>>...one must always remember the rules the enumerator had to follow. The >>biggest rule was that they COULD NOT ASK the person being enumerated how >>to spell the name. .<< I would be interested in learning where this information came from. I checked at IPUMS where the enumerators instructions can be found for every census from 1850 on, and there didn't appear to be any mention regarding the spelling of names.

Familysearch was correct when they indicated that it was the way it was transcribed it is going to stay that way. What you need to do is find the document that they were transcribing to see how the names were spelled. If the record was an extracted record -- that is the church actually did the transcription of the record, then at least two people had to look at the record. If there was a conflict between the two transcribers, then a third person took a look and decided which one was the more correct transcription. However, if it was not an extraction, but a submittal of a record, that means you or I could have submitted the record in question. One must be aware that no name is "misspelled". If your grandparents spelled their name in such a way that is different than the way it is currectly being spelled, then the name is correct for them. In other words if for example the surname (and I'll keep it a simple name) happened to be Smith as you spell it today, but back when your grandparents were spelling their name, it was spelled Smythe, that is correct for the way they chose to spell their name. It could also have been Smithe, or Smyth or some other derrivative spelling. Now, if you are looking a census record, one must always remember the rules the enumerator had to follow. The biggest rule was that they COULD NOT ASK the person being enumerated how to spell the name. The enumerator had to write it down either as the way he thought it should be spelled, the way the enumerator knew it was spelled, or the way in which he thought he heard the name pronounced. For example, you come across a family that was from say Germany, but the enumerator was not from Germany or knew how the spoken word comes across when spoken in English, he wrote down the name as he thought he heard it and spelled it to the best of his or her knowledge. You could also be from England, but not from say Yorkshire area, but from London -- there is a difference in the way English is spoken, even though it is the English language. How about when you hear today someone speak who is from Massachusetts and then you go to South Carolina. Can you understand the English that you are hearing? How about when you are listening to the television and people are describing something and it comes across as slurred, backwater, or illiterate. Can you make out what it is that they are talking about? While I am using examples of the spoken word in these instances, you must remember that the clerks in the court houses, employers, parish priests/ministers, hospital/hotel keeps all write down people's names and mangle it unless they stop to ask or you notice they are writing it incorrectly. Therefore the same applies to people are transcribing records. While not confronted with verbal pronounciation, they are confronted by the handwriting. Look at the way you wrote your name today, then think about how someone would write your name back in the early 1900s, then go back in time to the 1800s, the 1700s, the 1600s, or even back to the 1500s. A perfect example of going back in time is to take a look at some of the parish registers from England. In the 1800s, they started pre-printing forms so all the priest had to do was fill in the blanks so to speak. But before that, the parish priest had to handwrite every single entry for births, marriages and deaths. As you look at the records as you go back in time, the handwriting changed drastically. When you get closer to 1700, the handwriting and the legibility gets worse and worse. When you are looking at the parish registers from 1538, when they first began, you are looking at a lot of records that are latin or using terms that are latin. If you don't quickly learn these latin terms, you are lost and it makes it very difficult to read, not to mention the handwriting is so scruntched that at some point it is impossible to read. What you need to do is take the information that you found on family search and transcribe what it says, find the original record and look at it yourself. Then make a note in your database about the discrepancy between the transcribed name as familysearch entered it and what you think it really says. Now, it is quite possible that the transcription has manged the name from the original record - like if the record really does say and very clearly the name Smith, but it was transcribed some muddled way, then I would suggest you recontact family search by making a copy of the page in question, noting the name as it was indexed and point out that it should be corrected to whatever the actual record said. If all you are asking them to do is change a spelling to a "modern" spelling, or the spelling as you know it, they won't make the change because that is not what the record says. Yes, for newbies it might be difficult for them to find the record you looked at; but given time, these newbies quickly become more experienced and learn that it is going to take some thinking on their part to work around the problem to find the record. Always expecting either Ancestry.com or Familysearch.org to being 100% accurate just won't happen cause humans are involved and it is humans that make the records and it is humans that are transcribing them to put them on line so that we don't have to revert back to the "old fashioned" method of research -- letter writing, requesting copies, transcribing and waiting and waiting to get answers back. Having stuff on line has spoiled us all to the point we want immediate results. I guess I'm one of the "old fashioned" people because that was how I started with researching my genealogy. I started with letters, waited for answers, took seminar classes, read how-to books, and practiced like crazy to read old handwriting from original records. I've learned there are backdoors for getting to records that are indexed badly, but that's all in the game and the fun of the hunt. Hope this explains a little bit about familysearch.org and others and will help you in the future to do your research and to understand some of the difficulties you will have to overcome in the years to come when doing your family research. Christie rom: BMacKie lu2silly@yahoo.com I recently politely asked Family Search to change a name of one of my great randparents that they mispelled so badly it would have caused a newbie to earch elsewhere in vain. They politely said that that was the way it was ranscribed, and it would stay that way. That's the kind of thing that akes you want to pull out your hair at the roots (no pun intended). At east they don't charge for the service(?).

Thanks for your very empathetic reply to my apology. Kay -----Original Message----- From: BMacKie <lu2silly@yahoo.com> To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Sent: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 11:18 am Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] A MEA CULPA to any SHERMAN RESEARCHERS Thank God, I have never put a family tree online. I say that to myself every day! I did put one on line twenty years ago....and t was so wrong, I was embarrassed, so I had it removed and have never published ince. I refuse to do so. :-) ________________________________ From: "kaysfo@aol.com" <kaysfo@aol.com> o: njhunter@rootsweb.com ent: Monday, April 2, 2012 8:25 AM ubject: [NJHUNTER] A MEA CULPA to any SHERMAN RESEARCHERS lease, if there are any Sherman researchers out there, accept my apologies for n error in my research that I believe I may have shared with you. If any of ou added this information to your database, please correct it. I don't want my istake perpetuated. I will also change my entry on findagrave as well. Thank od, I have never put a family tree online. AGAIN, I TRY to be very careful, but I made the most EGREGIOUS of errors ---admittedly one that won't upset any genealogical applecarts too much since here was no issue from the marriage, but I listed my grandfather STACY SHERMAN s having taken for his second wife, MALINDA STOUT. INSTEAD, her name was actually MALINDA SLOUT (in one census listed as Melinda LOAT) born 1864, died 7 Feb 1895, buried at Rosemont Cemetery in the Stacy herman plot. I made the most stupid of errors in trusting a respected tertiary source over nd above what my own eyes saw on what was on a primary source document. Based n what I thought I knew, I stupidly believed that the person who had filled out he marriage license had forgotton to cross the first T in Stout. But esterday I looked at that record again (to recheck the spelling of her first ame) and I looked AGAIN and I knew that was no mistake----the L was really an , written in the same way on two places on the license. I had never been able to find Malinda STOUT on any census and no wonder. Last ight I looked for SLOUT and found her and a number of siblings. It seems that or some reason the family broke up after the 1870 census, for in 1880 she is iving with an Aunt and an Uncle in Locktown---John and Sarah Chamberlain, in lose proximity with her grandmother Deborah Strimple. Thank you Mr. Bill for publishing the corrected death index for in looking at hat and then writing to tell you that indeed you were correct with your death ate of 1895, I went back to a primary source to check the spelling of her first ame and , with fresh eyes, took another look and discovered my mistake. Again, my apologies and a promise to you and myself that I will not be so sloppy gain. Kay Larsen Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message

