Even if not taxed for sheep he still could have woven wool <G> in the exchange principal. And he could have woven for people who brought their linen, wool or possibly even cotton. He could even have been like the men who did coverlets with a jacquard loom. The connection between Ireland and linen is so strong <G> to us. Most interesting question, I wait for others to chime in <G> Eliz On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Dora Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > My three times great grandfather, JOhn Smith, lived in London Britain township in southeastern Chester County.  He bought his property in 1798, and lost it in 1834 after the New Garden textile mills opened.    He was a small time weaver.   He owned 29 acres, and was taxed on a loom, a horse, a cow, and a dog, and possibly a wagon.   The family history says the family divided their labor between the loom and the plow.   He came from Ireland around 1789, and he was a staunchly committed Presbyterian. > > What would John Smith have woven?   Did people grow flax in southeastern Chester County/ White Clay Creek area?   Or would John Smith have mostly woven wool? > > Was it possible to weave linen and wool with the same loom?   John Smith did not own two looms. > > Is there any local historian I could ask? > > Yours, > Dora Smith > Austin, TX > [email protected] > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >