Another over-sized post. -v ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date sent: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 19:57:00 -0600 From: "J. Grezlik" <jcgrezlik@bright.net> To: <McQUEEN-L@rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: Fw: [McQUEEN] Re: July,1763 Pontiac' War Indian attacks on w Md/mid s Pa. I will research it again. But, it still stands that son-in-law does not always mean a relative by marriage, anymore than cousin, Aunt, Uncle, and Sr. Jr. they were terms used as often for very close friends and persons taken into the household. This endearment practice still exists today, just not as often used. I have seen the indenture records for Dugal and that he was taxed in 1732 in the Upper Hundred of the Cliffs, Calvert Co. MD. In 1739/40 he was living in Prince George's Co. and surveyed Cranberry Plans. I don't believe he was all that poor. He would never have been able to purchase land. He was a farmer in Scotland. He was NOT Catholic. And yes the McQueen's did have a habit of marrying cousins, even into the 20th century!! He ended up at the head waters of the Patapsco River in what is now Carroll Co. MD. I hope to get back to MD to do more research on the land records. I have been working my way back the family lines from Ohio. In all my research I have yet to find any McQueen's that stay put for any length of time, even if they just move within a county or 2 from where they started. Jane ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hermon B Fagley" <hermfagley@juno.com> To: <McQUEEN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 3:48 AM Subject: Re: Fw: [McQUEEN] Re: July,1763 Pontiac' War Indian attacks on w Md/mid s Pa. > Research it again. A son-in-law "sometimes" did mean what it means today. > I quickly found cases it dd years ago. > It's been years,but I did,and found cases where it did mean that. I was > researching Brown's more than > McQueens at the time. I had a year where I knew finally who my Capt-Lt-JP > George Brown was, but not > whether his wife,Elizabeth was a McQueen,or a Sapp,or something else. Mr > Virden,in his shaky > handwriting, told me Elizabeth McQueen. > Robert Barnes,or someone and I differed years ago on his wife's and my > John Brown's > wife. I came from years of seeing the colony make 1st cousin marriages > [almost a rule] on the > frontier, while he came from researching Md records,and not further west. > > I was asked last night if I thought Grace was related to George and Mary > Stevenson Brown, > and I said no. > I know that you've read,in black and white ,that Grace may have been a > Brown,and that son-in-law > did not mean as it says today. I've read it too. And researched it.I say > that statement is not always correct, but I no longer can state where. > Research it. We disagreed 20 years ago. Today,Md will abstracts are on > www.ancestry.com . > Dugal's will gave items to Edward Logsdon and John Brown. One got a > great coat. It may have not mentioned > daughter's names. It said son-in-law. > Have you seen those tax lists showing Dugal McQueen,on the Anne > Arundel-Calvert Co line .Cliff's of Calvert. > I don't think my Brown[e] were within 15-20 miles that far south,but I > can't prove that. Severn River at Annapolis,maybe > > I think Dugal was poor,and perhaps Catholic,and knew how to herd,but not > farm,and knew > waterman's skills,which did him no good at Cranberry. Knew how to > herd,and ]or weave,or both,like most > Scotch. > Almost 4am. Going back to bed. ------- End of forwarded message -------