Susan, I can relate to that business of confused names. My grandmother's sister had nine children. One daughter, Ruth, was called "Pete" until the day she died -- and there was also a "Junie" (Junior) who was never referred to by his real name, Vernon. God Bless them -- they were special cousins. Nancy Heath Dallaire ---------- Original Message ---------- From: Susan Lynch <lizzytish@comcast.net> To: BMacKie <lumackie@gmail.com>, njhunter@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] census indexes Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 12:22:56 -0400 I'm an indexer for Family Search. I pride myself on being accurate. Someone earlier posted that the directions didn't help them index. They're pretty clear to me. There is a button to push that marks the space "writing unclear" . There is a button to push to make the space blank. If you don't know one letter you put ?. If you don't know a series of letters you but *. That's all in the boxes to the lower right when you are indexing. Also…you are forced to double check anything unusual before your work is submitted. When human beings are involved things aren't always perfect. Census sometimes have funny names in them or girls are boys and boys are girls. Ages change, birth countries change. I subscribe to Genealogy Bank. Great place to get newspaper articles. Lots of articles from the Trenton Times about Lambertville, Hopewell, Pennington, etc. I found an article detailing a stove exploding. My grandmother always had a little piece of something lodged in her cheek. The article explains that a stove had exploded because of a bad seal in the "water back". It listed the people in the house at the time . My grandmother and my Aunt Doris were injured. Not seriously. My grandfather was there and a whole bunch of kids. My father is one of eight. One child who I didn't know was listed as Bobby. Another was listed as June. I had no idea. Then I thought about it. Still confused. Asked my father…Bobby was his sister Gladys who was call Bub and June was his brother Ray who they called Junie because he was a junior. No one to blame. The newspaper reporter or the typesetter put what they thought was right. And 80 years later it took several of us to put the puzzle together. To me…that's what keeps genealogy interesting. Yes, it can be annoying, but we are all supposed to verify our information enough and double check so that we can put the pieces together. I'm sorry that you've had so much trouble finding your records. Susan Mauer Lynch researching (in Hunterdon) Wyckoff, Schenck, Cowdrick, Stout, Holcombe, Titus On Apr 2, 2012, at 11:08 AM, BMacKie wrote: > FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and > index is free and the quality is better. > > Jan, don't get your hopes up on the quality for FamilySearch...as I stated in an earlier post, they recently had a Cox listed as CASH (another family name altogether. Even I, twenty years ago as a novice researcher knew that the name on the record ("Cocke") was Cox. How did somebody get CASH out of Cocke anyway? "Cocke" is an archaic spelling of "Cox". But FamilySearch won't change it from Cash to Cox. Now that ticked me off a little. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "janalpert@aol.com" <janalpert@aol.com> > To: njhunter@rootsweb.com > Sent: Monday, April 2, 2012 7:01 AM > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] census indexes > > One more comment, Ancestry indexing is done in Indonesia because it is cheaper. The people doing the indexing are not familiar with American first names. > > FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and index is free and the quality is better. > > I am a society volunteer administrator on the 1940 census, and I will be happy to bring up the issue of being able to add correct spellings to the census index...after this project is well underway. I assume it will require another field in the database and search process. It would likely need to be incorporated in a later software release. Right now they have their hands full with the 1940 census. > > Jan Alpert > > Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® > > -----Original Message----- > From: kaysfo@aol.com > Sender: njhunter-bounces@rootsweb.com > Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 07:42:56 > To: <lumackie@gmail.com>; <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > Reply-To: njhunter@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > > Good luck getting Ancestry to change anything. Some of us remember when we discussed Bennet's Bagore on this list, a fictional place that shows up on Ancestry for the Kingwood Township census from, I believe 1830 or 1840. Even though the original images clearly said Kingwood Township, that is not what the indexes say. Oh, and they also have a listing for a Black River. It escapes me now what that actually turned out to be. I know they were contacted by people and asked to change it, but they never have. > > I wish you luck, Bill. Let us all know how you make out. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: BMacKie <lu2silly@yahoo.com> > To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sun, Apr 1, 2012 6:22 am > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > > Mr. Bill (I love that)....I suggest that nearly all information on Ancestry.com > s questionable from the getgo and should never be taken for granted. This is > ot a criticism, it is merely an observance over a twenty year period of time. > > ________________________________ > From: Mr. Bill Hartman <mrbill1033@comcast.net> > o: NJHUNTER <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > ent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:12 PM > ubject: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > o change the current DNA hoopla, read on! > I have discovered that nearly all the Deaths reported in the Hunterdon > epublican newspaper that occurred from January 1, 1895 until June 30, 1895 were > ecorded as '1894' in the Listings on Ancestry.com. This was seen in nearly 200 > eaths and they occurred not only from deaths in Hunterdon County, but also > ther New Jersey Counties. > It is my opinion that the error is most likely due to the indexer who read the > icrofilm of the originals and typed the wrong year. This opinion needs to be > erified by someone who has access to the original data, since the implication > ould mean that hundreds of deaths in the time period noted above are suspect. > I will contact Ancestry.com and tell them my findings, which you may see by > oing to the Hunterdon Republican Website, see below > Regards, > rBill > > > > > unterdon Republican newspaper, visit: http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ > > > isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------ > o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of > he message > isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------ > o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of > he message > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ____________________________________________________________ 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33 The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4f79daf3a989a32a5322st04duc

I am looking at a 1768 estate record. Peter Clover of Kingwood, Hunterdon County, New Jersey On the list of what is owed, there was : To William Fleming for the Rev. McHanna salary 12 shillings. I am not totally sure that McHanna is the right name. Can anyone guess what church this would be for? Are there lists of ministers for the churches at that time anywhere? June Byrne Researching Clovers

