I second this thought. I, too, have found extra tidbits, interesting info, and have connected with cousins through the list. However, as I said in my earlier reply to Vivienne (August 30), you don't have to enter the address keystroke by keystroke. There is a faster way. One extra click and you're there. Lori Beckerton North Bay, ON, Canada ---------- > From: Groat <groat@btinternet.com> > To: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [ORKNEY] REPLIES > Date: Thursday, August 31, 2000 2:13 PM > > I am a member of two other lists, both very, very active and one apparently > dead. The latter has adopted the reply off-list procedure, the former have > all replies to list unless you manually alter this. I stick with all three, > but get / give much more to the two who reply to list rather than off-list. > This is after all the nature of a discussion list? > > As I feel this 'vote' will change the nature of the discussions on this > list, cutting them short and stunting their potential for development, I > felt it was necessary to put my point here for others to see - so I hope you > do not mind the extra clutter in your mailbox folks! > > Replies to the list - > This promotes discussion and many threads develop as others throw in their > tuppence worth turning out to have interest for many. There are also many > who lurk on the list, preferring to follow rather than contribute all the > time. They would miss out completely and might then never feel encouraged > to join in if they saw that messages seemingly never got replies! > > As I think Ivan has already said, many replies are dashed off quickly, not > realizing whether it is going to list or sender until after sent. So if by > default they all went to list, then we would miss nothing and threads would > follow through. If you feel you are truly off on a specific tangent the > option is there for you to manually alter the addressee! > > Right off to do some work on those elusive dead folks! > > Catriona > > > > > > > ==== ORKNEY Mailing List ==== >

Does anyone on the list have any info regarding this area (or is it a town?) on Hoy?? Any help would be most appreciated. Jackie

Hello this is my first posting to the list,the above names are my main interest in Orkney as I'm just starting my husbands side of the family I dont have much to go on.My husbands granny ELIZA JANE STRAIN SINCLAIR is still alive at the grand old age of 96,but unfortunately doesn't know very much about her Orkney connections she would love to know where the name STRAIN came from and I hope someone on the list can help. T.I.A. Rita Rodger,Wishaw Lanarkshire.

Dear Vivienne, I don't know why that happens, but here's my solution. In my email program, I click on 'reply to author'. The 'To' area is already filled in - ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com. If I want the message to go to the list, I start typing my message. If I don't want it to go to the list, I look for the return address - see the first line of your message immediately below - and click on the blue hypertext part. If I click on that, your personal address comes up in a new window, and I can start typing a message that will go just to you. Lori Beckerton ---------- > From: Vivienne Simmons <vivienne.simmons@cimtegration.com> > To: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [ORKNEY] REPLIES > Date: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 10:41 PM > > When I REPLY to an Orkney list e-mail, the reply goes to the list and not to > the correspondent. > > When I REPLY to an e-mail on any of the other lists to which I subscribe,my > reply goes to the correspondent and not to the list, which is what I want to > happen. > > I know I can handle this manually, but I'm wondering why it happens. Does > anyone know? > > I'm using Outlook Express. > > Thanks. > > Vivienne > Toronto, Canada > > > ==== ORKNEY Mailing List ==== > >>>>TIP: When when posting your research interests, include the surnames in your subject line - this will improve our list archive and assist future researchers.<<<<

Dear Marilyn, I guess we have some ancestors in common. William and Catherine, married 14 Nov. 1790, South Ronaldsay, had a son, Edward. He married Isabel Norquoy and they had a daughter, Eliza Peebles Allan. Eliza married John Cogle Budge, my 2xgreatgrandfather. How are you connected to William and Catherine? Out of curiosity, how far back are we cousins? Lori Beckerton North Bay, ON Canada > Catherine Rosie (b. abt 1765- SWONA) married William Allan (b. 6/22/1760- > also of Swona). > I am in the process of computerizing some records regarding various South > Ronldsay families from Helen Manson's records. With her permission, I will > vbe happy to post that information.

