[email protected] wrote: > > > Better yet, if anyone has documents proving the above, I, for one, would > love copies <G>. And I definitely agree with you, Stephen, - the works by > S. C. Jones and by Mrs. McSwain are definitely flawed. I haven't seen the > new books by Joyce Moody, but look forward to finding them on my library's > shelf. But, if all the Hamrick researchers feel they are totally accurate > and complete and totally documented (which, until Steven's message was the > impression I've been getting lately on the Hamrick list), I really wonder > why the rest of us are bothering with continued research. > > Pat Pat, We do it because we love to be tortured, and spend hours trying to find an elusive piece of information that nobody else gives a rat's a** about, but we need it. Genealogy is an addictive habit... What do you consider documentation? I can referred you to records that help support or confirm most of my version of the first two generations. Since I don't want to write the next Hamrick Generations, tell me what items interest you most and I will tell you where to look. Don't tell me everything because I will ignore you ... sorry.. but true. I can document most, if not all, the first two generations.. gets harder after that... I would suspect that J. R. McKinney can also document the first two generations as he has a pretty good collection of HAMRICK data. J.R., do you have any documents which would disprove any part of the first two generations? or better yet, prove it! Steven A. Bridges [email protected]