WHOA Jan. Remember, yesterday is the absolute first time, I had ever even heard of the SLOUT name. I am printing out and filing your letter though and really digest it and see if I can come up with anything more. I have never researched the Chamberlain name either though I have heard it bandied about and come across it in Hunterdon County research. As I said Malinda SLOUT was the daughter of Peter SLOUT (born about 1829) and Mariah STRIMPLE. The only record I have of their marriage is an abstract from the Hunterdon County Democrat which erroneously gives the spelling as STOUT. Mariah is the daughter of Mahlon STRIMPLE and Deborah --?--. Peter's residence is listed as Bloomsbury at the time of the marriage and Deborah's is listed as Kingwood. I believe I have found Peter SLOUT in the 1850 census. Aged 21,he is in the household of his presumed parents Peter and Sarah SLOUT who are living in Alexandria Township. Also in the household are presumed siblings: Sarah A. age 30;Lavinia,age 29; and Philip, age 27. Kay -----Original Message----- From: JanAlpert <JanAlpert@aol.com> To: lu2silly <lu2silly@yahoo.com> Cc: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Sent: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 1:03 pm Subject: [NJHUNTER] Slout, Petty, Bodine, and Chamberlin Kay, have you and I exchanged Slout information? I am interested in knowing more about the family of William Slout. an you tell me more about the John and Sarah Chamberlain in the 1880 ensus? Do you know his parents? am researching a theory that Mary (Pickle) Bodine married Ebenezer Petty 1 Dec. 1805 as reported in the Hunterdon Co. Marriage Records, Vol. 1 p. 04. They were married by J.P. Wright. I believe this was the second arriage for both. Ebenezer Petty died 24 Dec. 1836. I believe Mary is living ith er daughter Matilda Slought in the 1850 census. Based upon the Orphan's ourt records, it appears Ebenezer had several children from his first arriage and three children from the second marriage to Mary Bodine: Ann Queen r Quinn) born 1806, Jonathan b. 1808 and Matilda b. 1812. She was named atilda Slout in the Orphan's Court records. iven Name urname ge /F ccupation alue of Real Estate tate of Birth illiam lought 0 armer ew Jersey atilda 8 eborah Ann 0 nderson S. ary etty 1 2000 have found the name spelled Slought and Slout. found William Slout 72 and Matilda Slout 69 in the 1880 US Census living n Phillipsburg, Warren Co., NJ. I know it is the correct family because nderson Slout, who was listed with them in the 1850 census, is living earby. William has paralysis. Their son William H. Slout 27, is living with hem. may have found Matilda still living in 1895 in the New Jersey census, iving with son William H. Slout. A Chamberlain is living next door. believe Mary Petty is the mother of my ancestor, Sarah Bodine who was orn to Mary (Pickle) and Jacob Bodine 4 September 1796 and was baptised in he German Reformed Church in Alexandria, Hunterdon Co. icholas Pickle, brother of Mary Pickle also had children baptised in the ame church. Mary Bodine is named in the will of her father in 1796. y Sarah Bodine married John Chamberlin 3 March 1817 in Hunterdon Co., NJ. hese Chamberlin's moved to Woodstock, Union Co., Ohio, where they died and re buried. Sarah named her oldest daughter (my ancestor) Matilda. have more information on Ebenezer Petty and his children if anyone else s researching the Pettys. isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message

SECOND WIFE WAS MALINDA SLOUT---not Stout. That's how all of this started. Years of habit are hard to break. -----Original Message----- From: kaysfo <kaysfo@aol.com> To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Sent: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 1:06 pm Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Stacy Sherman es, Dave. That is the one! Mary B. Wanger was wife # 1. She died 1 Sept 889, probably as a result of complications of childbirth since her daughter ertha Mae Sherman was born 23 August 1889. His second wife was Malinda tout---they were only married for a little over three years before she died, nd had no known children. My grandmother, Jane Wilson Caffey, was his third ife and gave birth to10 children, six of whom survived to adulthood. And thank you for accepting my apology. -----Original Message----- rom: David Sherman <dasherman@comcast.net> o: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> ent: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 12:42 pm ubject: [NJHUNTER] Stacy Sherman ust to confirm Kay, his is Stacy Genoa Sherman, born 12-19-1860? so, were his other wives Jane Wilson Caffey and Mary B. Wagner? anks avid Andrew Sherman n Apr 2, 2012, at 9:25 AM, kaysfo@aol.com wrote: Please, if there are any Sherman researchers out there, accept my apologies for an error in my research that I believe I may have shared with you. If any of you added this information to your database, please correct it. I don't want my mistake perpetuated. I will also change my entry on findagrave as well. Thank God, I have never put a family tree online. AGAIN, I TRY to be very careful, but I made the most EGREGIOUS of errors ----admittedly one that won't upset any genealogical applecarts too much since there was no issue from the marriage, but I listed my grandfather STACY SHERMAN as having taken for his second wife, MALINDA STOUT. INSTEAD, her name was actually MALINDA SLOUT (in one census listed as Melinda SLOAT) born 1864, died 7 Feb 1895, buried at Rosemont Cemetery in the Stacy Sherman plot. I made the most stupid of errors in trusting a respected tertiary source over and above what my own eyes saw on what was on a primary source document. Based on what I thought I knew, I stupidly believed that the person who had filled out the marriage license had forgotton to cross the first T in Stout. But yesterday I looked at that record again (to recheck the spelling of her first name) and I looked AGAIN and I knew that was no mistake----the L was really an L, written in the same way on two places on the license. I had never been able to find Malinda STOUT on any census and no wonder. Last night I looked for SLOUT and found her and a number of siblings. It seems that for some reason the family broke up after the 1870 census, for in 1880 she is living with an Aunt and an Uncle in Locktown---John and Sarah Chamberlain, in close proximity with her grandmother Deborah Strimple. Thank you Mr. Bill for publishing the corrected death index for in looking at that and then writing to tell you that indeed you were correct with your death date of 1895, I went back to a primary source to check the spelling of her first name and , with fresh eyes, took another look and discovered my mistake. Again, my apologies and a promise to you and myself that I will not be so sloppy again. Kay Larsen Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ----------------------------- unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of e message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message

AGAIN, this time a typo. Yes, Stacy's first wife was Mary WAGNER, not Wanger. Kay -----Original Message----- From: David Sherman <dasherman@comcast.net> To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Sent: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 12:42 pm Subject: [NJHUNTER] Stacy Sherman Just to confirm Kay, This is Stacy Genoa Sherman, born 12-19-1860? f so, were his other wives Jane Wilson Caffey and Mary B. Wagner? hanks David Andrew Sherman n Apr 2, 2012, at 9:25 AM, kaysfo@aol.com wrote: > Please, if there are any Sherman researchers out there, accept my apologies for an error in my research that I believe I may have shared with you. If any of you added this information to your database, please correct it. I don't want my mistake perpetuated. I will also change my entry on findagrave as well. Thank God, I have never put a family tree online. AGAIN, I TRY to be very careful, but I made the most EGREGIOUS of errors ----admittedly one that won't upset any genealogical applecarts too much since there was no issue from the marriage, but I listed my grandfather STACY SHERMAN as having taken for his second wife, MALINDA STOUT. INSTEAD, her name was actually MALINDA SLOUT (in one census listed as Melinda SLOAT) born 1864, died 7 Feb 1895, buried at Rosemont Cemetery in the Stacy Sherman plot. I made the most stupid of errors in trusting a respected tertiary source over and above what my own eyes saw on what was on a primary source document. Based on what I thought I knew, I stupidly believed that the person who had filled out the marriage license had forgotton to cross the first T in Stout. But yesterday I looked at that record again (to recheck the spelling of her first name) and I looked AGAIN and I knew that was no mistake----the L was really an L, written in the same way on two places on the license. I had never been able to find Malinda STOUT on any census and no wonder. Last night I looked for SLOUT and found her and a number of siblings. It seems that for some reason the family broke up after the 1870 census, for in 1880 she is living with an Aunt and an Uncle in Locktown---John and Sarah Chamberlain, in close proximity with her grandmother Deborah Strimple. Thank you Mr. Bill for publishing the corrected death index for in looking at that and then writing to tell you that indeed you were correct with your death date of 1895, I went back to a primary source to check the spelling of her first name and , with fresh eyes, took another look and discovered my mistake. Again, my apologies and a promise to you and myself that I will not be so sloppy again. Kay Larsen Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message