--part1_194a8f39.24fd447d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_194a8f39.24fd447d_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <TheShipsList-L-request@rootsweb.com> Received: from rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (rly-yh03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.35]) by air-yh05.mail.aol.com (v60.28) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 1999 19:06:10 -0400 Received: from bl-11.rootsweb.com (bl-11.rootsweb.com [204.212.38.27]) by rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (v60.28) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 1999 19:05:49 -0400 Received: (from slist@localhost) by bl-11.rootsweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA02972; Mon, 30 Aug 1999 16:05:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 16:05:35 -0700 (PDT) From: MRICH10000@aol.com Message-ID: <752c2ddf.24fc680f@aol.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 19:04:47 EDT Old-To: TheShipsList-L@rootsweb.com Old-Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_752c2ddf.24fc680f_boundary" X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 24 Subject: [TSL] Fwd: Returned mail: User unknown Resent-Message-ID: <KPSX3D.A.Lu.-4wy3@bl-11.rootsweb.com> To: TheShipsList-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: TheShipsList-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: <TheShipsList-L@rootsweb.com> archive/latest/35036 X-Loop: TheShipsList-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: TheShipsList-L-request@rootsweb.com --part1_752c2ddf.24fc680f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_752c2ddf.24fc680f_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <> Received: from rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (rly-zd04.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.228]) by air-zd03.mail.aol.com (v60.28) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 1999 18:56:55 -0400 Received: from imo20.mx.aol.com (imo20.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.10]) by rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (v60.28) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 1999 18:56:36 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost) by imo20.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) with internal id SAA06200; Mon, 30 Aug 1999 18:56:36 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 18:56:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@aol.com> Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Message-Id: <199908302256.SAA06200@imo20.mx.aol.com> To: MRICH10000@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="SAA06200.936053796/imo20.mx.aol.com" Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) --SAA06200.936053796/imo20.mx.aol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The original message was received at Mon, 30 Aug 1999 18:55:38 -0400 (EDT) from root@localhost *** ATTENTION *** An e-mail you sent to an Internet destination could not be delivered. The Internet address is listed in the section labeled: "----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----". The reason your e-mail could not be delivered is listed in the section labeled: "----- Transcript of Session Follows -----". The line beginning with "<<<" describes the specific reason your e-mail could not be delivered. The next line contains a second error message which is a general translation for other e-mail servers. Please direct further questions regarding this message to the e-mail administrator or Postmaster at that destination. ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <TheShipsList@rootsweb.com> ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to bl-3.rootsweb.com.: >>> RCPT To:<TheShipsList@rootsweb.com> <<< 550 <TheShipsList@rootsweb.com>... User unknown 550 <TheShipsList@rootsweb.com>... User unknown -------------------- Final-Recipient: RFC822; TheShipsList@rootsweb.com Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; bl-3.rootsweb.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 <TheShipsList@rootsweb.com>... User unknown Last-Attempt-Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 18:56:35 -0400 (EDT) -------------------- Received: from MRICH10000@aol.com by imo20.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v22.4.) id eYDYa28691 (4553) for <TheShipsList@rootsweb.com>; Mon, 30 Aug 1999 18:55:38 -0400 (EDT) Return-path: MRICH10000@aol.com From: MRICH10000@aol.com Message-ID: <e8666f27.24fc65e9@aol.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 18:55:37 EDT Subject: The sinking of the CROWN in 1679 To: TheShipsList@rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 24 30 August, 1999 Dear subscribers, Please help me to find information on the ship called the Crown which sunk at the Orkney Islands, Scotland in 1679. This ship sunk while transporting prisoners from Scotland to America. These were prisoners taken at the Battle of Bothwell Bridge. I would like to know just how many people were aboard that ship, passengers, if any, crew members and prisoners. Also, I assume, that there must have been a list of the names of the prisoners who were being transported aboard that ship. Please help me find these ansewers. Also, from where did the ship take on it's precious, human cargo? (What was it's port of departure)? How long had the ship been at sea? What was the size of the Ship? Who were the owners of the ship? Who was the ships captain? What was the exact date of sinkage and where was the exact location? Please help me on this one, I will be very grateful. Please enter the subject as The Sinking of the Crown. Respectfully Mel Rich E-mail: MRich10000@AOL.com --SAA06200.936053796/imo20.mx.aol.com-- --part1_752c2ddf.24fc680f_boundary-- ==== TheShipsList Mailing List ==== *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* TO CONTACT LISTOWNERS: Gery & Sue mailto:swig@ns.sympatico.ca *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* --part1_194a8f39.24fd447d_boundary--

