Patrick could you tell us what is the lab's definition of 'generation'. What is the mutation rate at the various loci. I understood the mutation rate was different at each loci or have they now determined that the rate of change is constant? If the rate is different, do they use an average rate to determine time since MRCA? Jan

Hey list, You know, during our DNA testing it was completely lost on me and I could kick myself. I was so busy trying to find members of the Jersey Payn family to participate in our test that I completely overlooked the Paynes of Bedfordshire that had removed FROM St. Kitts to settle there during the late 18th century. Perhaps we would have better luck finding current members of this family willing to participate in our next round of testing? Has anyone on the list had correspondence with members of this family or at least aware of any? I quick search on my part reveals that there are likely descendants still in the Bedfordshire area and perhaps Ireland as well. I have found some Payne's bearing the names "Coventry" and "Philip Monoux" Payne that are probably members of the family to which these names occur. They would be descendants of Sir Gilles and Sir Charles Payne of St. Kitts, mentioned in "The Paynes of Virginia." They were certainly related to Baron Lavington as I have records of deeds where they claimed land in St. Kitts once owned by Baron Lavingtons family. An observation here is that the names Gilles and Ralph (together) only occurs in the Jersey family to my knowledge. I have found members of the Gloucestershire branch by the name of Gilles [and they happened to live not very far from Wiltshire, supposedly the home of Baron Lavingtons family]. But Ralph, particularly in early days, only seems to appear in Jersey. At least that's what my database tells me, so it is interesting and worth noting. The last known male of the family in my database was Sir Philip Monoux Payne b. 1858 of St. Kitts and Wootton, Bedfordshire, who d. 1935. He was a son of Coventry Payne d. 1849, possibly the Vicar of Hatfield Peverel, Essex, by his wife Harriett Wright. He had a great-uncle by the name of Sir Charles Payne of Tempsford Hall, Beds. who died in France 1841. If anyone has knowledge of current members of this family, please contact me. We REALLY need to see if we can get them tested so that we can confirm or lay to rest a possible relation between them and our Group 2, which includes Thomas and Ralph Payne (son Thomas m. Mary Montagu) of Lancaster and Middlesex, Va., Isaiah Payne (married Ann Williams) of Dorchester County, Maryland, and William Payne (married Celia Lewis) of Virginia. In addition to this, we also need to test descendants of the immigrant John Payne (d. 1689/90). While it is possible that George Payne (married Mary Woodson) was in some way related to Group 2, it has not been confirmed that he descended from the immigrant John. If we can test known descendants of John and compare the DNA results with Group 2, we will have better answers. I ask anyone who can assist in locating descendants of these branches to please contact me. I'm off to Salt Lake in the morning and will have news to report when I get back. Thank you! Patrick Payne

Forrest, I think I remember your first name correctly. You wrote me several months ago because you also had a John Payne in the same TX area and time as mine. We exchanged data and determined they were from unrelated families. Your's had some commercial interest and my family moved to Sabine Co. I have deleted your e.mail so this is the only way I know to reach you. I have recently received information which might be of interest to you. There is a conflict of records and I think one of these may be your line. Send me a note so I can share this with you. I'll remember your e.mail address when I see it, I think :-) Marilyne Short Payne

I am looking for PAINE family who lived around what is now Lowell (Cambridge?), Middlesex Co., MA 1790's, perhaps earlier. The family had a large manufacturing business there. Kathleen