Yes, Dave. That is the one! Mary B. Wanger was wife # 1. She died 1 Sept 1889, probably as a result of complications of childbirth since her daughter Bertha Mae Sherman was born 23 August 1889. His second wife was Malinda Stout---they were only married for a little over three years before she died, and had no known children. My grandmother, Jane Wilson Caffey, was his third wife and gave birth to10 children, six of whom survived to adulthood. And thank you for accepting my apology. -----Original Message----- From: David Sherman <dasherman@comcast.net> To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Sent: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 12:42 pm Subject: [NJHUNTER] Stacy Sherman Just to confirm Kay, This is Stacy Genoa Sherman, born 12-19-1860? f so, were his other wives Jane Wilson Caffey and Mary B. Wagner? hanks David Andrew Sherman n Apr 2, 2012, at 9:25 AM, kaysfo@aol.com wrote: > Please, if there are any Sherman researchers out there, accept my apologies for an error in my research that I believe I may have shared with you. If any of you added this information to your database, please correct it. I don't want my mistake perpetuated. I will also change my entry on findagrave as well. Thank God, I have never put a family tree online. AGAIN, I TRY to be very careful, but I made the most EGREGIOUS of errors ----admittedly one that won't upset any genealogical applecarts too much since there was no issue from the marriage, but I listed my grandfather STACY SHERMAN as having taken for his second wife, MALINDA STOUT. INSTEAD, her name was actually MALINDA SLOUT (in one census listed as Melinda SLOAT) born 1864, died 7 Feb 1895, buried at Rosemont Cemetery in the Stacy Sherman plot. I made the most stupid of errors in trusting a respected tertiary source over and above what my own eyes saw on what was on a primary source document. Based on what I thought I knew, I stupidly believed that the person who had filled out the marriage license had forgotton to cross the first T in Stout. But yesterday I looked at that record again (to recheck the spelling of her first name) and I looked AGAIN and I knew that was no mistake----the L was really an L, written in the same way on two places on the license. I had never been able to find Malinda STOUT on any census and no wonder. Last night I looked for SLOUT and found her and a number of siblings. It seems that for some reason the family broke up after the 1870 census, for in 1880 she is living with an Aunt and an Uncle in Locktown---John and Sarah Chamberlain, in close proximity with her grandmother Deborah Strimple. Thank you Mr. Bill for publishing the corrected death index for in looking at that and then writing to tell you that indeed you were correct with your death date of 1895, I went back to a primary source to check the spelling of her first name and , with fresh eyes, took another look and discovered my mistake. Again, my apologies and a promise to you and myself that I will not be so sloppy again. Kay Larsen Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message

Kay, have you and I exchanged Slout information? I am interested in knowing more about the family of William Slout. Can you tell me more about the John and Sarah Chamberlain in the 1880 census? Do you know his parents? I am researching a theory that Mary (Pickle) Bodine married Ebenezer Petty 31 Dec. 1805 as reported in the Hunterdon Co. Marriage Records, Vol. 1 p. 104. They were married by J.P. Wright. I believe this was the second marriage for both. Ebenezer Petty died 24 Dec. 1836. I believe Mary is living with her daughter Matilda Slought in the 1850 census. Based upon the Orphan's Court records, it appears Ebenezer had several children from his first marriage and three children from the second marriage to Mary Bodine: Ann (Queen or Quinn) born 1806, Jonathan b. 1808 and Matilda b. 1812. She was named Matilda Slout in the Orphan's Court records. Given Name Surname Age M/F Occupation Value of Real Estate State of Birth William Slought 40 M Farmer New Jersey Matilda “ 38 F “ Deborah Ann “ 10 F “ Anderson S. “ 8 M “ Mary Petty 81 F 2000 “ I have found the name spelled Slought and Slout. I found William Slout 72 and Matilda Slout 69 in the 1880 US Census living in Phillipsburg, Warren Co., NJ. I know it is the correct family because Anderson Slout, who was listed with them in the 1850 census, is living nearby. William has paralysis. Their son William H. Slout 27, is living with them. I may have found Matilda still living in 1895 in the New Jersey census, living with son William H. Slout. A Chamberlain is living next door. I believe Mary Petty is the mother of my ancestor, Sarah Bodine who was born to Mary (Pickle) and Jacob Bodine 4 September 1796 and was baptised in the German Reformed Church in Alexandria, Hunterdon Co. Nicholas Pickle, brother of Mary Pickle also had children baptised in the same church. Mary Bodine is named in the will of her father in 1796. My Sarah Bodine married John Chamberlin 3 March 1817 in Hunterdon Co., NJ. These Chamberlin's moved to Woodstock, Union Co., Ohio, where they died and are buried. Sarah named her oldest daughter (my ancestor) Matilda. I have more information on Ebenezer Petty and his children if anyone else is researching the Pettys.

Just to confirm Kay, This is Stacy Genoa Sherman, born 12-19-1860? If so, were his other wives Jane Wilson Caffey and Mary B. Wagner? Thanks David Andrew Sherman On Apr 2, 2012, at 9:25 AM, kaysfo@aol.com wrote: > > > > > Please, if there are any Sherman researchers out there, accept my > apologies for an error in my research that I believe I may have > shared with you. If any of you added this information to your > database, please correct it. I don't want my mistake perpetuated. I > will also change my entry on findagrave as well. Thank God, I have > never put a family tree online. > > AGAIN, I TRY to be very careful, but I made the most EGREGIOUS of > errors ----admittedly one that won't upset any genealogical > applecarts too much since there was no issue from the marriage, but > I listed my grandfather STACY SHERMAN as having taken for his second > wife, MALINDA STOUT. > > INSTEAD, her name was actually MALINDA SLOUT (in one census listed > as Melinda SLOAT) born 1864, died 7 Feb 1895, buried at Rosemont > Cemetery in the Stacy Sherman plot. > > I made the most stupid of errors in trusting a respected tertiary > source over and above what my own eyes saw on what was on a primary > source document. Based on what I thought I knew, I stupidly > believed that the person who had filled out the marriage license had > forgotton to cross the first T in Stout. But yesterday I looked at > that record again (to recheck the spelling of her first name) and I > looked AGAIN and I knew that was no mistake----the L was really an > L, written in the same way on two places on the license. > > I had never been able to find Malinda STOUT on any census and no > wonder. Last night I looked for SLOUT and found her and a number > of siblings. It seems that for some reason the family broke up > after the 1870 census, for in 1880 she is living with an Aunt and an > Uncle in Locktown---John and Sarah Chamberlain, in close proximity > with her grandmother Deborah Strimple. > > Thank you Mr. Bill for publishing the corrected death index for in > looking at that and then writing to tell you that indeed you were > correct with your death date of 1895, I went back to a primary > source to check the spelling of her first name and , with fresh > eyes, took another look and discovered my mistake. > > Again, my apologies and a promise to you and myself that I will not > be so sloppy again. > > Kay Larsen > > > > > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message

