Jesse, Yes, I agree and realize that. This coincides with something told to me by a family member, that perhaps the WHITE family was who Harriett was in servitude to. From what I have gleaned from my 15+ years of digging, it may have been the WHITE family and/or the Barton POTTER family (for William). Thank you kindly. I appreciate everyone's input. This has been a quest of more than 15 years for our family, obtaining this information. BEST SUCCESS TO ALL IN THEIR RESEARCH Renee We cannot change the past, But we can change our attitude toward it. Uproot guilt and plant forgiveness. Tear out arrogance and seed humility. Exchange love for hate -- Thereby, making the present comfortable And the future promising. ----- Original Message ----- From: jess wilson Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 8:09 AM To: KYCLAY-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [KYCLAY] Look-ups offered (William Potter) Renee, When they rererred to "the white`s" they may have been talking about the WHITES, one of the first and most prominent families in Clay County. Jess Wilson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Renee Smith" <hrsmith40@msn.com> To: <KYCLAY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 11:01 PM Subject: Re: [KYCLAY] Look-ups offered (William Potter) > Calvin, > Oh, you just don't know how much this means. To have this info offered, in that you say they lived "near the whites". Can you please help me understand how this was gleaned. Can a location be pinpointed at all? By chance any way of determining from whince Harriet came before marrying William? Someone else reported my grandmother having appeared on the census as "Mulatto" - which is new news to me. I can get no further than back than Harriett and William. I suppose I'll never find out what Harriett's surname was prior to her becoming a Potter. > Thank you ever so much. > Renee > Columbus Ohio > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Calvin Smith > Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 1:25 PM > To: KYCLAY-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [KYCLAY] Look-ups offered (William Potter) > > 1900 census indicates the following: > Potter William head bm apr 1831 69 m 31 > Harriet wife bf may 1848 52 m 31 12 kids 6 living > Steven son bm sep 1870 29 s > Newton son bm may 1879 21 s > Louise dau bf apr 1882 18 s > Lilly gdau bf aug 1889 10 s > They were listed as day laborers living near the Whites > > Calvin Smith > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Renee Smith [mailto:hrsmith40@msn.com] > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 4:59 PM > To: KYCLAY-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [KYCLAY] Look-ups offered > > Charlotte, > Thank you kindly for helping. Shall await word from you (fingers > crossed). > Renee > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: CM7153@aol.com > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 4:57 PM > To: KYCLAY-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [KYCLAY] Look-ups offered > > In a message dated 7/25/03 5:03:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > hrsmith40@msn.com writes: > > > Charlotte, > > Thank you for the offer. Trying to locate any census records wherein > > > appeared one Harriett POTTER. > > Harriett would be listed under the household of either a William > POTTER or > > George POTTER. She had a daughter named Louise (or Louisa). Harriett > is my > > great, grandma. She was black, and I was told she was likely a slave > at some > > point in time. I am having a grave time of this. Do you know if > anyone has > > any records pertaining to slaves in Manchester? > > Renee > > Renee, > > I will look and get back with you. I don't know anything about slave > records. > > Thanks, > Charlotte Miller > <A > HREF="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Our_Sharing_Place/">http://groups.ya > hoo.com/group/Our_Sharing_Place/</A>