This was originally drafted as a response to an e-mail I had received about our DNA project. Since it directly relates to our project and some of the reasons for it, I decided to post to the list as well. At 09:30 AM 06/11/2002 -0400, you wrote: >John Payne and his wife Anne Jones were in King George Co., VA. Anne and his >son Reuben were named executors of his estate 1762 and the will was >witnessed by George Payne, James Pair and James Glendenning. John Payne b. >1696 Richmond Co., VA d. 1762 naming wife Ann and son, Reuben: exors.. I have this John born ca. 1696 Richmond Co., son of George Payne (d. 2 May 1711) of Richmond Co., and probably of "Red House," now Westmoreland, by his wife, Jane(?), dau. of Thomas White (d. 1687) of Mattox Creek. John was a grandson of the immigrant John Payne (d. 1689/90). I have John's death date as 2 July 1772 (as found in "The Paynes of Virginia" unless I have transcribed it wrong). His sibliings include: George Payne (d. 1745 K.G. Co.), who was under-Sheriff of Richmond Co. and m1. Martha ___ (who m2. John Peyton), m2. Mary ___; Thomas Payne (b. ca. 1700); William Payne (ca. 1702-bef. 1770) of Richmond Co., m1. bef. 1732 K.G. Co., Mary Jones, m2. bef. 1750 K.G., Mary Ball, by whom he had 12 children; Jane Payne (b. ca. 1703). >Records of Fauquier Co., VA; 1771, Reuben Payne leased 140 and 200 acres in >ŒManor of Leeds¹ from Lord Fairfax listing heirs Œwife Ann and son Colson¹ >(Warren Co OH records). In 1775, William Payne rec¹d lease in Manor of Leeds >for life of himself, wife Ann (Pannell) and son, Frank; adj. to Francis >Payne. The Paynes of Virginia gives Reubens wife as Elizabeth Wilkerson (see p. 377), citing the will of Gerrard Wilkerson of Hanover Parish, K.G. Co., dated 1789, which refers to his daughter Elizabeth Payne. In 1790-1814, Reuben paid taxes continuously in Orange County. In 1815, he and wife Elizabeth sold to son Charles their 100 acres on the west side of Russell Run and went to visit his son William in Ro. Co., to whom he deeded all his personal estate in the same year. So the 1771 record you cite, where Reuben had leased 140 acres and 200 acres in the Manor of Leeds listing his heirs as wife Ann and son Colson (or Colston?), must be referring to his mother, Ann, rather than wife. Further, POV states Reuben married about 1772, so this record may be before he married. To complicate matters, POV lists five children by Reuben and Elizabeth: William H., Gabriel, Elizabeth, Sally and Charles. No Colson (or Colston). However, if the record you cite can be trusted (other than the name of his wife) I suppose that it would serve to at least identify Colson's parents and it is evident that Colson had a connection with the family. All else in your post was new to me as I have only a partial interest in this line. What I find interesting about it all is that this line of the Smoot family had its origin in Charles County, Maryland (with interests in St. Mary's as well). They later had interests in King George County (my home) where a Lewis Egerton Smoot dedicated the library here. He descended from the Charles County family. Another line, that I have not been able to place, but who evidently also descend from the Charles Co. Md. group was Elizabeth Jenifer, daughter of Daniel Jenifer Smoot (29 Jan. 1792-8 Aug. 1865). Elizabeth Jenifer Smoot married 24 Dec. 1844 in Madison County, Va., Albert W. Payne (1819-1854), a descendant of the immigrant John Payne (d. 1689/90) of Westmoreland County. The reason that I say they must descend from the Maryland group is due to the name Jenifer. There were several Daniel Jenifer's of Maryland that the Smoot's appear to have adopted their name from. There was a Daniel "of St. Thomas" Jenifer of St. Mary's, son of Dr. Daniel Jenifer, who was son of Capt. Daniel "of St. Thomas" Jenifer (b. 1672) of Accomack County, Virginia, who later removed to Calvert and St. Mary's County. He married Elizabeth, granddaughter of John Michael, Sr. (d. 1679) of Graft, Holland & Lower Norfolk County, Virginia, and his wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Adam Thoroughgood (1604-1640) by Sarah Offley (1609-1657). Adam Thoroughgood had come to Virginia in 1635 aboard the John & Dorothy, John Payne, Commander. I believe this John Payne later settled in Westmoreland County and is the subject of the Paynes of Virginia. Elizabeth Michael (wife of Capt. Daniel Jenifer), was a niece of Sarah, daughter of Col. Southey Littleton of Northampton County. Sarah's sister, Eshter, was the 3rd wife of Col. William Whittington (1650-1720) of Accomack, Va. and Somerset Co., Md. Now it gets really interesting for me as Whittington's 2nd wife (and her 4th husband), Elizabeth Spinke, was a daughter of Thomas Spinke of St. Mary's, Maryland, by Jane Payne, a daughter of Thomas Payne (d. bef. 1731) and Tecla Thompson. [See Whitelaw, "Virginia's Eastern Shore] Whittington's 1st wife, Attalanta Toft, was a daughter of Mrs. Ann Toft (d. 1688) of Back Creek, Accomack County, Va. In 1668/9, Mrs Ann Toft is listed in Accomack Co. Court Orders, vol. II, p. 146, as having received land in Accomack for transporting several persons, including an Izard Payne- whom we have been unable to trace. I suspect that Izard had been a kinsman of the burgess Florentine Payne who had been partnered with Richard Lee I (m. Anne Constable), and also a kinsman of Daniel Payne, who had married Hannah Scarburgh, a granddaughter of Col. Edmund Scarburgh of Accomack & Northampton County, with whom Ann Toft had been closely associated with. So close that it has led some to speculate they were man and wife. About 1652, William Payne, of Boston and Ipswich, Mass., who descended from the Paynes of Suffolk, England, began a collection effort to recover money owed to him by Col. Edmund Scarburgh. This account appears in Northampton County Orders, Deeds & Wills, 1651-1654, Book VI, p. 170, citing folio 197. This record states "Be it known unto all men by these presents that I, William PAYNE (as opposed to Paine which some researchers today like to argue over the spelling of) of Ipswich in New England merchant have made, nominated, constituted, and appointed and by these presents do make, nominate, ordaine, constitute and appoint and in my place and stead put my loving friend William Stangridge of Virginia mariner my true and lawfull attorney for me and in my name and to my use, to ask, claim, recover and receive all and singular such debts, due, demands, sum and sums of money due, owing, and appertaining unto me, the said Wm. Payne by Mr. Edmund