Cousin Kay, Apology accepted. I will make the change. Good work, Thanks. David Andrew Sherman On Apr 2, 2012, at 9:25 AM, kaysfo@aol.com wrote: > > > > > Please, if there are any Sherman researchers out there, accept my > apologies for an error in my research that I believe I may have > shared with you. If any of you added this information to your > database, please correct it. I don't want my mistake perpetuated. I > will also change my entry on findagrave as well. Thank God, I have > never put a family tree online. > > AGAIN, I TRY to be very careful, but I made the most EGREGIOUS of > errors ----admittedly one that won't upset any genealogical > applecarts too much since there was no issue from the marriage, but > I listed my grandfather STACY SHERMAN as having taken for his second > wife, MALINDA STOUT. > > INSTEAD, her name was actually MALINDA SLOUT (in one census listed > as Melinda SLOAT) born 1864, died 7 Feb 1895, buried at Rosemont > Cemetery in the Stacy Sherman plot. > > I made the most stupid of errors in trusting a respected tertiary > source over and above what my own eyes saw on what was on a primary > source document. Based on what I thought I knew, I stupidly > believed that the person who had filled out the marriage license had > forgotton to cross the first T in Stout. But yesterday I looked at > that record again (to recheck the spelling of her first name) and I > looked AGAIN and I knew that was no mistake----the L was really an > L, written in the same way on two places on the license. > > I had never been able to find Malinda STOUT on any census and no > wonder. Last night I looked for SLOUT and found her and a number > of siblings. It seems that for some reason the family broke up > after the 1870 census, for in 1880 she is living with an Aunt and an > Uncle in Locktown---John and Sarah Chamberlain, in close proximity > with her grandmother Deborah Strimple. > > Thank you Mr. Bill for publishing the corrected death index for in > looking at that and then writing to tell you that indeed you were > correct with your death date of 1895, I went back to a primary > source to check the spelling of her first name and , with fresh > eyes, took another look and discovered my mistake. > > Again, my apologies and a promise to you and myself that I will not > be so sloppy again. > > Kay Larsen > > > > > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message

I'm an indexer for Family Search. I pride myself on being accurate. Someone earlier posted that the directions didn't help them index. They're pretty clear to me. There is a button to push that marks the space "writing unclear" . There is a button to push to make the space blank. If you don't know one letter you put ?. If you don't know a series of letters you but *. That's all in the boxes to the lower right when you are indexing. Also…you are forced to double check anything unusual before your work is submitted. When human beings are involved things aren't always perfect. Census sometimes have funny names in them or girls are boys and boys are girls. Ages change, birth countries change. I subscribe to Genealogy Bank. Great place to get newspaper articles. Lots of articles from the Trenton Times about Lambertville, Hopewell, Pennington, etc. I found an article detailing a stove exploding. My grandmother always had a little piece of something lodged in her cheek. The article explains that a stove had exploded because of a bad seal in the "water back". It listed the people in the house at the time . My grandmother and my Aunt Doris were injured. Not seriously. My grandfather was there and a whole bunch of kids. My father is one of eight. One child who I didn't know was listed as Bobby. Another was listed as June. I had no idea. Then I thought about it. Still confused. Asked my father…Bobby was his sister Gladys who was call Bub and June was his brother Ray who they called Junie because he was a junior. No one to blame. The newspaper reporter or the typesetter put what they thought was right. And 80 years later it took several of us to put the puzzle together. To me…that's what keeps genealogy interesting. Yes, it can be annoying, but we are all supposed to verify our information enough and double c! heck so that we can put the pieces together. I'm sorry that you've had so much trouble finding your records. Susan Mauer Lynch researching (in Hunterdon) Wyckoff, Schenck, Cowdrick, Stout, Holcombe, Titus On Apr 2, 2012, at 11:08 AM, BMacKie wrote: > FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and > index is free and the quality is better. > > Jan, don't get your hopes up on the quality for FamilySearch...as I stated in an earlier post, they recently had a Cox listed as CASH (another family name altogether. Even I, twenty years ago as a novice researcher knew that the name on the record ("Cocke") was Cox. How did somebody get CASH out of Cocke anyway? "Cocke" is an archaic spelling of "Cox". But FamilySearch won't change it from Cash to Cox. Now that ticked me off a little. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "janalpert@aol.com" <janalpert@aol.com> > To: njhunter@rootsweb.com > Sent: Monday, April 2, 2012 7:01 AM > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] census indexes > > One more comment, Ancestry indexing is done in Indonesia because it is cheaper. The people doing the indexing are not familiar with American first names. > > FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and index is free and the quality is better. > > I am a society volunteer administrator on the 1940 census, and I will be happy to bring up the issue of being able to add correct spellings to the census index...after this project is well underway. I assume it will require another field in the database and search process. It would likely need to be incorporated in a later software release. Right now they have their hands full with the 1940 census. > > Jan Alpert > > Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® > > -----Original Message----- > From: kaysfo@aol.com > Sender: njhunter-bounces@rootsweb.com > Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 07:42:56 > To: <lumackie@gmail.com>; <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > Reply-To: njhunter@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > > Good luck getting Ancestry to change anything. Some of us remember when we discussed Bennet's Bagore on this list, a fictional place that shows up on Ancestry for the Kingwood Township census from, I believe 1830 or 1840. Even though the original images clearly said Kingwood Township, that is not what the indexes say. Oh, and they also have a listing for a Black River. It escapes me now what that actually turned out to be. I know they were contacted by people and asked to change it, but they never have. > > I wish you luck, Bill. Let us all know how you make out. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: BMacKie <lu2silly@yahoo.com> > To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sun, Apr 1, 2012 6:22 am > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > > Mr. Bill (I love that)....I suggest that nearly all information on Ancestry.com > s questionable from the getgo and should never be taken for granted. This is > ot a criticism, it is merely an observance over a twenty year period of time. > > ________________________________ > From: Mr. Bill Hartman <mrbill1033@comcast.net> > o: NJHUNTER <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > ent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:12 PM > ubject: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > o change the current DNA hoopla, read on! > I have discovered that nearly all the Deaths reported in the Hunterdon > epublican newspaper that occurred from January 1, 1895 until June 30, 1895 were > ecorded as '1894' in the Listings on Ancestry.com. This was seen in nearly 200 > eaths and they occurred not only from deaths in Hunterdon County, but also > ther New Jersey Counties. > It is my opinion that the error is most likely due to the indexer who read the > icrofilm of the originals and typed the wrong year. This opinion needs to be > erified by someone who has access to the original data, since the implication > ould mean that hundreds of deaths in the time period noted above are suspect. > I will contact Ancestry.com and tell them my findings, which you may see by > oing to the Hunterdon Republican Website, see below > Regards, > rBill > > > > > unterdon Republican newspaper, visit: http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ > > > isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------ > o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of > he message > isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------ > o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of > he message > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

