Jim, I agree with you completely. Things just don't seem to be making sense. The possibilities are numerous and include me being unfortunate enough to get two inexperienced archivists on duty when I called who gave me some inaccurate information. That is why I've decided to just pursue this when I next get to the archives and can perhaps talk to the most senior archivist and/or take a look at these early bond microfilms myself! It is also certainly possible that LAND records were buried and lost, but marriage bonds were not. I was talking to the archivist specifically about marriage records. And if they indeed have microfilms of the earliest bonds, then they certainly didn't go missing during the Revolutionary War! Ava -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Richmond Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 11:39 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County I was born and raised in Orange County, searched land titles there for a few years, and at that time the Register of Deeds explained, and I had heard it before, that some land records prior to the Revolutionary war were missing because they were buried when Hillsborough was occupied by Cornwallis and his troops. Some of these records were re-recorded from originals after his departure. This may just be another urban legend, like many surrounding his occupation, debunked by modern historians. As I understand what is being said in these e-mails the 1752 et seq. Orange County marriage bond index has no entries of marriage bonds dated before about 1781, that the DOA index of North Carolina's marriage bonds, including Orange County, indicates that marriage bonds from Orange county dated before 1781 were filed, indexed by WPA, microfilmed, but the originals prior to 1781 cannot be found and DOA has no explanation of where they have gotten to. Quite a mystery. If DOA received marriage bonds from Orange County dated before 1781 why aren't they included in the 1752 et seq. Orange County index to marriage bonds? Why are these marriage bonds missing from the Orange County index but indexed and microfilmed by DOA the ones they can't explain why the originals are missing. Are there any clues to what happened when the microfilm of the missing marriage bonds are examined? Or are we left with a situation where there are no Orange County marriage bonds before about 1781 indexed by Orange County or filed, indexed, and microfilmed by DOA? Maybe Cornwallis made off with them after all. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ava H. Nackman Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 2:24 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County The reason I piped up here is because I had to do a survey of Orange County marriage records recently as a part of an assignment I was doing for an NGS course I am taking. I spent a day at the vital records office in Hillsborough. Here is what I wrote in my report regarding the earliest marriage records (which were all bonds): Begin quote: While the indexes and photocopied volumes indicated, from their titles, that records began in 1752 (the date of the countys formation), I skimmed the entire first volume of the grooms index and could not locate a single record dated earlier than 1781. There were, however, numerous records for the year 1781 and for all subsequent years, with no obvious lapses after the 1781 date. The records supervisor confirmed that earlier records were extremely sparse, and attributed this to the difficulties of early travel, which resulted in spotty official recording during this time period. She felt, in fact, that the records could not be considered really comprehensive until 1868. While I did not doubt that numerous marriages occurred in earlier years without the benefit of official sanction, I believed that the complete or almost complete absence of records until the sudden appearance of numerous records in 1781 more likely pointed to either the destruction/loss of the earliest records or the absence of official laws regarding the recording of marriage before that point in time. I determined, after a discussion with two archivists at the NC State Archives, that Orange County did not suffer from early record destruction due to burying of records during wars, fires, or other natural disasters. The state of North Carolina did, indeed, require the posting of bonds and the issuance of a license for all marriages from the countys inception. However, these archivists revealed that the NC Archives does hold additional very early records that, for one reason or another, were never included in the indexes, photocopied volumes, or microfiche held at the county Register of Deeds. They have microfilms of marriage bonds for Orange County that do, indeed, cover the 1752-1781 timeframe. However, the oldest original bonds held at the Archives date from 1779. The archivists could not tell me what happened to the originals of the 1752-1778 microfilmed bonds (!). End quote Now, I found this very curious. The microfilm copies (they may have been microfiche -- the archivist said microfilm, but I'm not sure how specific he was being) cannot have been made THAT long ago, so it is pretty amazing that no one tracked the whereabouts of the originals since that time. It is possible that there is a more experienced archivist who is aware of what happened to these early bonds, but the people