Scarburgh of Virginia by bill, bond, account, or otherwise, how so ever in Virginia, giving and by these presents granting unto my said attor. my full power and lawful authority for me and in my name, to sue, arrest, attach, declare, implead, imprison, condemn, and release the said debter, acquittance or acquittances or any other lawful discharge for such sum or sums as he shall receive for me and in my name to make, seal, and deliver one attorney or more under him to ordain and make, and at his pleasure again to revoke and more over to say, do execute, perform, conclude and finish what so ever matter or things shall be need full or requisite, in or about the premisses as fully and effectually as I, myself maybe might do (if I were there personally present) and had done the same myself ratifying, confirming and establishing whatsoever my said attorney shall happen lawfully to do or cause to be done in and about the promises and there unto I bind myself, my heirs, execs., and admins firmly by these presents. In witness where of I have here unto set my hand and seal the ninth day of October in the year of Our Lord one thousand six hundred fifty two. [signed] William Payne. recorded sexto die September 1654 per Edm. Mathews clk cur. [Note, William Stangridge's will was probated in Northampton County 28(?) April 1655:- "My beloved wife Mary Stangridge and my friend William Kendall extrs. and my whole estate to eq. div. betwixt them..." As late as 1654, although Stangridge had made good on his effort to collect the debt for William Payne, it had not been resolved. In a record from Northampton County Order Book V, fol. 24, dated 28 Aug. 1654 [assuming Stangridge was by this time ill], William Kendall had taken over the collection effort on William Payne's behalf:- "Whereas William Kendall, the lawful attorney of William Payne of Ipswich in New England merchant hath this day petitioned the court, against Lt. Col. Edmund Scarburgh for three hundred & seventy pounds sterling money (as ____ of the cause, before the court proceeded to judgement) the said Lt. Col. Edm. Scarburgh petitioned for an appeal before the Governor & Council (according to the Act of Assembly). It is therefore thought fitt & ordered that an appeal be granted unto him for hearing and determination of the said cause before the Honorable the Govenor and Council at James Citty upon the sixth day of the next ____ court provided that Mr. Scarburgh put in sufficient security for damages (according to Act of Assembly) in case he be cast in the suit." On September 27, 1651, Edward Gibbons and William Brenton of Boston, merchant, received a bond from Edmund Scarborough for beaver and tobacco for 1000 pounds sterling. [SLR 1:195; "The Great Migration Begins," Vol. II, p. 751.]. Gibbons had been a partner of William Payne and on 30 October 1651 he assigned a bond to William Paine [SLR 1:291; "The Great Migration Begins," Vol. II, p. 751]. Gibbons was also a partner of Thomas Hawkins, who would appear to have been a kinsman of Timothy Hawkins (ca. 1612-1651) of Watertown, Mass., who had married by 1637, Anna Hammond, daughter of William Hammond and Elizabeth Paine, sister of the William Payne of Boston and Ipswich, named in connection with Col. Scarburgh of Virginia. [See "The Great Migration" entry for Timothy Hawkins]. Gibbons was sued by Scarburgh in August 1654 for an accounting of their joint ownership of the ship "Artillery" [see Whitelaw's "Virginia's Eastern Shore," Vol. I, p. 631- which also mentions the suit brought against Scarburgh by William Payne]. Thomas Hawkins, although he owned land in Dorchester, Mass., was a mariner & shipwright and spent much os his time away. He was also a London merchant according to Thomas Lechford [see Lechford's Notebook 1638-1641]. Hawkins was a partner of William Robinson, whom Lechford describes [p. 211] as "of Dorchester, is continually found in the records of that town, where he was a well-known citizen. He came over in 1636, and was admitted freeman 1642. Both Hawkins and Robinson were friends of Roger Ludlow who "went off to Virginia, 1654, "under a maledict." And Savage says "for carrying away the town rec., wh. was a charge long aft. refut. by find. the vol. in town." Roger Ludlow was a kinsman of Sarah Ludlow who married John Carter of Virginia. Sarah's father was Gabriel Ludlow of Dinton, Wiltshire, uncle of Roger Ludlow above [see "The Great Migration" entry for Roger Ludlow establishing his Wiltshire roots; for Sarah Ludlow, there are numerous resources. The one I had available was Clifford Dowdey's "The Virginia Dynasties"]. John Carter's 2nd wife had been Eleanor, sister of William Eltonhead (ca. 1616-1655) who married Jane, daughter of Dr. Thomas Gerrard- all of Northampton County, Va. and of St. Mary's County, Maryland. Dr. Gerrard, however, died in Westmoreland County before 1673. All of this is significant for Payne researchers because it clearly shows a connection between William Payne of Boston and Ipspwich, Mass. with the Paynes of Virginia and Maryland. From Northampton County, Orders, Deeds and Wills, 1651-1654, Book IV, p. 48: "Novo die December 1651 present ut antea; Whereas Major Obedience Robins hath commenced a suit agt. Mr. Wm. Eltonhead for nine hundred and nine pounds of tobacco with four years interest and charges. The said Eltonhead pretending that he could make it appear that the tobacco was all satisfied. It is ordered that the said Mr. Wm. Eltonhead shall immediately put in sufficient security (such as shall be answerable for the debt) to make his personal appearance upon the 20th of January next nine at Accomacke in court to make appearance that the said debt is already paid otherwise exrc. then to precede for the said debt. damages and court charges. The said Eltonhead then promising in court not to export or alienate his estate (now in this county) until the performance of this debt. p. 60: "Whereas Major Obedience Robins had this day made appearance to the court that ***Capt. [later Col.] Edm. Scarburgh was security for personal appearance of Mr. Wm. Eltonhead of Maryland*** to answer his suit upon an account of debt for the sum of nine hundred and nine pounds of tobacco with four years interest and charge in the suit (the said Mr. Eltonhead failing his appearance). Its therefore thought fit and ordered (according to order of the court entered the 9th of December last) where in is expressed that ***such security shall be taken of Mr. Eltonhead as shall be answerable for the debt that Capt. Edm. Scarburgh*** shall forth with make payment of the said debt with four years interest and court charge atr exrc. For as much as Major Obedience Robins hath this day procured order against Capt. Edm. Scarburgh (the security for Mr. Wm. Eltonhead of Maryland, for a debt of nine hundred and nine pounds of tobacco with four years interest and charge in the suit its therefore ordered that Capt. Edm. Scarburgh shall detain is his custody and possession so such goods (appertaining unto the said Mr. Wm. Eltonhead) as well be sufficient to make him satisfaction to the full value of the order this court passed against him at the suit of the said Major Robins with damages and charges atr exrc." The Eltonheads owned a slave by the name of Francis Payne:- p. 151: "Francis Payne [note he is not given as "Negro" here] after my love to thee and I cannot hear of any servants in York. They are all sold but if you do get your tobacco in cask, I question not but to get them, when I come down again, and likewise I will being [bring?] down some cask with me (if I can come soon enough) so I rest. Your loving master Wm. Eltonheade. From York 13th of December 1649. Recorded 4 die March 1653 per me Edm. Mathews clk cur." There are many more records pertaining to this Francis Payne, slave of William Eltonhead and his wife Jane. He was actually a slave of Jane Gerrard and subsequently to her children by a prior marriage:- "Northampton County, Virginia. Orders, Deeds & Wills 1651-1654, Book IV, p. 99: "These presents do testify that I Jane Eltonhead wife to Wm. Eltonhead gent. do covenant and agree to and with Francis Payne my negro servant (he being part of the estate belonging to my children) as followeth first that I the said Jane do resign all my right of this insueing crop that he is now a working in unto the said Francis warranting him to enjoy the same quietly for any trouble or molestation that nay or can arise from any person or persons. Likewise I do authorize him to use the best means lawful be and can for the further bettering of the said crop. In consideration whereof I the said Francis an[d] to pay to me the said Jane (the year following) fifteen hundred pounds of tobacco and six barrels of corn. At the end of this present crop and to have the power from time to time to make use of the ground and plantation until such time that I have freed myself of this judgment, witness our hands this 13th of May 1649." Signed Jane Eltonhead & Fran. Payne. Witness Wm. Pindley. Recorded Decimo die mensis December 1652 per me Edm. Mathews cur clk. "The condition of these presents is in manner following first that I Francis Payne negro am to pay to my mistress three sufficient men servants between the age of fifteen and twenty four and they shall serve for six years or seven at the least and that I Francis am to pay these servants the next crop after the date here of and that I Jane Eltonhead am to free the said Francis (on the present after the performance of these contents) but if the said Francis do not perform these presents, then it is void and of no effect 1649." Signed Francis Payne, Jane Eltonhead. Recorded date decimo die December 1652 per me Edm. Mathews cur clk. (page 119) "Received by me Wm. Eltonhead gent. of Francis Payne Negro the quantity of sixteen hundred and fifty pounds of tobacco and two servants (according unto the condition between him and his mistress) also a bill take in of his mistress which she passed unto Mr. Edward Drew for the maid servant I say received by me Wm. Eltonhead the second of April 1651." Signed William Eltonhead. Witness John Dolby. Recorded 10 die December 1652 per me Edm. Mathews cur clk. "Memoranda that I Wm. Eltonhead do acknowledged to have taken bill of Mr. Peter Walker merchant for two men servants which is for the use of Francis Payne Negro towards his freedom as witness my hand the 2nd day of March 1649." Signed Wm. Eltonhead. Witness Derrick Derrickson. Recorded 10th die December 1652 per me Edm. Mathews cur clk." Now, these Eltonheads were the aunts and uncles of Eltonhead Conway (daugther of Edwin Conway and Martha Eltonhead) who married about 1662 Henry Thacker (d. 1674) and their son, Henry (1663-1710) married Elizabeth Payne, granddaughter of the immigrant John Payne (d. 1689/90). Elizabeth was a niece of William Payne (ca. 1652-1697/8), who had appointed Richard Lee II and his wife, Lettice Corbin, as the guardians of his children:- "Crozier, p. 8: "Paine, William, of Cople, gent., 31 Jan. 1697-8; 23 Feb. 1697. Eldest son William when 16 years; son Edward 700 acres in Stafford; my eldest daughter Anne by a former venture, my dau. Betty; my dau. Mary; dau. Anne and son William exors.; my said dau. Anne to go after me decease to Col. Lee's house; my loving wife." Brooke Payne expands on this by including: -"Will written 31 Jan. 1697/8, names his loving friend Richard Lee of Lower Machotique as guardian of his children. He instructed his daughter Anne to go immediately to Col. Lee's house." Richard Lee II's father, Richard Lee I, had been continously associated with Florentine Payne, an early burgess of Elizabeth City and mariner. [see Clifford Dowdey's "The Virginia Dynasties" as well as "Cavaliers and Pioneers," Vol. I naming Florentine in records of Richard Lee.]. Recall that William Payne of Boston and Ipswich, Mass. had made William Kendall his attorney to collect the debt from Col. Scarburgh. Hancock Lee, the brother of William Payne's (d. 1697/8) "loving friend" Richard Lee II, had married Mary Kendall, daughter of William Kendall. I don't know how much clearer the records have to be to indicate a connection here between the Massachusetts and Virginia branches. For the life of me, I don't understand why we, as Payne researchers, have not latched on to this and begun a serious investigation and called into question past statements that there had been no relation between them. There is no room for coincidence here as it comes about from so many different directions- all pointing to the same conclusion. The snag here, as some may have gleaned from our DNA results chart, is that the DNA signature from descendants of Thomas Payne and Mary Snow of Eastham, Mass. [Thomas suspected of being a cousin of William Payne of Boston], do not seem to fit any of the other participants DNA results which would indicate a relationship. However, I feel that before we can rule it out, we should attempt to include other known descendants of William Payne of Boston. Daniel Payne which had married Col. Scarburgh's granddaughter Hannah, is believed to have been an ancestor of the