One more comment, Ancestry indexing is done in Indonesia because it is cheaper. The people doing the indexing are not familiar with American first names. FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and index is free and the quality is better. I am a society volunteer administrator on the 1940 census, and I will be happy to bring up the issue of being able to add correct spellings to the census index...after this project is well underway. I assume it will require another field in the database and search process. It would likely need to be incorporated in a later software release. Right now they have their hands full with the 1940 census. Jan Alpert Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® -----Original Message----- From: kaysfo@aol.com Sender: njhunter-bounces@rootsweb.com Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 07:42:56 To: <lumackie@gmail.com>; <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Reply-To: njhunter@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! Good luck getting Ancestry to change anything. Some of us remember when we discussed Bennet's Bagore on this list, a fictional place that shows up on Ancestry for the Kingwood Township census from, I believe 1830 or 1840. Even though the original images clearly said Kingwood Township, that is not what the indexes say. Oh, and they also have a listing for a Black River. It escapes me now what that actually turned out to be. I know they were contacted by people and asked to change it, but they never have. I wish you luck, Bill. Let us all know how you make out. -----Original Message----- From: BMacKie <lu2silly@yahoo.com> To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sun, Apr 1, 2012 6:22 am Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! Mr. Bill (I love that)....I suggest that nearly all information on Ancestry.com s questionable from the getgo and should never be taken for granted. This is ot a criticism, it is merely an observance over a twenty year period of time. ________________________________ From: Mr. Bill Hartman <mrbill1033@comcast.net> o: NJHUNTER <njhunter@rootsweb.com> ent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:12 PM ubject: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! o change the current DNA hoopla, read on! I have discovered that nearly all the Deaths reported in the Hunterdon epublican newspaper that occurred from January 1, 1895 until June 30, 1895 were ecorded as '1894' in the Listings on Ancestry.com. This was seen in nearly 200 eaths and they occurred not only from deaths in Hunterdon County, but also ther New Jersey Counties. It is my opinion that the error is most likely due to the indexer who read the icrofilm of the originals and typed the wrong year. This opinion needs to be erified by someone who has access to the original data, since the implication ould mean that hundreds of deaths in the time period noted above are suspect. I will contact Ancestry.com and tell them my findings, which you may see by oing to the Hunterdon Republican Website, see below Regards, rBill unterdon Republican newspaper, visit: http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

FamilySearch is using dual entry on the 1940 census. In other words two different people will index a page and a computer program will compare the two entries. If they are the same the page will be approved. If they disagree a third person called an arbitrator will review the census page and determine which is correct. More experienced indexers are arbitrators. I do not know if FamilySearch will list multiple spellings of a surname if the census page is not clear or if the census taker spelled the name wrong and a family researcher later notifies FamilySearch. As has been noted in earlier emails, Ancestry can show alternate spellings, but one should always transcribe the name as it appears in the census. Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® -----Original Message----- From: "Mr. Bill Hartman" <mrbill1033@comcast.net> Sender: njhunter-bounces@rootsweb.com Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 14:27:20 To: <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Reply-To: njhunter@rootsweb.com Subject: [NJHUNTER] Jacqueline et al: Re: Newspaper Deaths and 1840 Census comments So True, I see these controversial data entries constantly in my project of abstracting the newspaper, especially with Census Records. And now on the Eve of the release of US Census Records for 1940, we are apt to see these problems again and again. I have signed up as an indexer for the Family Search Organization and have been doing their trial indexing for an hour each day the past week or so. Since they did not critique my work, I asked them to do so and they directed me to their list of directions. This didn't help me at all. If a data field is missing on the original record - do I enter the word "missing" or leave the question on their indexing form "blank" ? There is a difference and I did not get an answer. However, I do have a record of being 98% correct, even though some of the names I indexed, I have no idea whether or not they were correct!! Have fun with the new Census Records, and please don't curse me out if you find misspellings! Regards, MrBill Hunterdon Republican newspaper, visit: http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jacqueline Lubinski" <jwlube@ptd.net> To: "BMacKie" <lumackie@gmail.com>, njhunter@rootsweb.com Sent: Sunday, April 1, 2012 9:45:36 AM Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! I found that out with my very first search years ago! My grandfather's name is spelled Gonzol but pronounced Gernzel in phonetic Hungarian. Ancestry.com has the family in the 1920 census as Guernsey, my grandmother's name is listed as Mary (nor Borbala), and my mom is listed as Serena instead of Irene. There are 3 errors here in this family alone. The first two are due to the census taker, and the 3rd (my mom's name) is because the transcriber to Ancestry.com read Irene as Serena and that is how she is listed in their u database. I made corrections to their files. In doing Ancestry searches one has to really "think outside the box". Sometimes it is not as easy as WDYTYA on tv portrays it to be. -----Original Message----- From: njhunter-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:njhunter-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of BMacKie Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2012 6:17 AM To: njhunter@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! Mr. Bill (I love that)....I suggest that nearly all information on Ancestry.com is questionable from the getgo and should never be taken for granted. This is not a criticism, it is merely an observance over a twenty year period of time. ________________________________ From: Mr. Bill Hartman <mrbill1033@comcast.net> To: NJHUNTER <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:12 PM Subject: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! To change the current DNA hoopla, read on! I have discovered that nearly all the Deaths reported in the Hunterdon Republican newspaper that occurred from January 1, 1895 until June 30, 1895 were recorded as '1894' in the Listings on Ancestry.com. This was seen in nearly 200 deaths and they occurred not only from deaths in Hunterdon County, but also other New Jersey Counties. It is my opinion that the error is most likely due to the indexer who read the microfilm of the originals and typed the wrong year. This opinion needs to be verified by someone who has access to the original data, since the implication would mean that hundreds of deaths in the time period noted above are suspect. I will contact Ancestry.com and tell them my findings, which you may see by going to the Hunterdon Republican Website, see below Regards, MrBill Hunterdon Republican newspaper, visit: http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Sue, I've found discrepancies on ancestry, LDS and all kinds of census records.  The census-takers could only input what they were told. My husband's family came through Ellis Island and I could never find their records.  I finally decided that maybe they were listed as ColGuhoun instead of the correct ColQuhoun.  Sure enough, there they were.  You have to be creative.  You're right - that's part of the fun!  I think I read too many Nancy Drew books....     Harry and Sharon Moore Colquhoun Yardville, NJ Our family website http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~hscc/ From: Susan Lynch <lizzytish@comcast.net> To: BMacKie <lumackie@gmail.com>; njhunter@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, April 2, 2012 9:22 AM Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] census indexes I'm an indexer for Family Search.  