This is very needed because several different lines of different surnames have same first names and unless one knows where and when then one does not know if info ones has is related to what the inquirer wants Mable in Michigan. From: "Georgia Sanden" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 11:09 PM Subject: RE: [PACUMBER] Source information > Please give up this argument. We all started somewhere. I still remember > the day someone told me they had found my dad on the Internet. I'd never > even thought of genealogy before, and the result was that I went from > having > no family to having over a hundred cousins I didn't know I had -- truly a > blessed event. > > In the time since, I'm amazed at how much I've learned and how much I > realize I don't know -- it's been a very convoluted path. I most > appreciate > folks who put everything they have on the Internet, and that's what I do. > I've learned that if there are sources, I need to check them out anyway, > but > at least I have a clue. I hate when someone throws out so-called facts > without even a hint as to where they got them; I can't tell you how many > hours I've spent running down other folk's dead ends. > > The goal is to find our ancestors, and the more researchers checking a > line, > the more opportunity there is to dig up information. The more we share our > sources, and the more transcribed source materials we put up, the more > chance we have of breaking down those brick walls and finding those > blessed > cousins. > > Just an opinion..... > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 6:52 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PACUMBER] Source information > > In a message dated 4/16/2006 6:41:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: >> Real genealogical research requires time, money, and patience. That >> is what researchers find so offensive about nonresearchers who post >> pedigrees. > > Barb and Peg, > You bring forward two sides of the issue. > But I suspect you are preaching to the choir. In my experience, > many > of the subscribers to lists like this are serious and long term > researchers. > > People looking for an instant family tree don't spend much time on > these lists except to make a posting or two hoping that someone has done > the > work for them. > But this leads to why I am responding on-list rather than privately. > > Perhaps this can serve as a reminder that we can lead by example. > When we respond to those inquiries we can give some sources or other > background information so the other person can place it in context, > perhaps > even a word or two of explanation if the person is a "newbie." > I recently saw on another list where a responder to an inquiry > warned > the first person not to include dates and places because someone might > steal > it. What good is the information without that? Better to not respond at > all. > > Tony > > > ==== PACUMBER Mailing List ==== > A quick link to the complete list of PA USGenWeb County sites. > http://www.pagenweb.org/ > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx > > > > > ==== PACUMBER Mailing List ==== > A quick link to the complete list of PA USGenWeb County sites. > http://www.pagenweb.org/ > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx > >

Has anyone sorted this family out enough to tell me if there is a relationship between Andrew Bushey b. 1795 , lived Cumberland Co, went to Ohio and William Bushey b. abt 1808, lived Warrington twp., York I strongly suspect the connection lies through Lower Bermudian Church. Tony

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Classification: Query Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/JaB.2ACE/953.1.2 Message Board Post: I have also been tracing my husband's Emmons Rex Soards 1925-2001 ancestry. Rex was the 13th child of Henry Clay Soards who was the 6th child of Henry Soards and his first wife Florence Mae Jane Ritchey. This Henry Soards was Rex's grandfather( first wife Mary M. Ward). Henry was the 6th child of Daniel Swords and his first wife, Mary"Polly" Newman. I have been trying to connect Daniel Swords to the Ebenezer Swords Family of Pa. I have worked on this history for about ten years.

