--WebTV-Mail-11431-4829 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit KELLOGG FAMILY HISTORY UPDATE --WebTV-Mail-11431-4829 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Message/RFC822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Received: from mailsorter-102-2.iap.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.99) by postoffice-273.iap.bryant.webtv.net with WTV-SMTP; Wed, 22 Sep 1999 23:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <lenraab@dreamsoft.com> Received: from ds-pom1.dreamsoft.com (ds-pom1.dreamsoft.com [207.218.159.1]) by mailsorter-102-2.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8-wtv-d/ms.dwm.v7+dul2) with ESMTP id XAA03275 for <mainmule@webtv.net>; Wed, 22 Sep 1999 23:06:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lfraab (pm06-port30.dreamsoft.com [207.218.158.62]) by ds-pom1.dreamsoft.com (Vircom SMTPRS 4.1.180) with SMTP id <B0004491414@ds-pom1.dreamsoft.com>; Wed, 22 Sep 1999 23:06:23 -0700 Message-ID: <00ea01bf0589$996ed820$3e9edacf@lfraab> From: "Leonard F. Raab" <lenraab@dreamsoft.com> To: <mainmule@webtv.net> Cc: "David and Sonja" <kellogg@cncnet.com> References: <1804-37E036CE-3376@postoffice-273.iap.bryant.webtv.net> <000701bf0043$a80a0120$324ae7cf@kellogg> Subject: Re: Re: Fwd: Re: [KELLOGG] Re: KELLOGG-D Digest V99 #17 Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 23:05:09 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 The info was taken from several sources - excerpts from early histories, etc. Was originally compiled in 1975 or so, for a history for my immediate family. Sure can't give you actual sources now. ----- Original Message ----- From: Kellogg <kellogg@cncnet.com> To: Bill Kellogg <mainmule@webtv.net> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 6:01 AM Subject: Re: Re: Fwd: Re: [KELLOGG] Re: KELLOGG-D Digest V99 #17 | Family tradition is that the KELLOGGs are of Scottish descent. But we find | that the family is proven to have lived near London as early as 1583 and | very possibly as early as 1488. Then, how could they be of Scottish | descent - the Scots and English being "blood enemies" in these times? The | Scots were very skilled weavers of woolen cloth - a craft handed down from | father to son. With commercial trade allowed between the Scots and England, | the Crown soon learned that there was a great demand in the European | countries for the finished woolen cloth. Scotland, having little or no | shipping, had not exported her product, and England, with her great merchant | fleet, soon became the point of export. It was soon realized that the | commerce would prosper even more if the raw wool was brought near the | English ports and weavers were located there too. In the period of which we | speak, such work was done in the home - there being no "factories" of the | sort we now know. The Scots soon formed a guild which not only maintained | the quality of their product but strictly controlled the entry of additional | craftsmen into the trade. To become a journeyman weaver you first must serve | an apprenticeship, and to become an apprentice, you must have one or more | journeymen nominate you. Obviously, a young man with a father or uncle a | journeyman would have the better opportunity to become an apprentice. | Consequently, the weaving craft remained virtually entirely the skill of | those who were of Scottish blood. | | | | | Towards the mid-1600s England found the demand for woolen cloth seriously | decreasing with the opening of trade with China and the sudden demand for | silks and other fine cloths now becoming highly sought after by those living | in the European Counties. Consequently, a severe economic depression struck | England, who had for so many years, relied upon the exportation of woolen | cloth as the main source of income. | | Even though the Crown had passed many laws requiring the use of woolen cloth | by her subjects, more and more weavers were without work. Once the weavers | were without work, the sheep shearers and then the growers were is dire | straights - as were those who were the shippers and suppliers - and so on, | until there was near revolution in England by the mass of people who were | first thrown out of their homes into the streets and forced to become | beggars to feed themselves and their families. | | | | | Though many of the laws requiring the use of wool are now traditional in | England and Canada, such as the one requiring a judge to sit upon a piece of | wool when serving on his bench - these laws were of no avail, and England | was in severe economical trouble. And this is a prime reason England decided | to establish colonies in the new country, America. That there were private | individuals - such as the Puritans to invest in such a venture was all to | the better. | | | | | | | The first English Colonies in America were, of course, the Virginia | Colonies. But these were mismanaged and were almost entirely colonized by | lawbreakers, some were felonious criminals by English laws. The Puritans, | once they obtained their charter from the King, absolutely refused to allow | any but those examined and approved by themselves to embark to their Colony | or disembark once there. It was not until the late 1600s - when so many | wretched persons had been flung into English prisons for any infraction, no | matter how insignificant, did the Puritans permit any "criminals" into their | Colonies. And then, they forced them to move on to Rhode Island, mostly, as | that Colony was peopled mostly by those who had shown the disposition of not | accepting the Puritan ways that they had once claimed to espouse. | | | | | If you were not a well-to-do Puritan, how might you obtain passage to New | England and be admitted into the New England Colonies? There was only one | way open for most, and that was to become "indentured" to a wealthy Puritan | who either was living in the Colonies or had investments there. This same | word "indentured" is used to explain the status of the "criminal" forced to | colonize the Virginia Colonies as an alternate to a beheading or rotting in | an English prison for life. But as applied to those who entered the New | England Colonies, it identifies those men and