I pride myself on being accurate.  Someone earlier posted that the directions didn't help them index.  They're pretty clear to me.  There is a button to push that marks the space "writing unclear" .  There is a button to push to make the space blank.  If you don't know one letter you put ?.  If you don't know a series of letters you but *.  That's all in the boxes to the lower right when you are indexing.  Also…you are forced to double check anything unusual before your work is submitted.  When human beings are involved things aren't always perfect.  Census sometimes have funny names in them or girls are boys and boys are girls.  Ages change, birth countries change. I subscribe to Genealogy Bank.  Great place to get newspaper articles.  Lots of articles from the Trenton Times about Lambertville, Hopewell, Pennington, etc. I found an article detailing a stove exploding.  My grandmother always had a little piece of something lodged in her cheek. The article explains that a stove had exploded because of a bad seal in the "water back".  It listed the people in the house at the time .  My grandmother and my Aunt Doris were injured.  Not seriously.  My grandfather was there and a whole bunch of kids.  My father is one of eight.  One child who I didn't know was listed as Bobby.  Another was listed as June.  I had no idea.  Then I thought about it.  Still confused.  Asked my father…Bobby was his sister Gladys who was call Bub and June was his brother Ray who they called Junie because he was a junior.  No one to blame.  The newspaper reporter or the typesetter put what they thought was right.  And 80 years later it took several of us to put the puzzle together.  To me…that's what keeps genealogy interesting. Yes, it can be annoying, but we are all supposed to verify our information enough and double check so that we can put the pieces together. I'm sorry that you've had so much trouble finding your records. Susan Mauer Lynch researching (in Hunterdon) Wyckoff, Schenck, Cowdrick, Stout, Holcombe, Titus On Apr 2, 2012, at 11:08 AM, BMacKie wrote: > FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and > index is free and the quality is better. > > Jan, don't get your hopes up on the quality for FamilySearch...as I stated in an earlier post, they recently had a Cox listed as CASH (another family name altogether. Even I, twenty years ago as a novice researcher knew that the name on the record ("Cocke") was Cox. How did somebody get CASH out of Cocke anyway?  "Cocke" is an archaic spelling of "Cox".  But FamilySearch won't change it from Cash to Cox.  Now that ticked me off a little.  > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "janalpert@aol.com" <janalpert@aol.com> > To: njhunter@rootsweb.com > Sent: Monday, April 2, 2012 7:01 AM > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] census indexes > > One more comment, Ancestry indexing is done in Indonesia because it is cheaper. The people doing the indexing are not familiar with American first names. > > FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and index is free and the quality is better. > > I am a society volunteer administrator on the 1940 census, and I will be happy to bring up the issue of being able to add correct spellings to the census index...after this project is well  underway. I assume it will require another field in the database and search process. It would likely need to be incorporated in a later software release. Right now they have their hands full with the 1940 census. > > Jan Alpert > > Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® > > -----Original Message----- > From: kaysfo@aol.com > Sender: njhunter-bounces@rootsweb.com > Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 07:42:56 > To: <lumackie@gmail.com>; <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > Reply-To: njhunter@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > > Good luck getting Ancestry to change anything.  Some of us remember when we discussed Bennet's Bagore on this list, a fictional place that shows up on Ancestry for the Kingwood Township census from, I believe 1830 or 1840.  Even though the original images clearly said Kingwood Township, that is not what the indexes say. Oh, and they also have a listing for a Black River.  It escapes me now what that actually turned out to be.  I know they were contacted by people and asked to change it, but they never have. > > I wish you luck, Bill.  Let us all know how you make out. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: BMacKie <lu2silly@yahoo.com> > To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sun, Apr 1, 2012 6:22 am > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > > Mr. Bill (I love that)....I suggest that nearly all information on Ancestry.com > s questionable from the getgo and should never be taken for granted.  This is > ot a criticism, it is merely an observance over a twenty year period of time.  > > ________________________________ > From: Mr. Bill Hartman <mrbill1033@comcast.net> > o: NJHUNTER <njhunter@rootsweb.com> > ent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:12 PM > ubject: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! > > o change the current DNA hoopla, read on! > I have discovered that nearly all the Deaths reported in the Hunterdon > epublican newspaper that occurred from January 1, 1895 until June 30, 1895 were > ecorded as '1894' in the Listings on Ancestry.com. This was seen in nearly 200 > eaths and they occurred not only from deaths in Hunterdon County, but also > ther New Jersey Counties. > It is my opinion that the error is most likely due to the indexer who read the > icrofilm of the originals and typed the wrong year. This opinion needs to be > erified by someone who has access to the original data, since the implication > ould mean that hundreds of deaths in the time period noted above are suspect. > I will contact Ancestry.com and tell them my findings, which you may see by > oing to the Hunterdon Republican Website, see below > Regards, > rBill > > > > > unterdon Republican newspaper, visit: http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ > > > isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------ > o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of > he message > isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------ > o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com > ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of > he message > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Please, if there are any Sherman researchers out there, accept my apologies for an error in my research that I believe I may have shared with you. If any of you added this information to your database, please correct it. I don't want my mistake perpetuated. I will also change my entry on findagrave as well. Thank God, I have never put a family tree online. AGAIN, I TRY to be very careful, but I made the most EGREGIOUS of errors ----admittedly one that won't upset any genealogical applecarts too much since there was no issue from the marriage, but I listed my grandfather STACY SHERMAN as having taken for his second wife, MALINDA STOUT. INSTEAD, her name was actually MALINDA SLOUT (in one census listed as Melinda SLOAT) born 1864, died 7 Feb 1895, buried at Rosemont Cemetery in the Stacy Sherman plot. I made the most stupid of errors in trusting a respected tertiary source over and above what my own eyes saw on what was on a primary source document. Based on what I thought I knew, I stupidly believed that the person who had filled out the marriage license had forgotton to cross the first T in Stout. But yesterday I looked at that record again (to recheck the spelling of her first name) and I looked AGAIN and I knew that was no mistake----the L was really an L, written in the same way on two places on the license. I had never been able to find Malinda STOUT on any census and no wonder. Last night I looked for SLOUT and found her and a number of siblings. It seems that for some reason the family broke up after the 1870 census, for in 1880 she is living with an Aunt and an Uncle in Locktown---John and Sarah Chamberlain, in close proximity with her grandmother Deborah Strimple. Thank you Mr. Bill for publishing the corrected death index for in looking at that and then writing to tell you that indeed you were correct with your death date of 1895, I went back to a primary source to check the spelling of her first name and , with fresh eyes, took another look and discovered my mistake. Again, my apologies and a promise to you and myself that I will not be so sloppy again. Kay Larsen