Please give up this argument. We all started somewhere. I still remember the day someone told me they had found my dad on the Internet. I'd never even thought of genealogy before, and the result was that I went from having no family to having over a hundred cousins I didn't know I had -- truly a blessed event. In the time since, I'm amazed at how much I've learned and how much I realize I don't know -- it's been a very convoluted path. I most appreciate folks who put everything they have on the Internet, and that's what I do. I've learned that if there are sources, I need to check them out anyway, but at least I have a clue. I hate when someone throws out so-called facts without even a hint as to where they got them; I can't tell you how many hours I've spent running down other folk's dead ends. The goal is to find our ancestors, and the more researchers checking a line, the more opportunity there is to dig up information. The more we share our sources, and the more transcribed source materials we put up, the more chance we have of breaking down those brick walls and finding those blessed cousins. Just an opinion..... -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 6:52 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PACUMBER] Source information In a message dated 4/16/2006 6:41:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Real genealogical research requires time, money, and patience. That > is what researchers find so offensive about nonresearchers who post > pedigrees. Barb and Peg, You bring forward two sides of the issue. But I suspect you are preaching to the choir. In my experience, many of the subscribers to lists like this are serious and long term researchers. People looking for an instant family tree don't spend much time on these lists except to make a posting or two hoping that someone has done the work for them. But this leads to why I am responding on-list rather than privately. Perhaps this can serve as a reminder that we can lead by example. When we respond to those inquiries we can give some sources or other background information so the other person can place it in context, perhaps even a word or two of explanation if the person is a "newbie." I recently saw on another list where a responder to an inquiry warned the first person not to include dates and places because someone might steal it. What good is the information without that? Better to not respond at all. Tony ==== PACUMBER Mailing List ==== A quick link to the complete list of PA USGenWeb County sites. http://www.pagenweb.org/ ============================== Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx

Hey gang, Just a short reminder to the vets and newbies at this site of my free research for the asking here at Andersonville. Please email me directly at [email protected] with request so we dont tie up the county site. Kevin Andersonville Historic Site Historian / NPS Volunteer www.angelfire.com/ga2/Andersonvilleprison/index.html or go to google.com and search " Andersonville Kevin Frye " My site will come up.

In a message dated 4/16/2006 6:41:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Real genealogical research requires time, money, and patience. That is > what > researchers find so offensive about nonresearchers who post pedigrees. Barb and Peg, You bring forward two sides of the issue. But I suspect you are preaching to the choir. In my experience, many of the subscribers to lists like this are serious and long term researchers. People looking for an instant family tree don't spend much time on these lists except to make a posting or two hoping that someone has done the work for them. But this leads to why I am responding on-list rather than privately. Perhaps this can serve as a reminder that we can lead by example. When we respond to those inquiries we can give some sources or other background information so the other person can place it in context, perhaps even a word or two of explanation if the person is a "newbie." I recently saw on another list where a responder to an inquiry warned the first person not to include dates and places because someone might steal it. What good is the information without that? Better to not respond at all. Tony

