I had no idea that so many people would be stirred into action by my questions. The "Mrs. Alvi" I inquired about suffered from my misspelling after hearing the name. I'm satisfied at this point that her name was Alvey, though I still don't know who she is. At this point, however, I am not at all concerned with finding her. It has been pointed out that the part of the pages in which I was most interested (the first two paragraphs) came substantially from Timothy O'Rourke's opus magnus, Maryland Catholics on the Frontier, The Missouri and Texas Settlements,p. 171. I've also been shown a web site devoted to O'Rourke at http://www.marylandcatholics.com/orourke.htm Wishing to see for myself the connection of a Luke Mattingly with Barton, I tracked down the records of St. Mary of the Barrons on microfilm at the archdiocesan archives in suburban St. Louis and made a brief initial study of the marriage records. The first record is date 1822, and very quickly it becomes clear that the Mattinglys were in Perryville in force by that time. The 8th couple married on 10 Feb. 1823 were William Robertson and Sarah Mattingly (daughter of Barton Mattingly and Mary Camron). The 14th (on 8 July 1823) were Thomas Mattingly (son of Jeremiah Mattingly and Sarah Ann Shanks) and Teresa Tucker. The priest was J[oseph] Rosati, C.M., who later became the first bishop of St. Louis. The 18th (on 9 Dec. 1823) were Joseph Mattingly, son of Joseph Mattingly and Ann Taylor, and Ann Star. I found that quite interesting since earlier in the day, someone had told me they thought that Jeremiah and Joseph were brothers of Barton. Next was the 22th couple to be "married" -- Barton Mattingley (sic), son of Luke Mattingley and ______ Camberin , and Elizabeth Camberin, daughter of Soe [Zoe] Camberin in 1824 . The priest was [John Mary] Odin, C.M. This was all in Latin, incidentally, and Luke's name thus appears as Lucae. That is no reason to suspect his name was Lucas, as I seen somewhere. I read the the name of Luke's wife as saying Betsy, O'Rourke has Nellie. He may be right. I will need to check the emtry again. O'Rourke says "the record was quite garbled." It would have been more accurate to say it is so smudged that it is very difficult to read, especially the part referring to a prior ceremony. Rourke says explicitly "The spelling Cambren was used." I looked at it for a long time and in all four instances where it appears IN THIS ENTRY it seems to be "Camberin." Camron and Cambron and Cambern appeared in nearby entries. Well, that's enough for now. Peace and All Good! Fr. Blaine Burkey