Thank God, I have never put a family tree online. I say that to myself every day!  I did put one on line twenty years ago....and it was so wrong, I was embarrassed, so I had it removed and have never published since.  I refuse to do so.  :-) ________________________________ From: "kaysfo@aol.com" <kaysfo@aol.com> To: njhunter@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, April 2, 2012 8:25 AM Subject: [NJHUNTER] A MEA CULPA to any SHERMAN RESEARCHERS Please,  if there are any Sherman researchers out there, accept my apologies for an error in my research that I believe I may have shared with you.  If  any of you added this information to your database, please correct it. I don't want my mistake perpetuated.  I will also change my entry on findagrave as well. Thank God, I have never put a family tree online. AGAIN, I TRY to be very careful, but I made the most EGREGIOUS of errors ----admittedly one that won't upset any genealogical applecarts too much since there was no issue from the marriage, but I listed my grandfather STACY SHERMAN as having taken for his second wife, MALINDA STOUT. INSTEAD, her name was actually MALINDA SLOUT (in one census listed as Melinda SLOAT)  born 1864, died 7 Feb 1895, buried at Rosemont Cemetery in the Stacy Sherman plot. I made the most stupid of errors in trusting a respected tertiary source over and above  what my own eyes saw on what was on a primary source document.  Based on what I thought I knew, I stupidly believed that the person who had filled out the marriage license had forgotton to cross the first T in Stout.  But yesterday  I looked at that record again (to recheck the spelling of her first name) and I looked AGAIN  and I knew that was no mistake----the L was really an L, written in the same way on two places on the license. I had never been able to find Malinda STOUT on any census and no wonder.  Last night I looked  for SLOUT and found her and a number of siblings.  It seems that for some reason the family broke up  after the 1870 census, for in 1880 she is living with an Aunt and an Uncle in Locktown---John and Sarah Chamberlain, in close proximity with her grandmother Deborah Strimple. Thank you Mr. Bill for publishing the corrected death index for in looking at that and then writing to tell you that indeed you were correct with your death date of 1895, I went back to a primary source to check the spelling of her first name and , with fresh eyes, took another look and discovered my mistake. Again, my apologies and a promise to you and myself that I will not be so sloppy again. Kay Larsen Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and index is free and the quality is better. Jan, don't get your hopes up on the quality for FamilySearch...as I stated in an earlier post, they recently had a Cox listed as CASH (another family name altogether. Even I, twenty years ago as a novice researcher knew that the name on the record ("Cocke") was Cox. How did somebody get CASH out of Cocke anyway?  "Cocke" is an archaic spelling of "Cox".  But FamilySearch won't change it from Cash to Cox.  Now that ticked me off a little.  ________________________________ From: "janalpert@aol.com" <janalpert@aol.com> To: njhunter@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, April 2, 2012 7:01 AM Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] census indexes One more comment, Ancestry indexing is done in Indonesia because it is cheaper. The people doing the indexing are not familiar with American first names. FamilySearch has organized the indexing project for the 1940 census with many genealogy societies participating so access to the census and index is free and the quality is better. I am a society volunteer administrator on the 1940 census, and I will be happy to bring up the issue of being able to add correct spellings to the census index...after this project is well  underway. I assume it will require another field in the database and search process. It would likely need to be incorporated in a later software release. Right now they have their hands full with the 1940 census. Jan Alpert Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® -----Original Message----- From: kaysfo@aol.com Sender: njhunter-bounces@rootsweb.com Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 07:42:56 To: <lumackie@gmail.com>; <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Reply-To: njhunter@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! Good luck getting Ancestry to change anything.  Some of us remember when we discussed Bennet's Bagore on this list, a fictional place that shows up on Ancestry for the Kingwood Township census from, I believe 1830 or 1840.  Even though the original images clearly said Kingwood Township, that is not what the indexes say. Oh, and they also have a listing for a Black River.  It escapes me now what that actually turned out to be.  I know they were contacted by people and asked to change it, but they never have. I wish you luck, Bill.  Let us all know how you make out. -----Original Message----- From: BMacKie <lu2silly@yahoo.com> To: njhunter <njhunter@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sun, Apr 1, 2012 6:22 am Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! Mr. Bill (I love that)....I suggest that nearly all information on Ancestry.com s questionable from the getgo and should never be taken for granted.  This is ot a criticism, it is merely an observance over a twenty year period of time.  ________________________________ From: Mr. Bill Hartman <mrbill1033@comcast.net> o: NJHUNTER <njhunter@rootsweb.com> ent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:12 PM ubject: [NJHUNTER] Newspaper Deaths in 1895 - Indexed as 1894! o change the current DNA hoopla, read on! I have discovered that nearly all the Deaths reported in the Hunterdon epublican newspaper that occurred from January 1, 1895 until June 30, 1895 were ecorded as '1894' in the Listings on Ancestry.com. This was seen in nearly 200 eaths and they occurred not only from deaths in Hunterdon County, but also ther New Jersey Counties. It is my opinion that the error is most likely due to the indexer who read the icrofilm of the originals and typed the wrong year. This opinion needs to be erified by someone who has access to the original data, since the implication ould mean that hundreds of deaths in the time period noted above are suspect. I will contact Ancestry.com and tell them my findings, which you may see by oing to the Hunterdon Republican Website, see below Regards, rBill unterdon Republican newspaper, visit: http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njhrna/ isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message isit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I'm only offering another source , not claiming it to be fact. The publication I mentioned was taken from notes from Monette's publication and from church records that were published in the New Jersey Historical Society Proceedings, the Calendar of New Jersey Wills and from East Jersey Deeds, the New Jersey Archives 1st Series, Vol. XXI, 1664-1703. I'm not new to genealogy and know the difference between a primary and secondary source. I don't conclude anything as fact unless proven by a primary source, but when a preponderance of people draw the same conclusion..I add it to my notes with a (?). Sometimes it's the closest we will ever get....but the hunt goes on doesn’t it...ha? Mark Orr -----Original Message----- From: Carol Anne Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2012 11:26 PM To: njhunter@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Martha Dunn and Thomas Runyan And what was their source? Monette's book? Are we going in circles here maybe? It gets really frustrating sometimes! We need a primary source. If you're new to genealogy a "primary" source is one made at or near the time of the event. For instance your great-grandmother's death certificate would be a primary source for the date of her death, but a secondary source for the date of her birth, as it was not made near the time of her birth. And if someone makes an abstract of the information on the death certificate and publishes it in a book, the book is a tertiary source. Today good genealogists cite their sources when they publish so that a reader can find the sources that were used and check them out to validate the assertions and interpretations if necessary. That was not often done at the time Monnette wrote. Carol Anne On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Mark <mpcc@comcast.net> wrote: > I found in my notes that Thomas Runion (Runyon) married Martha Dunn, > daughter of Hugh Dunn. > Source is the Colonial Families of New Jersey Vol. 1. > Land records show him as Tho. Runion. > > Mark > mpcc@comcast.net > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Carol Anne > Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2012 5:34 PM > To: njhunter@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] Martha Dunn and Thomas Runyan > > The only source I have ever found for the information that Thomas > married Martha Dunn was Monnette's "First settlers of ye plantations > of Piscataway and Woodbridge, olde East New Jersey, 1664-1714". He > gave no source. > > I sent to the NJ Archives for a copy of Hugh Dunn's estate packet. In > Oct 1691, when he wrote his will, his daughter Martha was unmarried. > "Item I do give and bequeath unto my dearly beloved Wife Elizabeth Dun > all my [herd?] of Catle and [----old?] goods with all the moveables > disposed of for the to be prudent to [ward?] well [--?--] up of my > poor Children, especially to [--?--] my feather bed which after my > wifes decease I give and beqeath unto my daughter Mary Dunn alius Mary > Bonham wife to Hezekiah Bonham, and my daughters Elizabeth Dun and > Martha Dun upon the day of their Marriage such part as well of my > goods [Cattels?] as she in her discretion shall think [--?--] " > > The will is very interesting but in such poor condition that it is > extremely difficult to read!!! I was hoping to find a settlement of > accounts in the packet, because if Martha had married by the time the > will had settled her share of the estate would have gone to her > husband according to the law at that period. This can be clearly seen > in Thomas Runyan's estate settlement for instance, where his sons and > sons-in-law receive equal cash payments. It's possible, I suppose, > that such a record may exist for Hugh Dunn's estate in some court > order book, and that somehow no copy was included in the estate > packet, but this would take a thorough search of the archives by > someone who could actually go there. > > If money is no object, copies of the estate settlements of every one > of Hugh Dunn's children could be obtained to see if there was any > mention anywhere in any of them of a brother-in-law (often just > referred to just as "brother" at that time) named Thomas Runyan in any > of them. I have only checked the abstracts in "Calendar of New Jersey > Wills". Deeds are another possibility, if you can get the actual > documents. > > As far as I am concerned it is totally unproven at this point, and I > have Thomas's wife listed as Martha (?) on my website and in my > records. I try to be as accurate as I can. > > Carol Anne > > On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Mark <mpcc@comcast.net> wrote: >> I have that same info regarding Thomas Runyan marrying Martha Dunn in >> Piscataway, Middlesex, N.J. in 1698. Is this not true?????? >> Mark >> > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message