Tony, You did a great job with that, and you already know all of what I'm about to say, but this is for the benefit of those who don't understand what a "source" is: An original source is an actual legal document, court record, church record, deed, pension file, tax list, affidavit, or some other document that was made by the ancestor at the time when the ancestor lived. There are many other examples of original sources that I do not list here, but the point is, it is the ORIGINAL--not a transcription, not a summary, and not something downloaded from the internet. Secondary sources can be helpful, but are not proof. They include: census listings, dates of birth found on tombstones, published town histories, databases at ancestry.com and other internet services, etc... These contain second-hand information. The census taker wrote down whatever people told him, and didn't always write it down correctly, or even visit the household, for that matter. Dates of birth on tombstones were given by someone other than the deceased, who may or may not have remembered or even knew the exact date of birth. Town histories and published genealogies usually present "history" in the best possible light, almost always without any citations of original sources--I have found them to be more fantasy than history most of the time. It is a lead, and nothing more. Here's a short list of things that are not valid "sources": 1. Family Tree Maker pedigrees where dates not entered are "estimated". This flies in the face of logic, especially where estimates build on one another. 2. A source on a pedigree that says: "12345678913847382843". This is not a source citation for any legitimate source document. A "citation" is a deed book and page number, a pension file certificate number, a will book and page, file number, microfilm group and roll number, etc..., along with the name and location of the repository where it was found. 3. User-submitted pedigrees sold by the Mormons on CD, or the name of some individual who emails you a list of names. 4. OneWorldTree, where any 9-year-old can "vote" for which birthdate or parents' names they think are the real thing, and thus vote it into being "history" without any proof. This has to be the biggest insult to serious researchers and historians, ever! 5. Family stories passed down for generations. These can be very helpful, but should be listed in research "notes", not in "sources". If you are a researcher, you will follow up on what Great-Aunt Sally told you and search for records in the place where she said the family would be, and find the original source documents. Aunt Sally knows a lot, but she might have a couple pieces confused, and if you post and defend her every word, you are subjecting her to public embarrasment when someone like me puts a post-em on there that disproves something. Real genealogical research requires time, money, and patience. That is what researchers find so offensive about nonresearchers who post pedigrees. Incredibly, many nonresearchers don't realize that what they are doing by posting their database full of suppositions is that they are claiming to be researchers when they haven't done any credible research. Tony, as you say, this is certainly academic dishonesty. The internet is clogged with enormous useless pedigrees that do nothing but undermine credible research that is being painstakingly done by others at great time and expense. As a researcher, I find it personally insulting when I see a banner on a rootsweb pedigree that says something like: "not all of this is verified, please verify your own work". The person is publicly demanding that others do what they themselves refuse to do, and they somehow believe that they have credibility! My approach has gone from the defensive, like what Barbara R. mentioned, to the offensive. If I see something in a pedigree on one of my people that I can easily disprove with original sources, I put a "post-em" on it. I also put post-ems asking to please tell us which record repository they found this marriage record (or whatever) in, so that I may write for a copy of it. When I see that they have transcribed something word-for-word from a book or something else, and haven't cited it--I cite it on a post-em. The vast majority never answer me, however, any new researchers who look up that name will not only see the unsourced information, but they will also see my dated "post-em", with an opinion to the contrary and/or a call for source documentation that has gone unanswered. I figure that is how other researchers will find me, and they do. It is unfortunate that the LDS site does not allow you to put post-ems on bad pedigrees that they have posted. Thankfully, rootsweb does, and many pedigrees get altered or taken down when I "blow the whistle". It doesn't make me popular, but it helps to control the spread of unsourced gossip. I make no apologies for publicly asking for sources when someone chooses to publicly say that they have done research by posting their "work". After all, that is how it's done. Peggy Reeves Burtonsville, MD ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [PACUMBER] Re: Feyerabend - Firoved family tree > In a message dated 4/16/2006 2:53:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: >> Working on allied lines to geT at the big picture!!- I hope you retain >> credit for your work.. >> > Frankly, in this electronic information age, I'm not sure how one does > this. > The simplest solution is not to put it when others can "steal" it. But > this > begs the issue. Unless one has been a total purist all his genealogical > career, we are all indebted to the work of others. > I have seen people lift other people's work bodily from a web site, add > some stuff of their own, and then complain when someone has "stolen" their > work. > They take wrong information, make it wronger, and offer a poor rendition > of > this, with poor or no citations for a serious researcher to be able to > evaluate the validity of the work. > It is simply a case of intellectual honesty and rigor. One should admit > they used the work of others. One should provide enough information for > others > to evaluate the work. We should have learned this in college, or in the > scientific community. > > Tony > > > ==== PACUMBER Mailing List ==== > A quick link to the complete list of PA USGenWeb County sites. > http://www.pagenweb.org/ > > ============================== > New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors > at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: > http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429 >

In a message dated 4/16/2006 2:53:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Working on allied lines to geT at the big picture!!- I hope you retain > credit for your work.. > Frankly, in this electronic information age, I'm not sure how one does this. The simplest solution is not to put it when others can "steal" it. But this begs the issue. Unless one has been a total purist all his genealogical career, we are all indebted to the work of others. I have seen people lift other people's work bodily from a web site, add some stuff of their own, and then complain when someone has "stolen" their work. They take wrong information, make it wronger, and offer a poor rendition of this, with poor or no citations for a serious researcher to be able to evaluate the validity of the work. It is simply a case of intellectual honesty and rigor. One should admit they used the work of others. One should provide enough information for others to evaluate the work. We should have learned this in college, or in the scientific community. Tony