women (you must be age 16 or | older) who made an agreement to serve a certain number of years as the | "servant" of the Massachusetts Bay Colony or an invested member of that | Colony. | | | | | The Puritan looking for an employee, would have an agreement prepared with | stipulations that must be | | met by the prospective employee, such as the number of years of service he | or she would be required to serve; the nature of the work performed - | farming, planting, housework, a particular skill - such as carpentry, | weaving, fishing, etc. On the remaining portion of the parchment would be | written the stipulations the employer would meet, such as payment of passage | to America; food and board and clothing for the period of service; schooling | and the teaching of a trade;, and at the end of the prescribed service, a | set amount of money, usually 5 to 10 pounds; additional clothing, and the | deed to land, usually 3 to 10 acres. All of these stipulations were required | to be provided by the Government of the Massachusetts Bay Company, which, in | fact, was the Church. Thus, the Puritans were in full authority in the | Colonies. | | | | | Once the two-part agreement was prepared, a strip, of the parchment was torn | off along one edge and care was taken to see that there was a pointed piece | left on the narrow strip that would mate with the "indentation" left on the | torn edge of the portion containing the written stipulations. Thus came | about the term "Indenture"....... and as the agreement was written in two | parts, this came the terms "party of the first part" and "party of the | second part" terms we still read in most contracts to this day. | | | | | An agent for the prospective employer, often a ship's captain, would then | return to England carrying the portion of the parchment containing the | written stipulations and search out a prospective employee. Often a Puritan | who had remained in England had a waiting list of those seeking to go to the | Colonies. Once a likely candidate agreed to the terms in the agreement he or | she was handed the written agreement and given passage to America. Once | there the employee and the employer met and compared the torn edges each | held with the other and the contract was consummated. | | | | | Terms of indenture were usually for seven years. However, those with a skill | in great demand made agreements for shorter periods, but not less than one | year mostly. Some others served periods as long as ten years. But, the | "government" would see that they were clothed, fed and housed as best as | could be provided and that they were schooled and taught a trade applicable | to earning their own livelihood after the end of indenture. At that time the | released employee would be deeded land and given a specified sum. It was not | unusual for a man to become indentured for the passage and keep of his | entire family, however, this was unusual. | | | | | There was another term often written in records of the Puritans, and this | word is "Freeman." This term identifies a former indentured who had joined | the Puritan Church (Congregational). You then became a Puritan. But - as | long as you were indentured you could not become a member of the Church - | but you could attend services and were expected to do so. Once you were a | "Freeman" then you had some "say" in the running of the government (which | was the Church) but very little say at that - and then only through | delegates selected by the Church. This condition existed for a time until | there were sufficient "Freemen" to insist otherwise, but even then, direct | say in the operation of the government was reserved for a select few. | | There was another term which is similar to "Freeman" and that is actually | two words: "free Man". This term referred to a once-indentured person who | had served his years of indenture and had been released - and thus was a | "free man" - but who had not joined the Church and thus, was not a | "Freeman". Only a member of the Church - a Puritan - could be a "Freeman". | | | | | During the first score or so years of the Massachusetts Bay Colony the | number of Puritans reached 20,000. Naturally, as there became more free men | the balance of Puritan control through the Freemen became lessened. As a | consequence, the Puritans "allowed" dissenters to move into what is now | Connecticut and Rhode Island where they could hopefully be ignored. | | | | | Regarding the family tradition that the Kelloggs are of Scottish descent - a | descendant of JOSEPH - one Nathaniel, wrote that "among the 20,000, there | was not one of Scottish blood." (He must be referring to the Puritan | settlers of New England). This Nathaniel was of an early generation | following 1700. Whether he knew for certain, cannot be known. However, you | have been given a true account of happenings in England that would permit us | to have this trace of Scottish blood that some earlier KELLOGGs seemed proud | to claim. Could there be some reason Nathaniel would rather not claim | Scottish descent ? This is a possibility. During his time, there continued | to be a feeling of bad blood between those claiming to be English, and those | claiming to be Scottish or Irish , because of the exile by an earlier King | of his"enemies"from the borders shared by England and Scotland. These exiled | "borderers" and "Rievers" were sent mostly to Ireland and other English | colonies from which later generations emigrated to America, where they might | not be held in as great esteem as one claiming to be "English." And, in the | early 1700s it was still thought that "to be English was of greater | significance" even though English officers and governors "looked down" upon | the Colonists. It was not until the War of 1776, when it became popular to | claim descendence from other than an English line. | | Yours Truly, | Sonja Kellogg | | | ----- Original Message ----- | From: Bill Kellogg <mainmule@webtv.net> | To: Kellogg <kellogg@cncnet.com> | Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 7:16 PM | Subject: Re: Re: Fwd: Re: [KELLOGG] Re: KELLOGG-D Digest V99 #17 | | | > Thanks, looking forward to it. | > | > REGARDS, MAINMULE | > | | --WebTV-Mail-11431-4829--