BOTHWELL BRIDGE AND ORKNEY Mel- Here are some details of the Battle of Bothwell Bridge and its aftermath, abridged from Alexander Smellie's "Men of the Covenant" published nearly a hundred years ago. This engagement between Government and Covenanting forces took place in the aftermath of the murder of Archbishop Sharp on Magus Moor in Fife on 3rd May 1679. Following a show of strength by the Covenanters (including two of the Fife assassins) in the streets of Rutherglen on 29th May, Government forces under John Graham of Claverhouse pursued them to their Sunday worship near Loudoun Hill, west of Strathaven, only to be unexpectedly defeated at Drumclog. The Covenanters had advanced singing the seventy-sixth psalm. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ After the Sabbath-day on which they sent Claverhouse flying at Drumclog, the Covenanters knew that they must hold together, because their enemies would muster soon to punish them. They grew rapidly in numbers. Within three weeks the two hundred and fifty had multiplied into a legion of between five and six thousand. Probably the ultimate issues of the campaign were never in doubt; the soldiers of the Kirk could not vanquish the overwhelming forces which the King was able to send against them. But, for months, they might have maintained a guerilla war, and, in the end, have extorted from their persecutors terms which were not unfavourable. They were themselves to blame that the result was mournfully different. Their foes on this occasion were not Charles Stuart, and the Duke of Lauderdale, and General Dalzell, and John Graham; they were the men of their own household. The little band of fighters had pursued their adversaries till they were within sight of the gates of Glasgow, and then called a halt. They were worn with the battle and the chase, and the King had a considerable garrison in the town. So they withdrew for the meantime; and yet they came back soon: Glasgow was a prize worth making an effort to win. Lord Ross hurriedly threw up barricades and stationed his musketeers. It was still early on the morning of Monday when the Covenanters appeared. But their assault was badly managed and futile. From behind the barricades the guns of the Royal troops flashed out flame and death. At least seven were killed, and their comrades were compelled to beat a retreat. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday were spent by the Whigs in marching to and fro. But in this interval the men who had repulsed them were ordered by the inconclusive Earl of Linlithgow, who had arrived with his army, to leave their quarters within the gates and join his regiments outside. The Covenanters were quickly appraised of this. They marched again to Glasgow, and stationed themselves in and around the place: it was in their hands now. This was on Friday the 6th of June. Ever since their success on the Sabbath, they had been gathering new recruits. From Ayrshire, from Renfrew, from Lanark, from Stirling in the north and Galloway in the south, companions hastened to join them. Already they were so formidable that the rebellion began to trouble the authorities not only in Holyrood but in Whitehall. But they kept Sir Robert Hamilton in the chief command, a young man whose thirtieth birthday was still in front of him and whose fondness for dissent in its most intransigent varieties had turned him into a "crackbrained enthusiast". He could not brook the presence of anyone who failed to see each of the many facets of truth from the same angle as himself. An exclusiveness so rigid did infinite harm to others, and wrecked the army of the Covenant. His was the Hard Church which believes in a Hard Master, which thinks that it is not the endurance, but the infliction of hardness that makes a true soldier of Christ, which walks about like a theological detective, without any care or compassion for the sins of the defaulters it arrests. Every new band of helpers, as it arrived, was compelled to declare itself for the party of rigour or for that of comprehension; there was no permission to see the truth on both sides. The army determined, at one stage, to draw up a manifesto -a "Declaration". But over this the leaders quarrelled: Hamilton and his intimates demanding a definite repudiation of the Indulgence; the others answering that "neither were we a Parliament nor a General Assembly" to judge such matters, and that, "if we meddled with them, it would hinder many to come who would be as willing as we, and would make friends to become enemies." Hot words were spoken. More than once the moderate men were on the eve of leaving; it needed John Welsh's eloquence and the near approach of the common enemy to prevent them from departing in heartache and despair. And all the while, their doom drew closer to them. From London a large force had been despatched; and, when this was added to the Scottish contingents, the Royalists numbered about fifteen thousand horse and foot. The young Duke of Monmouth, Charles's son and, meantime at least, Charles's favourite, had the principal command. He was popular for his good looks, his courtesy, his Protestantism, although his Protestantism was neither very intelligent nor very ardent. He was disposed, too, to lenient courses; it was an encouraging omen for the Covenanters that he received the first place and that Dalzell had to be content with standing second. Many of them were inclined to negotiate with Monmouth; and, though the extremists resisted the proposal, the moderate men managed to carry the point. Another Sabbath had come round, the third since Drumclog. Soon after daybreak, two envoys went to interview the Duke -David Hume and a Galloway landlord named Murdoch. He gave them a not unkindly welcome, and listened while they read the Declaration of some days before. Then he answered that their petition ought to have been worded in humbler terms, but that, if they were willing to lay down their arms, he had no intention to deal harshly. They returned to their comrades to report how they had fared. But the proviso about disarming was a fatal obstacle. Sir Robert Hamilton laughed loudly when he heard it. "Yes, and hang next !" he said. Manifestly the strife must be fought out to the end. Yet there was another pause before the artillery began to play. Hume and his friend had something more to ask, and Major Maine went over from the King's lines to ascertain what it was. Had not Monmouth brought with him, they inquired, " terms of accommodation from England " ? and would he acquaint them with their purport ? But these were questions to which the General was not prepared to give any reply. The parleyings were over, and the time for decisive action had arrived. The combatants confronted each other on opposite banks of the Clyde. Between them was the old and steep and narrow Bridge of Bothwell, not more than twelve feet wide, and guarded in the centre with a gatehouse. The King's army was much the larger. It was well officered. The Duke of Monmouth led the cavalry, the Earl of Linlithgow the infantry. Claverhouse rode at the head of his dragoons, and the Earls of Home and Airlie were in command of their respective troops; Lord Mar held a command of foot. Dalzell's commission, much to his annoyance, was late in arriving from London; and he did not get to the scene of the action until everything was over. The advantages of position were with the Presbyterians. If they could only have abandoned their controversies, and gone to work singing the Drumclog Psalm, a new victory might have been theirs. But at Bothwell they were without unity, without buoyancy, without competent generalship. Let us listen to James Ure: " We were not concerned with an enemy, as if there had not been one within a thousand miles of us. There were none went through the army, to see if we wanted powder and ball. I do really think there were few or none that had both powder and ball, to shoot twice." The Covenanters had predestined themselves to failure and shame. There were some who did their best. Ure was one, and Henry Hall was another; but the honours of the lamentable day are with David Hackston of Rathillet. For hours, with three hundred men of Galloway to aid him, the genuine and great-hearted soldier held the bridge. After awhile, the three hundred, wearied with their vigil and struggle, begged, not to be withdrawn, but to have reinforcements from the larger mass behind them; but no reinforcements were sent. Then they asked for ammunition, and were told that the ammunition was at an end. At last Hamilton gave them the order to fall back on the main body. They obeyed " with sore hearts," as Hackston writes; for they felt that the order was the last folly of this black and bitter Sabbath, and that now their fate was sealed. The barrier which hitherto had hindered its advance having been removed, the Royal artillery slowly and steadily crossed the Clyde; and soon, from the same bank as that on which they stood themselves, the Duke's cannon poured death into the lines of the Whigs. Even yet the Royalist triumph might have been postponed. But a panic seized the Covenanters. Numbers of them fled recklessly and at random. Only Rathillet and his companions held their ground, until they too, seeing that all was over, retired from the moor in sullen silence. The rout was complete. By ten o'clock in the morning, every hope was extinguished; and from the King's side a messenger took horse for Edinburgh, bearing news of the victory. No fewer than four hundred perished in the death-chase; some accounts, indeed, would double that number. Twelve hundred were taken prisoners; and very many of these would have been massacred in cold blood, if Monmouth had not interposed. Bound two and two, they were dragged eastward to Edinburgh. No one on the wearisome road dared to extend to them a hand of succour. When the capital was reached, the mob greeted them with the taunt, "Where's your God? where's your God?" Two of the ministers, adherents of Welsh rather than of Robert Hamilton, were executed at the Mercat Cross. Five Covenanters were hanged on Magus Moor, though not one of them had a personal share in the death of the Archbishop. As the Edinburgh gaols could not hold the crowd of other prisoners, a part of Greyfriars churchyard was transmuted into a place of confinement; and into it they were penned like sheep. Sentinels guarded them day and night. They were exposed to sun and rain, wind and weather; for there was no covering above their heads - none at least until, with the approach of winter, some wooden huts were erected, "mightily boasted as a great favour". Their bed was the bare ground. They were poorly fed, and it was next to impossible for friends to convey any comfort to them. In this plight they lived "a life half dead, a living death, and buried", until the dreary weeks of November. A few hundreds had been freed on their pledge to desist in the future from armed resistance ; here and there one, more fortunate than his comrades, had gained the goodwill of his gaolers; some had contrived to escape across the churchyard walls; some were dead. Only two hundred and fifty-seven remained out of the twelve hundred. Early one November morning, they were marched by a party of soldiers from the Greyfriars to a vessel, the Crown, lying in Leith Roads; the Privy Council had decreed that they should be banished to the West Indies, and sold for slaves. On board the ship their pains came to a climax. They were crowded under deck in a space not sufficient to hold one hundred people. Those with some health were forced to continue standing, that the sick and dying might lie down on the hard boards. Hour after hour, in the poisonous air, many fainted away. "All the troubles we met since Bothwell," one of them, James Corson, wrote to his wife, " were not to be compared to one day in our present circumstances. Our uneasiness is beyond words. Yet the consolations of God overbalance all; and I hope we are near our port, and heaven is open for us." Off the coast of Orkney, in a night of tempest, the captain ran his vessel close inshore and cast anchor, locking and chaining the hatches over the prisoners in the hold. In the darkness, at ten o'clock, the ship was dashed against the rocks, and was broken in two. The sailors made a bridge of the mast and escaped to the rough beach; nearly sixty of the Covenanters were able, in one way or in another, to follow their example. But the other two hundred were drowned, only a few of their bodies being washed to the land, to be buried at a place called Scarvating, where one may see the graves today. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The book, published originally by Andrew Melrose, and more recently reprinted by The Banner of Truth Trust, has an illustration of the monument at Deerness, Orkney, to the Covenanters drowned in the Crown. Alexander Smellie (1857-1923) was a minister in the Original Secession Church. All the best,Roger Kelly Penicuik, Scotland ----- Original Message ----- From: <MRICH10000@aol.com> To: <ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 27, 1999 8:46 PM Subject: [ORKNEY] the Battle of Bothwell Bridge.............. > 27 August, 1999 > 12:50 PM, Pacific Daylight Time > > I am very interested in learning more (actually all that there is to > know) about the Battle od Bothwell Bridge of 1679. Would anyone (everyone) > who has any information on this battle please E-mail me direct. > Or, please E-mail me the names of any/all books regarding the subject. > Of course, please include the authors name as well as the publisher of the > book/s. > I will really appreciate any information which you can send to me. Thank > you, in advance. > Respectfully > Mel Rich > E-mail: MRich10000@AOL.com

