote: > Let's suppose I round up 50 or 100 men with the name PENCE to do a > surname analysis seeking to find which may stem from which > progenitors in the U.S. This sort of an approach seems to be > popular right now (and of some considerable value when properly > designed to test a stated hypotheses). Let's further say the tests > cost $100 a throw. Now, after we spend $5,000 or $10,000, will the > report say there is a 50 percent chance that cenrtain specific > persons within the sample are related within seven generations? If > not, then what will we get for our investment? I understand those 25-point tests from Mr. Blankfeld's org run $160 a pop. The 12-pointers are $80. Dragging out my ol' relationship calculator, this "within 7 generations" covers everyone from you down to what I know as a 10th cousin and what you call a 5 cousin 1 remove. And unless I've been badly misinformed in the talks I've been in on, this test will give you and your brother a 50% chance of being related within 7 generations. But it won't tell me Mary Elizabeth's biological father. [For those less familiar than Mr. Pence with my Mary Elizabeth: b abt 1856, married 1869 using a step-father's surname; step-father and alleged mother both on 3rd marriage; no probable brothers survived their teens from any marriage. No birth record, no death record, no burial record, no one still living who knew her or her only known half- or step- siblings, no newspaper obit, no deeds, no wills, predeceased her husband and in the Valley of Virginia where the two nearest county seats changed hands 56+ times *EACH* during the Late Unpleasantness.] Max said: > > On the opposite side you have those that found enormous value to it. I've found enormous value to psychics -- days after a psychic "saw" my nice sweater (missing since Oct 2000), I found it (Mar 2003). She is unable to see Mary Elizabeth's dad though. :( I have one place where brothers married sisters (Brother Aardvark married Sister Zebra and brother Zebra married Sister Aardvark) but DNA will claim descendants aren't related (neither the Y nor the mt line duplicates). Cheryl singhals@erols.com

Thank you to everyone who has helped me trying to trace William Baxter. I found him still in Scotland on the 1901 census so he must have left for the States after that. The obvious thing now seems to be to look on the 1910 census for Texas - can anyone tell me whether there is a cheaper way of doing this than taking out a subscription to Ancestry.com? Thanks Annette "ASHTON-REDLIN ANNETTE" <ashtonredlin@yahoo.co.uk>

Hello Gil I have been watching the e-mails on DNA testing, just about to delete any further submissions on the subject when I read your contribution on the issue, which made sense to me. What I want to know is if there a facility in the British Isles that you know of performing the same function? I'd be very interested if there were. Regards Thomas Walsh "Thomas Walsh" <thomas@aldwick39.freeserve.co.uk>

Evelyn Bayna asked: > One of the papers I found was a "final account" for an estate for > May READ. She had acquired quite a sum of worth for 1961 and the > list of heirs was over 32. My husband's grandfather, a paternal > cousin, received 1/4th 1/6th of 1/2 estate. I contacted the probate > office for Cook Co. , IL and they say the file is 400 pages. <snip> > My question, does anyone know what I would ask for that would show > how the heirs are related? <snip> Evelyn: You will find your answers in the first documents filed, not the last. The probate file starts with either a will or a petition to probate an intestate estate [i.e. she didn't leave a will]. The latter is probably the case. The person chosen as the executor would have inquired as to her relatives. From what you have said it looks to me as though it works out as follows: Since the estate went to cousins, it follows that May did not have children of her own, or living siblings or their living descendants or living parents. If anyone who descended from her parents out lived her they would have inherited and it would not have gone to a cousin. Working backward, it would seem that your husband's grandfather was one of four siblings that were then living or, if deceased, had descendants [could also be deceased siblings with no descendants that would not have a share], that his grandfather's parent [who was deceased or he or she would have inherited] that was related to May was one of six siblings [again, there could have been more siblings that died without leaving a descendant], one of grandfather's grandparents was one of two closest relatives to May who had descendants. The other one may have been a sibling or could be a relative on her other parent's side. At any rate, this would be spelled out in one or more of the initial documents. Most court files have a list of the documents in the file by title, which might help you search for the right one. Joan Best "Joan Best" <joanbest@earthlink.net>

> I just got back from a successful trip to NM, photographing > gravestones and gathering photos and papers from relatives. One of > the papers I found was a "final account" for an estate for May READ. > She had acquired quite a sum of worth for 1961 and the list of heirs > was over 32. My husband's grandfather, a paternal cousin, received > 1/4th 1/6th of 1/2 estate. I contacted the probate office for Cook > Co. , IL and they say the file is 400 pages. That would cost about > $125 to have copied. I have the "final account" that states page > 240 on the first page and lists assets and heirs. There are no > addresses for heirs or genealogical evidence on these pages. My > question, does anyone know what I would ask for that would show how > the heirs are related? The woman in the office was quite helpful > and she is going to look through the file over the next couple of > days, but I only asked her to look for addresses. I didn't know > what else to ask for. Would there be a chart or family tree? What > would a genealogist submit for a probate heir search as results that > might be in this file. I would think it would be a great find to > further my research if this estate already paid someone to do a > search back for all these cousins. > > Evelyn Bayna <ebayna@ucsd.edu> The person probating the estate would have been required to give notice to the heirs listed. So look for the declarations (or affidavits) of service. A declaration/affidavit of service will basically state under oath that on such a day the person mailed a specified document (or documents) to the following people at the following addresses. You might find one which lists them all, or they might have been sent in batches, so there might be several. If addresses wee no known, it might have been notice published in a local newspaper in the legal notices section fr whatever peirod of time the law requires. Notice to the heirs of the opening and of the intended closing of the estate should have been sent prior to distribution of assets, as well as notice of other actions. Perhaps the clerk can send you simply a copy of the "docket." This lists the name of each document filed. You can then obtain copies of specific documents. Another alternative is to see if the LDS has filmed probate records for the county of NM in which you are interested. You can then ordered the microfilm and review the entire document and make whatever copies you need. If you get the docket sheet and don't know what s important or not, email me. I work for a judge in a court system and used to be a probate paralegal. carole@caroleallen.com (Carole Allen)