working when I called had no clue, other than that they are not at the archives. By the way, my entire report is quite extensive. I am sending it in for grading in a day or two. When I get it back I would be happy to give it to DOGS for the website or to Trading Paths, as it might be very helpful to researchers with ancestors in Orange County, particularly people trying to do research long distance. I can't guarantee that it is 100% accurate, but it would give someone a pretty good idea of what records exist, how they are organized, and what information of genealogical value is added to/deleted from them over time. Ava -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard Ellington Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 9:04 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County Am I really sure? No, I am not at all sure that this index is that complete. That is merely the title, as far as I am concerned. I have heard that there are a few marriages registered in the originating counties (Bladen, Granville & Johnston) after 1752 because it was more convenient for folks to go where they had gone to do their governmental duties before the creation of Orange County. According to the NCGENWEB site for Orange, marriage bonds issued prior to 1779 are no longer extant, but I don't know that for sure. - Richard Ava H. Nackman wrote: > Richard, > Are you really sure that there ARE 1752 marriages in that index? I am > curious, because the indexes that they had at the Vital Records Office in > Hillsborough were LABELLED 1752-, but did not in actuality contain much from > before 1781. > > Marty, > I did speak to archivists in Raleigh, and they indicated that they did have > microfilms of the earliest marriages, back to 1752, but did NOT have the > originals of the very early ones. I found this odd, but the two archivists > there at the time had no idea what had become of them. Perhaps the more > experienced archivists who might know weren't around to ask at that time. > Next time I am there I hope to pursue this a bit further. > > Ava > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:18 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County > > Richard, > > I'm not Jack, but would you look for male Bells before 1780 for me. I am > particularly interested in Robert Bell, born in 1736. Thanks. > > Ann Myhre > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Ellington <[email protected]> > > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 14:57:42 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County > > > Jack, I have a printed copy of the bride & groom indexes for Orange > County from 1752-2004. If you will send me a list of the names you are > looking for, I will check the indexes. > > - Richard > > > Jack Ricketts wrote: >> I haven't been able to find a listing of this on microfiche. Do you have > the >> name or number so I can look it up on familysearch.org? >> >> TIA >> Jack Ricketts >> >> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Martha Gujda > <[email protected]>wrote: >>> Hello Ava, >>> >>> The LDS church (Mormons) Family HIstory Centers have all the Marriage >>> Bonds from N.C. from very early dates. (1752) I found all the records I >>> need from those. They are on Micro-fische and are filed by last name of >>> Groom & also by Brides. I understand they got these from the NC Archives > & >>> History Library. So,,,, they should be at the Library in Raleigh. Did > you >>> ask for the assistance of a genealogist who was on duty?? marty gujda >>> >>> >>> martydar >>> >>> >>> --- On Sun, 11/23/08, Ava H. Nackman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> From: Ava H. Nackman <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County >>> To: [email protected] >>> Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 2:25 PM >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> >>> >>> I recently spent some time at the Register of Deeds on Churton Street >>> surveying the marriage records for the county. I noticed that, while the >>> indexes and volumes holding the oldest records are dated from 1752, I > could >>> not find a single entry in the 1752-1911 index (I searched about ½ of it) >>> for a record earlier than 1781. However, there are numerous records for >>> 1781 and subsequently. I know that Orange County was originally formed > in >>> 1752. Does anyone know if records were actually being kept from that > date >>> and all records earlier than 1781 somehow lost or destroyed? Or did laws >>> change around the 1781 timeframe that resulted in new records being kept > in >>> that year that just weren't collected before then? >>> >>> >>> >>> Similarly, while marriage bonds (and a rare license or return) did appear >>> from 1781, the earliest marriage register (with copied returns) that I > was >>> able to find is dated from 1851. Does anyone know if there are registers >>> extant for the time period 1781-1850? >>> >>> >>> >>> I can try to call the NC Archives in Raleigh to find out tomorrow, but >>> thought someone in D-OGS who is doing local research might have some > idea. >>> The OC deputy registrar didn't seem to know. >>> >>> >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> >>> Ava >>> >>> ************************* >>> Visit the D-OGS web site: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/<http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Encdogs/> >>> Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: >>> > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html<http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Encd > ogs/memquery.html> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ************************* >>> Visit the D-OGS web site: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/<http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Encdogs/> >>> Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: >>> > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html<http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Encd > ogs/memquery.html> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes >>> in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> ************************* >> Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ >> Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > -- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Richard K. Ellington ITS Data Centers Manager Information Technology Services University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 440 W. Franklin St., CB 1150 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-1150 Control Center - http://control-center.unc.edu 919-698-8591 (voice) 919-843-9153 (fax) [email protected] "We shall not fail or falter; we shall not weaken or tire...Give us the tools and we will finish the job". -Winston Churchill =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= ************************* Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ************************* Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ************************* Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
I was checking my copy of "North Carolina Research" by Helen Leary (1st edition). In the section on county marriage records, it says: "There have been great losses of marriage bonds in many counties. In a series of articles beginning in the December, 1956, issue of the _North Carolinian_, William Perry Johnson described the availability of bonds from the several counties, with an excellent essay on bonds and marriage procedures of the colonial period ..." The Durham County Library has a copy of this journal. So do various university libraries and the Genealogy Library at the State Library. Duke has a copy, but I'm not at work today, so I can't check it just now. Gwyneth --On Friday, December 12, 2008 12:12 AM -0500 "Ava H. Nackman" <[email protected]> wrote: > Jim, > I agree with you completely. Things just don't seem to be making sense. > The possibilities are numerous and include me being unfortunate enough to > get two inexperienced archivists on duty when I called who gave me some > inaccurate information. That is why I've decided to just pursue this > when I next get to the archives and can perhaps talk to the most senior > archivist and/or take a look at these early bond microfilms myself! > It is also certainly possible that LAND records were buried and lost, but > marriage bonds were not. I was talking to the archivist specifically > about marriage records. And if they indeed have microfilms of the > earliest bonds, then they certainly didn't go missing during the > Revolutionary War! Ava > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Jim Richmond > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 11:39 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County > > I was born and raised in Orange County, searched land titles there for a > few years, and at that time the Register of Deeds explained, and I had > heard it before, that some land records prior to the Revolutionary war > were missing because they were buried when Hillsborough was occupied by > Cornwallis and his troops. Some of these records were re-recorded from > originals after his departure. This may just be another urban legend, > like many surrounding his occupation, debunked by modern historians. As I > understand what is being said in these e-mails the 1752 et seq. Orange > County marriage bond index has no entries of marriage bonds dated before > about 1781, that the DOA index of North Carolina's marriage bonds, > including Orange County, indicates that marriage bonds from Orange county > dated before 1781 were filed, indexed by WPA, microfilmed, but the > originals prior to 1781 cannot be found and DOA has no explanation of > where they have gotten to. Quite a mystery. If DOA received marriage > bonds from Orange County dated before 1781 why aren't they included in > the 1752 et seq. Orange County index to marriage bonds? Why are these > marriage bonds missing from the Orange County index but indexed and > microfilmed by DOA the ones they can't explain why the originals are > missing. Are there any clues to what happened when the microfilm of the > missing marriage bonds are examined? Or are we left with a situation where > there are no Orange County marriage bonds before about 1781 indexed by > Orange County or filed, indexed, and microfilmed by DOA? Maybe Cornwallis > made off with them after all. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Ava H. Nackman > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 2:24 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County > > The reason I piped up here is because I had to do a survey of Orange > County marriage records recently as a part of an assignment I was doing > for an NGS course I am taking. I spent a day at the vital records office > in Hillsborough. Here is what I wrote in my report regarding the earliest > marriage records (which were all bonds): > > Begin quote: > > While the indexes and photocopied volumes indicated, from their titles, > that records began in 1752 (the date of the countys formation), I > skimmed the entire first volume of the grooms index and could not locate > a single record dated earlier than 1781. There were, however, numerous > records for the year 1781 and for all subsequent years, with no obvious > lapses after the 1781 date. The records supervisor confirmed that > earlier records were extremely sparse, and attributed this to the > difficulties of early travel, which resulted in spotty official recording > during this time period. She felt, in fact, that the records could not > be considered really comprehensive until 1868. While I did not doubt > that numerous marriages occurred in earlier years without the benefit of > official sanction, I believed that the complete or almost complete > absence of records until the sudden appearance of numerous records in > 1781 more likely pointed to either the > destruction/loss of the earliest records or the absence of official laws > regarding the recording of marriage before that point in time. > > I determined, after a discussion with two archivists at the NC State > Archives, that Orange County did not suffer from early record destruction > due to burying of records during wars, fires, or other natural disasters. > The state of North Carolina did, indeed, require the posting of bonds and > the issuance of a license for all marriages from the countys inception. > However, these archivists revealed that the NC Archives does hold > additional very early records that, for one reason or another, were never > included in the indexes, photocopied volumes, or microfiche held at the > county Register of Deeds. They have microfilms of marriage bonds for > Orange County that do, indeed, cover the 1752-1781 timeframe. However, > the oldest original bonds held at the Archives date from 1779. The > archivists could not tell me what happened to the originals of the > 1752-1778 microfilmed bonds (!). > > End quote > > Now, I found this very curious. The microfilm copies (they may have been > microfiche -- the archivist said microfilm, but I'm not sure how specific > he was being) cannot have been made THAT long ago, so it is pretty > amazing that no one tracked the whereabouts of the originals since that > time. It is possible that there is a more experienced archivist who is > aware of what happened to these early bonds, but the people working when > I called had no clue, other than that they are not at the archives. > > By the way, my entire report is quite extensive. I am sending it in for > grading in a day or two. When I get it back I would be happy to give it > to DOGS for the website or to Trading Paths, as it might be very helpful > to researchers with ancestors in Orange County, particularly people > trying to do research long distance. I can't guarantee that it is 100% > accurate, but it would give someone a pretty good idea of what records > exist, how they are organized, and what information of genealogical value > is added to/deleted from them over time. > > Ava > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Richard Ellington > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 9:04 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County > > Am I really sure? No, I am not at all sure that this index is that > complete. That is merely the title, as far as I am concerned. I have > heard that there are a few marriages registered in the originating > counties (Bladen, Granville & Johnston) after 1752 because it was more > convenient for folks to go where they had gone to do their governmental > duties before the creation of Orange County. According to the NCGENWEB > site for Orange, marriage bonds issued prior to 1779 are no longer > extant, but I don't know that for sure. > > - Richard > > > Ava H. Nackman wrote: >> Richard, >> Are you really sure that there ARE 1752 marriages in that index? I am >> curious, because the indexes that they had at the Vital Records Office in >> Hillsborough were LABELLED 1752-, but did not in actuality contain much > from >> before 1781. >> >> Marty, >> I did speak to archivists in Raleigh, and they indicated that they did > have >> microfilms of the earliest marriages, back to 1752, but did NOT have the >> originals of the very early ones. I found this odd, but the two > archivists >> there at the time had no idea what had become of them. Perhaps the more >> experienced archivists who might know weren't around to ask at that time. >> Next time I am there I hope to pursue this a bit further. >> >> Ava >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of [email protected] >> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:18 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County >> >> Richard, >> >> I'm not Jack, but would you look for male Bells before 1780 for me. I am >> particularly interested in Robert Bell, born in 1736. Thanks. >> >> Ann Myhre >> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Richard Ellington <[email protected]> >> >> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 14:57:42 >> To: <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County >> >> >> Jack, I have a printed copy of the bride & groom indexes for Orange >> County from 1752-2004. If you will send me a list of the names you are >> looking for, I will check the indexes. >> >> - Richard >> >> >> Jack Ricketts wrote: >>> I haven't been able to find a listing of this on microfiche. Do you have >> the >>> name or number so I can look it up on familysearch.org? >>> >>> TIA >>> Jack Ricketts >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Martha Gujda >> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> Hello Ava, >>>> >>>> The LDS church (Mormons) Family HIstory Centers have all the Marriage >>>> Bonds from N.C. from very early dates. (1752) I found all the records > I >>>> need from those. They are on Micro-fische and are filed by last name >>>> of Groom & also by Brides. I understand they got these from the NC > Archives >> & >>>> History Library. So,,,, they should be at the Library in Raleigh. Did >> you >>>> ask for the assistance of a genealogist who was on duty?? marty > gujda >>>> >>>> >>>> martydar >>>> >>>> >>>> --- On Sun, 11/23/08, Ava H. Nackman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Ava H. Nackman <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: [NCDOGS] Question Re Marriage Records in Orange County >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Date: Sunday, November 23, 2008, 2:25 PM >>>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I recently spent some time at the Register of Deeds on Churton Street >>>> surveying the marriage records for the county. I noticed that, while > the >>>> indexes and volumes holding the oldest records are dated from 1752, I >> could >>>> not find a single entry in the 1752-1911 index (I searched about ½ of > it) >>>> for a record earlier than 1781. However, there are numerous records >>>> for 1781 and subsequently. I know that Orange County was originally >>>> formed >> in >>>> 1752. Does anyone know if records were actually being kept from that >> date >>>> and all records earlier than 1781 somehow lost or destroyed? Or did > laws >>>> change around the 1781 timeframe that resulted in new records being >>>> kept >> in >>>> that year that just weren't collected before then? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Similarly, while marriage bonds (and a rare license or return) did > appear >>>> from 1781, the earliest marriage register (with copied returns) that I >> was >>>> able to find is dated from 1851. Does anyone know if there are > registers >>>> extant for the time period 1781-1850? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I can try to call the NC Archives in Raleigh to find out tomorrow, but >>>> thought someone in D-OGS who is doing local research might have some >> idea. >>>> The OC deputy registrar didn't seem to know. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Many thanks, >>>> >>>> Ava >>>> >>>> ************************* >>>> Visit the D-OGS web site: >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/<http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Encdogs/> >>>> Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: >>>> >> > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html<http://www.rootsweb.com/%7E > ncd >> ogs/memquery.html> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ************************* >>>> Visit the D-OGS web site: >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/<http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Encdogs/> >>>> Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: >>>> >> > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html<http://www.rootsweb.com/%7E > ncd >> ogs/memquery.html> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes >>>> in the subject and the body of the message >>>> >>> ************************* >>> Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ >>> Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > -- > =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= > > Richard K. Ellington > ITS Data Centers Manager > Information Technology Services > University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill > 440 W. Franklin St., CB 1150 > Chapel Hill, NC 27599-1150 > Control Center - http://control-center.unc.edu > > 919-698-8591 (voice) > 919-843-9153 (fax) > [email protected] > > > "We shall not fail or falter; we shall not weaken > or tire...Give us the tools and we will finish the job". > > -Winston Churchill > > =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= > ************************* > Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ > Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > ************************* > Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ > Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > ************************* > Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ > Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > ************************* > Visit the D-OGS web site: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/ > Please post all queries using the D-OGS query form: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncdogs/memquery.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message ---------------------------------------------------- Gwyneth Duncan Voice: 919-660-5860 Systems Librarian Fax: 919-684-2855 Perkins Library Email: [email protected] Box 90196 Duke University Durham, NC 27708-0196