Hello all. I am seeking information on the above surnames related to MCEVOY/MCAVOY/MCVOY in the country of SCT (I apologize I do not know exact location) for the time period 1700-1800. My ancestor was known as JOHN MCVOY or MACABOY/MACAVOY/M'EVOY but his actual first name may have been MARTIN, WILLIAM, THOMAS, or ALEXANDER. He was probably born ca. 1740's and family legend states that somethin unknown happened and he had to suddenly leave his homeland and went first to SPAIN. Apparently while there, courted a Spanish princess named YSABEL, or ISABELLA who was born around 1752 per her age on a FLORIDA CENSUS. "Supposedly" for her wedding dowry, she was given land in the area of MOBILE AL in SPANISH WEST FLORIDA in the US. This is just a family legend and unproven. There are some names, perhaps someone may recognize. Her name was YSABEL or ISABELLA and her other names were spelled differently on different documents so I am not sure which is correct. My line of the family had her listed as ISABELLA MELSA INDESA MCVOY (de MADRID?) and in the book, OUR FAMILY FACTS AND FANCIES,THE MORENO AND RELATED FAMILIES,c.1988 by REGINA MANDRELL, it lists her as YSABEL MELOS(,)ENGLISH on the 1784 PENSACOLA FLORIDA,USA census and her children are listed as MAKBOY. There were 4 children in 1784. Eldest was ANA MAKBOY, born around 1771 approx, JOAQUIN (aka JUAN/JOHN),b.ca.1773, (LOCATION OF ANA AND JOAQUIN'S birth is unknown to me), GUILLERMO(aka WILLIAM) said to be born AUG.29, 1776 SAVANNAH GA,USA, then the 4th child at that point was DIEGO MACABOY(aka JAMES) who "may" have been named MARTIN DIEGO (*his obit lists him as M.DIEGO MCVOY)and DIEGO was born "somewhere" in the country of SCOTLAND in 1781. The family came back to the US and JOHN MACVOY is listed in the 1783 early FLORIDA COLONY CENSUS INDEX on Ancestry.com. YSABEL & the 4 children are listed in the PENSACOLA,FL,CENSUS of SPANISH WEST FL in 1784, but not John. Mrs Mandrell says in her book that YSABEL remarried to a prominent businessman named MARTIN de MADRID after JOHN MACVOY died. But I am not so convinced. There are more children born after the arrival in Pensacola named MACABOY/MACVOY/MCVOY. One, ALEXANDER,b.1791 is buried with GUILLERMO in MOBILE AL. DOES ANYONE KNOW A STORY OF A SCT MAN NAMED MACAVOY (or any close spelling) marrying a Spanish princess (approx. 3rd tier from Crown) named YSABELLA? The timeframe of this marriage was probably around 1768-1770, probably in SPAIN. CONTACT: Bonnie McVoy Treon mailto:COOLTREONS@hotmail.com *(also, I am the listowner of 3 LISTS on ROOTSWEB.COM about the MCVOY, MCAVOY, MCEVOY surnames and we also have NEW GEN-CONNECT BOARDS) mailto:MCVOY-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM mailto:MCAVOY-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM mailto:MCEVOY-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM *If interested in any of these lists (they all get about the same mail as I fwd. it so no one misses anything) please click above and just type the single word SUBSCRIBE in the subject and body areas (nothing else or it will bounce.) Thank you for any help in finding my ancestors. I thought IRE, but other family says SCT. Bonnie ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