Tony You are right in your evaluation, and if the world was just, things would work that way, but they don't. I have a website I've always been willing to share any information with anyone that wants it. However, on the front page of my website, I've got a LARGE disclaimer that states: 1. Some of the information is from others, and I always try to credit them. 2. I do NOT want my work, or the work of others, to be taken and used on sites that then put the information on CDs and sell it. In spite of this, I've had people take all the information from my site, even when there's only a slight collateral connection, and put it with their information on other sites, especially Ancestry.com. They didn't even have the decencey to credit where they got all that information. Thus, I used to put my proofs along with the information. I have stopped doing this. I have also stopped updating a lot of it. I figure if someone is interested enough, they'll get in touch with me and I can then update any information and proofs. I am still willing to share but I'm just not going to make it easier for the information thieves to take my work. Oh. One such example. I had a family story posted on one page. The next thing I know, some man took the story, verbatim, and put it in his on-line magazine, WITHOUT any credits at all. I contacted him, and told him this was wrong. He basically flipped me off saying it was on the web and he could therefore do whatever he wanted. He still has it on his webpage but I don't. I've removed the family stories also. I feel bad about this because I think they should be shared. But blatant thievery is just more than I can bear. So, if anyone runs across my webpages, and wants more information, contact me. I'm more than happy to share as long as you don't publish it without credit, or put it on sites that resell it. By the way. When I do put someone else's information on my webpages, it is with their permission. Barbara R. [email protected] wrote: >In a message dated 4/16/2006 2:53:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >[email protected] writes: > > >>Working on allied lines to geT at the big picture!!- I hope you retain >>credit for your work.. >> >> >> >Frankly, in this electronic information age, I'm not sure how one does this. >The simplest solution is not to put it when others can "steal" it. But this >begs the issue. Unless one has been a total purist all his genealogical >career, we are all indebted to the work of others. > I have seen people lift other people's work bodily from a web site, add >some stuff of their own, and then complain when someone has "stolen" their work. > They take wrong information, make it wronger, and offer a poor rendition of >this, with poor or no citations for a serious researcher to be able to >evaluate the validity of the work. > It is simply a case of intellectual honesty and rigor. One should admit >they used the work of others. One should provide enough information for others >to evaluate the work. We should have learned this in college, or in the >scientific community. > >Tony > > >==== PACUMBER Mailing List ==== > A quick link to the complete list of PA USGenWeb County sites. > http://www.pagenweb.org/ > >============================== >New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429 > > > > >

Happy Easter!! Is there any connection between this FERGUSON and John Ferguson who lived in the Kinderhook area of Lancaster Co PA ? Jim in Vermont

William Ferguson is buried in the cemetery at the Big Spring Presbyterian Church. This church, established in 1738, is still an active congregation and is in Newville, eleven miles west of Carlisle. Ferguson was a carpenter and during the Rev. War he was stationed at the Carlisle Barracks Armory, also known as Washingtonburg. He designed and built the wooden carriages that were used with the William Denning cannons. William Denning is buried in the same cemetery about 200 feet from Ferguson. The church records show that there were seven members in the Ferguson family.

Tony Now that is what I call a family historian!! Working on allied lines to geT at the big picture!!- I hope you retain credit for your work.. Paul Pettit ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 3:39 PM Subject: Feyerabend - Firoved family tree > Hello all, > I recently completed [or at least as far as I want to go now] a > genealogy of this family. I am not related to this family, but have found > that > various people of this family kept popping up on my "twigs." So I have > attempted > to see how they are related. > It is not a common surname, so much so that it appears that all the > people of this surname that I have found before the middle 1800's are > related. > In short, John Feyerabend immigrated in 1772 to Phila. His indenture > was purchased by Rev. Muhlenburg. John settled in the Lebanon twp area, > where > he served in the Revolution. He became a landowner and started a family. > In > the 1790's he moved to the North Middleton area of Cumberland Co. and > became > known by the surname Fireoved. Here his children and grandchildren > married into > the various German families of central Cumberland Co. Many of his > offspring > moved to the midwest and by the mid 1800's this family name became extinct > in > Cumberland Co. although many descendents remained with other surnames. > If you wish, the results can be found at > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=carlthoover& > id=I221 > > Tony >