--WebTV-Mail-20568-5020 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit good morning janine thank you very much for the reply! with comments and advice from you and others i belive this is the alexina i am searching for! once again thank you michael esson young --WebTV-Mail-20568-5020 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Message/RFC822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Received: from mailsorter-101-3.iap.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.120) by postoffice-151.iap.bryant.webtv.net with WTV-SMTP; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 17:48:42 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <ORKNEY-L-request@rootsweb.com> Received: from bl-11.rootsweb.com (bl-11.rootsweb.com [204.212.38.27]) by mailsorter-101-3.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97) with ESMTP id RAA23869; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 17:48:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by bl-11.rootsweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA01283; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 17:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 17:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BEF196.7E5A7B40.janine@muskoka.com> From: Janine McIntyre <janine@muskoka.com> Old-To: "'ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com'" <ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com> Subject: RE: [ORKNEY] ESSON / SPENCE Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 20:46:20 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <Dz1KRB.A.tT.ZMIy3@bl-11.rootsweb.com> To: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: <ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com> archive/latest/826 X-Loop: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: ORKNEY-L-request@rootsweb.com Micheal The age doesn't sound like you have the right person however the ABT could always be wrong. I have found a ggguncle who was born 1816 but the IGI's say ABT 1829. Thru much research with the census I found the ABT was wrong. If you can get holed of the census from 1821 to 1841 you might get your answer. Even the 1851 and on will give you an age for Alexina if she was still alive and something to help you find her real birth\christening. Janine -----Original Message----- From: Michael Young [SMTP:michaeleyoung@webtv.net] Sent: Friday, August 27, 1999 12:11 PM To: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [ORKNEY] ESSON / SPENCE hello could SKS tell me if im going in the right direction! i have ARTHUR ESSON and ALEXINA SPENCE married DEC,10 1833 SOUTH RONALDSAY would this be the same ALEXINA born "ABT 1825" in south ronaldsay......her parents were RICHARD SPENCE and BARBARA ROSIE thank you michael esson young --WebTV-Mail-20568-5020--

Micheal The age doesn't sound like you have the right person however the ABT could always be wrong. I have found a ggguncle who was born 1816 but the IGI's say ABT 1829. Thru much research with the census I found the ABT was wrong. If you can get holed of the census from 1821 to 1841 you might get your answer. Even the 1851 and on will give you an age for Alexina if she was still alive and something to help you find her real birth\christening. Janine -----Original Message----- From: Michael Young [SMTP:michaeleyoung@webtv.net] Sent: Friday, August 27, 1999 12:11 PM To: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [ORKNEY] ESSON / SPENCE hello could SKS tell me if im going in the right direction! i have ARTHUR ESSON and ALEXINA SPENCE married DEC,10 1833 SOUTH RONALDSAY would this be the same ALEXINA born "ABT 1825" in south ronaldsay......her parents were RICHARD SPENCE and BARBARA ROSIE thank you michael esson young

Looking at census records be careful about accepting any ages given. The instructions for the 1841 census that I read showed that ages given were rounded up or down. For example: if a person was of the ages 50-55 the census taker was to put 50, if the person was 55-60 the census taker was to put 55 (so in reality a person of 55 might be recorded as either 50 or 55!). Just thought this might help some folks with census age discrepancies. Lori

Dear Lisa, I, too, am related to Budges from South Ronaldsay. Are we cousins? My ancestor, John C. Budge, left the Orkneys in 1869 for Canada. His wife and children followed several years later. The oldest child, Thomas Budge, is my great-grandfather. Lori Beckerton North Bay, Ontario, Canada > of as many familial interconnections & data for my BUDGE family's Parish as > I can. I have found that, Orkney being a 'small' place, THERE ARE MANY > INTERCONNECTED FAMILIES. You never know who may turn out to be a Cousin. > I am always learning. > > --Lisa, in Seattle, WA -- 4G-Granddaughter of James BUDGE & JANET DUNCAN.

Meg I don't have much information about clergy, other than my own ancestry. I have checked my database for BEW & LAING, and have found nothing in common with the names you list. However, some of the Laings you list were prominent historians, etc, and you should be able to get details on them. Good Hunting! Message text written by INTERNET:ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 17:14:54 -0500 From: Meg Greenwood <finn@ionet.net> Ken Harrison - I read your post about ministers in Orkney around 1836. Do you have any references to earlier clergy? In researching my HALCRO line, I have gotten back to the family of Elizabeth LINAY and William BEWS. (Their daughter Margaret married Joseph HALCRO) There were 10 BEWSes, the 3 youngest had the middle name of LAING. Twins Robert and Samuel Laing BEWS born in 1800, Kirkwall, and Malcolm Laing BEWS born March, 1802, Kirkwall. I have looked for the LAING name as a surname for a previous generation, have found one for a Malcolm LAING (born 1763-Kirkwall)son of Robert LAING and Barbara BLAW. Another finding is for Samuel LAING (born 1780-Kirkwall) to the same parents. These were quite intriguing, and I really dug for a link to the BEWS family, but I cannot seem to link these families. There was another listing for a Malcolm Jaques LAING (born August, 1802-Kirkwall) to James LAING and Mary HAGGART. Could these all be named after a local clergyman? Or is there a family link I have totally missed? If you have any information on the clergy of that era, 1760 - 1800, I would like to know if there is a LAING among them, then I will not look further for a BEWS/LAING link. But then again, they might be named after a clergyman who was an ancestor ! I will just post this anyway, and go off in desperation and list a few more 1891 Census extras ! <G> Thanks to anyone who can offer insights ! Meg Greenwood< Ken Harrison North Vancouver, Canada mcharrison@compuserve.com

G'day Mel, My "Dictionary of English History" published 1889 (it should be British History!) has the following on the Battle of Bothwell Bridge. "Bothwell Bridge, The Battle of (June 22, 1679), was fought between the Royalist troops commanded by the Duke of Monmouth, and the forces of the revolted Conventiclers or Covenanters. The insurgents occupied a strong position, with the Clyde between them and the enemy; but, as they attempted to defend instead of destroying a bridge, Monmouth cleared the passage of the river with his artillery. The insurgents were forced to retire to a hill nearby, known as Hamilton Heath, where they were attacked by the Royal troops and completely routed. Bothwell Bridge is in Lanarkshire, near Hamilton." Cheers David, Western Australia

hello could SKS tell me if im going in the right direction! i have ARTHUR ESSON and ALEXINA SPENCE married DEC,10 1833 SOUTH RONALDSAY would this be the same ALEXINA born "ABT 1825" in south ronaldsay......her parents were RICHARD SPENCE and BARBARA ROSIE thank you michael esson young

thank you anne for the info cheers and happy hunting

At 08:57 AM 8/27/99 -0700, you wrote: >deer list > on feb 09, 1894 my grandfather WILLIAM ESSON was born in braehead, >westray. his parents were WILLIAM ESSON (farmer) and mother name was >BETSY KIRKNESS married on dec, 04, 1873 in south ronaldsay. now what im >curious about is that WILLIAM was registered nine days later in south >ronaldsay on feb,28 1894.........did william and betsy pack up there son >only a few days old and move back down to s/ronaldsay, or were all >records from the islands sent to a central register in s/ronaldsay, and >the family stayed on in braehead?? also in the 1800"s what >occupations were available to a man of westray besides farming??? The other occupations I've seen include: fisherman, mason/carpenter, merchant, weaver, tailor/dressmaker, teacher, minister, domestic servant. -The woman and children often worked too. Anne Rendall

deer list on feb 09, 1894 my grandfather WILLIAM ESSON was born in braehead, westray. his parents were WILLIAM ESSON (farmer) and mother name was BETSY KIRKNESS married on dec, 04, 1873 in south ronaldsay. now what im curious about is that WILLIAM was registered nine days later in south ronaldsay on feb,28 1894.........did william and betsy pack up there son only a few days old and move back down to s/ronaldsay, or were all records from the islands sent to a central register in s/ronaldsay, and the family stayed on in braehead?? also in the 1800"s what occupations were available to a man of westray besides farming??? thank you for your attention michael esson young

27 August, 1999 12:50 PM, Pacific Daylight Time I am very interested in learning more (actually all that there is to know) about the Battle od Bothwell Bridge of 1679. Would anyone (everyone) who has any information on this battle please E-mail me direct. Or, please E-mail me the names of any/all books regarding the subject. Of course, please include the authors name as well as the publisher of the book/s. I will really appreciate any information which you can send to me. Thank you, in advance. Respectfully Mel Rich E-mail: MRich10000@AOL.com

The Scottish Record Office is on the net and you can do it by email with a credit card. B. Allan -----Original Message----- From: DMHINEY@aol.com <DMHINEY@aol.com> To: ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com <ORKNEY-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 8:21 AM Subject: [ORKNEY] Death Records >Hello All! Can anyone tell me where I might write for a death record on my >ggreat grandfather William Campbell who died Sept 23, 1915 in Deepdale Holm >Orkney? I was also wondering would there have been probate records for this >time period and where one might access this information! > >Thanks for the help > >Debbie >Medford, OR USA > >