Hello all, I recently completed [or at least as far as I want to go now] a genealogy of this family. I am not related to this family, but have found that various people of this family kept popping up on my "twigs." So I have attempted to see how they are related. It is not a common surname, so much so that it appears that all the people of this surname that I have found before the middle 1800's are related. In short, John Feyerabend immigrated in 1772 to Phila. His indenture was purchased by Rev. Muhlenburg. John settled in the Lebanon twp area, where he served in the Revolution. He became a landowner and started a family. In the 1790's he moved to the North Middleton area of Cumberland Co. and became known by the surname Fireoved. Here his children and grandchildren married into the various German families of central Cumberland Co. Many of his offspring moved to the midwest and by the mid 1800's this family name became extinct in Cumberland Co. although many descendents remained with other surnames. If you wish, the results can be found at http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=carlthoover& id=I221 Tony

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Classification: Query Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/JaB.2ACE/3509 Message Board Post: A William Ferguson lived in Cumberland Co. Pa.as per Census of 1790-1800-1820 and 1830-He was a member of Big Spring Presbyterian Church near Carlisle.Died in 1834,wife Elisabeth is in will and she is listed in 1840 Census. He is buried in graveyard there as " A soldier of the Revolution about 76 yrs." All Census from 1790 have a William Ferguson living in West Pennsboro Twp. Cumberland Co. Pa. and that is near the church.March 1786 listed as a member of same church. a Catherine Ferguson married a John Greenwood in this church in 1807.William Ferguson is listed at that time as the only Ferguson head of household as a member of the church.She could be a daughter.

Could you kindly contact me off list. You have such great info. I would like to ask you a couple of questions. [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 2:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Shippensburg Thanks for challenging my remarks about Shippensburg. It gives me an opportunity to defend the historical research done by my mentor, Rev. William T. Swaim. But first, let me say this is not an attack on the writer, Thera. She repeats what she has read from other sources, as we all do. One of the most important statements Swaim directed to me, was,”do not believe everything you read in 19th century history books. Especially the one by Rev. Conway Wing!” Wing is the person who fabricated the story about 1730 Shippensburg in his 1879 history.. Swaim found more than 2000 historical errors during his 20 years of research, I know of none that have been challenged and corrected! #1- Carlisle was the county seat selected in 1750, Shippensburg was not selected because, “As to Shippensburgh I have no occasion to say any Thing, the Lands being granted.. ...that the lands about it are unsettled for Want of Water...” PA Archives, S1. II, pg 43. (Surveyor Cookson’s report to the Governor when he recommened Carlisle). #2. There were only 7,598 inhabitants in all of western Cumberland County (Hopewell, Newton, Tyborn, West Pennsborough) when the 1790 census was taken, My estimate would be ca50-75 citizens in Shippensburg in 1750, certainly not 5000, which probably was not obtained until the late 1800s. You should also take into account that Samuel Blunston issued just 249 licenses from Jan, 1734 to July, 1736 for all of Cumberland and Franklin Counties. None to the immediate Shippensburg area in 1734, and just 16 licenses to the Middle Spring Presby. Church area, which is several miles north of Shippensburg. The log church was not built until 1737/38. It appears as if Thomas Wilson got the first license (1735) for 200 acres which might have included the Shippensburg area. Edward Shippen obtained this property 2 years later (1737) and it was located on the “Potomac Road at the half-way spring (meaning Middle Spring). #3. Widow Piper’s: Tavern Since the Great Road (current day Route 11) was not surveyed until 1743/44 and approved by Lancaster Court in May 1744. Piper’s Tavern did not exist in the 1730s. It, and two other stone mansions in Shippensburg, set exactly on the corners of Route 11 and some cross streets. The street layout came before the buildings. In addition, the surveyor’s map showed no town, even in 1744. #4. Edward Shippen was mayor of Philadelphia in 1744 and he owned land all over central Pennsylvania, he got some ground in the Hopewell Twp area but did not “develop” any of it in 1737. Stone houses were not being built in 1735 in Cumberland County, Piper’s Tavern was probably log until much later. It is unlikely that there were any Indian Tribes in the area after 1730. “Pexton Manor” (Camp Hill, Lemoyne area) was established prior to 1734 to “coax” the Indians to come back to Cumberland County. In my possession is a 75 page document by Swaim which literally demolishes the existence of Shippensburg before 1744. My apologies for such a looooong letter!......Wilmer Maxwell, Carlisle ______________________________

Doris, Thanks for the package of info on the MAXWELLs. I got it on the 12th and although I haven't gone thru it all - I don't recognize the names and dates so far. By a wild shot here could your James be kin to another James born 16 Dec 1773 and died 10 Feb 1852 in Plain Grove Township, Lawrence County, PA? He was my 4GF and married Nancy Braden. She was born 1766 and died 1817. I don't have any idea when and where they came from prior to Plain Grove. Sincerely, Larry > Seeking the parents of Henry Maxwell b 1807 PA. > DNA suggests that we are kin to James Maxwell d > 1694 DE. > Can you see any connection to your John in > Hopewell Twp. in 1800 and 1810. Thanks, Doris > Maxwell Dell > > ______________________________> Date: 13 Apr 2006 20:23:29 -0600 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Maxwells of PA - Post your > lines!!!!! > > This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed > to this mailing list. > > Classification: Query > > Message Board URL: > > http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/JaB.2ACE/2810.1 > > Message Board Post: > > I am seeking the family of Henry Maxwell b 1807 > PA. > I see a James Maxwell in Rye Twp in 1810. > Do you find any connection to Henry or Albert? > Dori > Maxwell Dell [email protected] > > ______________________________> Date: 13 Apr 2006 20:36:10 -0600 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: MAXWELL,WALLACE > > This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed > to this mailing list. > > Classification: Query > > Message Board URL: > > http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/JaB.2ACE/855.1 > > Message Board Post: > > I am looking for the parents of Henry Maxwell b > 1807 PA. > I feel he is connected to the Franklin Co > Maxwells. > On the 1830 census Adam Maxwell is in Franklin > Co with a male the age of Henry. > > Adam's wife is from Franklin Co and I think she > is gone by the 1830 census. She had a number > of brothers in the Rev War and I have wondered > if Adam met her thru serving with her > relatives. OR was Adam connected with the part > of Cumberland Co that became Franklin Co later. > > I think Adam died in Armstrong Co. This is an > interesting family. Would appreciate knowing > what you think. > [email protected] Doris Maxwell Dell >

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Classification: Query Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/JaB.2ACE/855.1 Message Board Post: I am looking for the parents of Henry Maxwell b 1807 PA. I feel he is connected to the Franklin Co Maxwells. On the 1830 census Adam Maxwell is in Franklin Co with a male the age of Henry. Adam's wife is from Franklin Co and I think she is gone by the 1830 census. She had a number of brothers in the Rev War and I have wondered if Adam met her thru serving with her relatives. OR was Adam connected with the part of Cumberland Co that became Franklin Co later. I think Adam died in Armstrong Co. This is an interesting family. Would appreciate knowing what you think. [email protected] Doris Maxwell Dell

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Classification: Query Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/JaB.2ACE/2810.1 Message Board Post: I am seeking the family of Henry Maxwell b 1807 PA. I see a James Maxwell in Rye Twp in 1810. Do you find any connection to Henry or Albert? Dori Maxwell Dell [email protected]

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Classification: Query Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/JaB.2ACE/577.594 Message Board Post: Seeking the parents of Henry Maxwell b 1807 PA. DNA suggests that we are kin to James Maxwell d 1694 DE. Can you see any connection to your John in Hopewell Twp. in 1800 and 1810. Thanks, Doris Maxwell Dell

Could you share that web site with the list. Thank you, Jan