Paynes of Worcester County, Maryland. Here too, I have found several links back to the descendants of the immigrant John Payne through their mutual kinsmen the Sturmans and Popes (as well as several others). It would take me a considerable amount of time to list all of these connections between these branches and I have been working on doing just that. I just can't possibly post it all to mailing lists. I currently have over 700 pages (unedited) of these connections between the Colonial families alone. Another volume of equal size showing the same type of connections among the branches of the Payne family in England (prior to the immigration by some of them between 1635 and 1650). There are NO OTHER examples of this occurring in any genealogy that I am aware of other than those with proven relations between their branches- and those families had ties with the Paynes- such as the Lee's, the Washington's (whose ancestry takes them back to Suffolk, England, with John Washington, who had married a sister of Sir Thomas Kytson- whose bailiff of Hengrave had been Henry Payne, an ancestor of William Payne of Boston/Ipswich.), and other dynastic families with similar pedigree's reaching back into England's past long before the colonization period began. Now we have DNA evidence to support ties between some of our Maryland and Virginia branches, and I believe that with continued testing to include more members of our various early Payne branches in America, we will discover even more. We've missed the boat by allowing ourselves to rely to heavily on blanket statements made by past researchers who claimed no relationship existed between branches, although our only published genealogies are direct line in nature and written between 70 and 120 years ago! By their very nature it is evident that there was no real research into the question for such statements to be made. The ONLY basis for the claims of no relationships between branches is the lack of records to establish it. But I ask, how many of us name our uncles and cousins in our wills or deeds today? I'd venture a guess and say not many of us do. If we take that element away, we are left with really only one source that would establish these relationships, and that is birth records. How many of us have been to England to search for them? In our known English lines, how many sons and daughters have been completely overlooked? Here is one example- In 1935, Col. Brooke Payne had correspondence with the College of Arms in London in an effort to establish family traditions claiming that the immigrant John Payne of Virginia had been a son of Sir Robert Payne of Huntingdonshire. They concluded that Sir Robert had only three sons, none with the name of John Payne. Nor, they said, did Sir Robert have any immediate kinsmen with the name John. As a result, we all but abandoned the old family traditions and have pretty much left it at that. Though no fault is given to the College of Arms as they simply based their statement on records submitted to them in 1613 by Sir Robert, it has since been discovered that Sir Robert had two additional sons AFTER 1613 (though their names are not known). This information can be found on Sir Robert's tomb in Huntingdonshire which names 5 sons (and two additional daughters previously unknown to us as well). It has also been discovered through primary records that Sir Robert did in fact have a brother by the name of John Payne who had been Rector of Southoe, Hunts. in 1603, whose daughter, Anne Payne, was the wife of William Leete, later Governor of Hartford, Ct. No NEW genealogy has been undertaken between the publication of "Paine Genealogy- Ipswich Branch" or "Paine Family Records" in 1881, and "The Paynes of Virginia" in 1935. We have not advanced much beyond what is contained in them. They are of great value, and well-done, but we've generally come to accept everything in them as gospel and refused to consider alternatives. We regurgitate and perpetuate the good, as well as the bad contained in them. Then the Internet, with all of its benefits, has now come to replace real "research." Instead of spending time in Records Offices, University Libraries, Courthouses, etc., many of us are more prone to copy research found on the web and call that research (with the added downside that the resources are often not cited, and when they are, the information is conveniently cut and pasted into web pages or mailing list posts, giving no credit to the individual responsible for the research or transcription work. Which, I am sure, has caused many researchers to refrain from sharing information altogether). In the past, I have made efforts to bring some of these clues to the attention of other researchers in the hopes that we might consolidate our research efforts to gain ground on many of the questions and problems we face. But these efforts have been piece mealed. It doesn't do just to the big picture to approach it in that way. This post, for example, shows some of the connections, but based on this one example alone, one might conclude that it is nothing more than coincidental or circumstanstial to the fact that as merchants or business men that it is inevitable that families would come into contact with one another. I agree with that to some extent, but would ask to see examples of it in other genealogies. When all of the evidence is brought to bear in our case, it becomes much to large to attribute to chance. See also http://papayne.rootsweb.com/Ralph-Payne and http://home.earthlink.net/~ppayne1203/poa to bring more of this puzzle together. Purists still want proof in the form of primary records explicitely confirming the connections. I believe these records do exist- but they will not be found in America. Our answers lie on dusty shelves in England- and not necessarily where we'd expect them to be as many of these families had interests in several counties, not just the traditional family seat we've come to know. Our DNA project has already proven its value for some of us. I, for one, can say it was the best $150.00 for research that I've ever spent. It has opened new doors and will continue to do so as long as we have willing participants seeking answers to their own genealogy mysteries. DNA research will never fully replace traditional genealogical research, but it can be (and has shown) its worth in that it provides scientific support to the genealogical record evidence by establishing relatedness- even if it might leave us with the holes to fill. Regards, Patrick Payne ppayne1203@earthlink.net

Am looking for parents of Lizzie Myrtle PAYNE, b. May 1875 in Greenvalley, Washington, Virginia. Possible mother is May J. PAINE,b. 1853-VA. She died in either 1957 or 1962 in Bristol, Wash., VA She married William Drury HAYNES abt 1896 and is found in the 1900-1910-1920 Washington Co., VA Census. They had 7 children. Any information at all about this family would surely be appreciated. Thanks, Renee Harris <harrisgr27@yahoo.com> __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

Hi Everyone: It's been almost a year since I communicated to you the status of our request to LDS to film the Payne Collection, #920, at the University of Virginia. The last information I received from LDS was in January 2002. They advised they were waiting to receive a response from the University of Virginia in regard to a Memorandum of Understanding. I have since made inquiries of LDS on 4/26 and 5/27 for a status report and have received no reply. I do not know what is causing the delay but when I hear something, I will let everyone know. Don Payne

Hello Everyone, I have made some revisions and additions to the Payne Family DNA Project web site at http://home.earthlink.net/~ppayne1203 There is now a link to the DNA test results chart and once I have the final analysis from the lab, I will add a link for it as well. I will be going to Salt Lake City on the 20th of June and hope to return with the analysis. I have also added a new link with my research on Ralph Payne, Baron Lavington. I felt that this might be valuable in an effort to determine his origin and how Ralph Payne and his son Thomas of Lancaster and Middlesex County, Virginia, fit in with his family. We can now also include the family of Thomas Payne and Jane Smallpiece of St. Mary's County, Maryland among Ralph and Thomas' kinsmen. As a descendant of Isaiah Payne (b. 1735) of Dorchester County, Maryland, whom many researchers believe to have been a descendant of Thomas and Jane of Maryland, our DNA project has revealed that my DNA signature is nearly identical to that of one of Ralph Payne's descendants. The lab has concluded that we are closely related. The preliminary results of the DNA testing also indicate a probable relationship between these families with a descendant of George Payne and Mary Woodson of Virginia. George is believed to descend from the immigrant John Payne (d. 1689/90), subject of "The Paynes of Virginia." However, because of subtle differences in the DNA signature of this descendant of George from the descendants of Ralph of Virginia and Isaiah of Maryland, I am waiting for the final analysis which we hope will provide us with more details on the nature of the relationship. Just how close was it? Col. Brooke Payne in The Paynes of Virginia suggests that Ralph and his son were kinsmen of the immigrant John Payne based on record evidence. We think the DNA results will add a significant amount of support for (or against) that theory. In fact, we need to have the final report before we can make any further determination of relationships between our participants other than those shown in the various groups indicated on the result chart. In some cases, we were only able to test one descendant from our various Payne branches. This was a good start, but we really need to have at least two in order to ensure accuracy. If there had been a non-paternity event, or an error in genealogy, it would greatly effect the results we show. With two or more participants from the same line, however, we can make sure that the results are accurate because the DNA signatures between the participants should closely match. Therefore, we hope to get started on round 2 testing soon in the hopes that more descendants from these families will participate. Particularly from our New England, Jersey and Maryland lines. We also had several single participants that were unsure which line that might connect with. The test has given some of them new leads to follow. For the remaining participants, it would help them out tremendously to have a new round of testing. I will post details on round 2 as they become available. In the meantime, If you are interested, please send me an e-mail to let me know. There is really no point in trying to conduct another round if we have fewer than 20 participants as the cost becomes prohibitive ($250.00). With 20 or more, we can likely get a similar fee as we had with round 1 ($150.00). Finally, I have revived my page on Payne slaves as I have been in contact with folks interested in researching their African-American roots. There is a link provided from the main page to a list of Payne slaves as found in records. I will be happy to update this list if anyone comes across slave names while they are researching. Simply jot down the slaves name, and what family they had been associated with (names, dates, location, etc.). I will then add it to my list so we can have a central location for that data. That's it for me tonight. Regards, Patrick

Hi, I am looking for information on JOHN PAYNE who was born in Dublin on 1 Dec, 1802. He married PHEOBE FITZPATRICK in 1829 in Liverpool, England. They moved to Louisiana and he died 1 Oct 1877 in Natchitoches, LA. Any information on his parents or siblings would be greatly appreciated. Rachel

Please remove this e-mail address from all mailing lists. Thanks! paygin@erols.com

Do any of you Paynes have the current address for Courtney Hott a descendent of Hiram Payne? I have tried to e-mail her but the letter comes back. Will appreciate help. Martha B Steward<MBStew@worldnet.att.net.

Does anyone know Robin Yakour ryakour@aol.com new address? This one keeps coming back. David S. Payne, 1614 Chapman Rd., Anderson, SC, 29621, 864-225-3253 otime1@yahoo.com My line: http://worldconnect.genealogy.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=otime Searching for surnames mostly in Upstate SC/GA: ADDISON, ALLISON,ARENDALL, CANADY, CORBIN, COX, CRAIG, DEAN, FOWLER, HALEY, GORDON, HENSON, JAMES, McMILLIAN, McPHERSON, MOODY, PARKER, PAYNE, POINDEXTER, REDWINE, REID, SWANN, WEST, TODD, WHITMIRE --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup

> http://www.thedrake.org/sswills/ssindex.htm > > Index of Secretary of State Wills > Transcribed by Frank Bell > Entries are sorted alphabetically. > > As I understand, prior to the revolution wills and estate records were filed > with the Secretary of State office. These wills are not to be found in > county records, but the original wills are found at the NC State Archives > > To obtain wills write to: > Kim Cumber > Search Room, NC Division of Archives and History > 109 E. Jones St > Raleigh, NC 27601-2807 > Send a self-addressed stamped envelope, your one question, a check for $8.00 > (search fee). In return mail, you will be advised of the number of pages in > the estate folder and the cost to produce copies. > > Secretary of State Wills > > Paine, John 1767 New Hanover > Paine, John 1754 Craven > Paine, Samuel 1715 Currituck > Palin, Henry 1700 Pasquotank > Palin, John 1737 Pasquotank > Palin, John 1755 Pasquotank > Palin, Thomas 1751 Pasquotank > Palin, Thomas 1734 Pasquotank > Payne, Peter 1755 Chowan > > >

I am in GA and searching for my great grandfather's brother, Thomas Jefferson Payne, born circa 1858 in Cherokee Co., NC. He is listed with his mother Rebecca Payne born circa 1837 in Knox Co. Ky. The younger son was my great grandfather, James Oliver Payne born circa 1860. Thomas J. Payne was believed to have died in Artemus, KY. In the 1880 census of Cherokee Co. NC. Thomas is listed with his wife Jane and daughter Martha (?).

GUSTAVUS PAYNE b. abt 1811 married on 9 May 1842 to CYNTHIA SARAH SHINN b. 5 Jan 1815 Harrison Co., WV Source: LDS Ancestral File Colleen Kitch GuyCol@webtv.net

Hey Everyone, I was just contacted by Relative Genetics and the Chief Operating Officer wants to fly me out to Salt Lake to spend a couple of days with them! How exciting is that! Not just for me, but because of the interest they have placed in our project. So if anyone has ideas or suggestions on how the lab can improve or be of more value, now is our chance to address them. Please let me know well before the 17th so I have time to prepare! Regards, Patrick

Hello Everyone, I am going to go ahead and release the results of our DNA testing to everyone since all of our participants have been notified at this point. However, the final analysis that we are still waiting for has been referred out to a Statistician by the lab director and now looks like about a three week wait for it. Therefore, we must use caution when interpreting these results until that final report is made. I want to reiterate this point by giving a little more information. Samples from 23 male Paynes were screened for 24 Y-chromosomal "loci." This means that the lab tested each participants sample looking for 24 specific markers (referred to as "loci") on the Y-chromosome. Perhaps it would do to give another brief explanation of the principal behind Y-chromosome DNA testing. For that, I will turn to the literature provided by the lab: Y-chromosome (Ycs) markers are inherited from father to son and remain mostly unaltered from generation to generation. This property makes the Ycs an ideal focus for genealogical studies because, barring adoption or illegitimacy, the route of the Ycs through time in a pedigree exactly parallels the surname in many western cultures. The Ycs will pass from fathers to each son in the pedigree. In women, the Ycs inherited by their sons will be different because these sons belong to a different male line- that of their father. For this reason, women, and their male descendants, were excluded from our testing. The Ycs is widely used in establishing relationships among individuals sharing the same or similar last names. By determining a Ycs fingerprint, or "Haplotype" as it is known, of several related male individuals we can create a Ycs haplotype that is inherited with a specific surname. This information can be used for further genealogical pursuits by allowing males with the same or similar last name to compare Ycs haplotypes and determine descent from a common paternal ancestor. The results you are about to see are FIXED- meaning that the values under each "loci" you will see on the chart for each participant will not change. That much is firm and can be relied upon. This enables us to compare the results of one participant with the other effectively enough to determine relationships between our participants. A road map for the chart you are about to see can be easily given. The chart contains 25 columns of data. The first column gives the participants details, which includes the participants identifier (such as "IP+AW-1735-01," which is nothing more than the initials of the ancestor, a spouse if known, and a date that can be associated with them- such as a birth or death date), it also includes the area of the country of the ancestor, and finally the name of the ancestor and his spouse if known. A bit redundant but necessary to protect the privacy of the particpant. So that takes care of column one. You can look under this column to determine if one of these participants belongs to your own Payne line. The next 24 columns represent the "loci" sites in the DNA. The values or numbers under each "loci" site in the chart correspond to the number of "repeats" the participant had at that loci site. All of these 24 loci sites tested are made up entirely of repeated segments of DNA. What makes these sites useful is that while everyone has them, they are different lengths in different individuals. For example, one individual might have 8 repeat units, called "allele 8," while another may have 10 repeat units, called "allele 10." These values or "allele" can be thought of as the number of segments of DNA contained in a particular "loci." Therefore, in the most simple terms, the closer the match in all 24 sites between one or more individuals in our test, the more likley they were related. For example, an exact match in all 24 sites might indicate ancestors had been brothers or father and son. One difference in a loci site might also indicate the same type of relationship, but that the particular loci had undergone a "mutation," which do occur over time. However, these mutations are on the order of many generations. One difference might also indicate an uncle or other near relative. Essentially, the more differences found between these sites, the less likely that a relationship existed between our ancestors. So while a match in all, or nearly all, of the loci sites would be indicative of a close relationship, such as father and son, a brother, a grandfather or uncle, a difference in the value of several loci sites would indicate that either no relationship existed, or if it did, it was more distant and occured long ago. This is where the Statistician comes in. The rate of mutuation in loci sites is stable, so statistically it is possible to determine how long ago a common ancestor had lived. You can think of it this way [although this is a very uneducated example]- Let's say that it is known that a change or mutation can be measured to occur every 100 years [a number out of the blue] and when two test results are compared you can identify that there are 3 differences. You can conclude from this reasoning that the two had shared a common ancestor that had lived 300 years ago. This can further be narrowed down by the statistician to give a more precise time frame which might enable researchers to identify a particular individual. Again, this is a very simple explantation of a very complex scientific analysis and should only be used as a general idea of the process involved. With all this in mind, we can turn to our specific test results. But keep in mind that we are also still waiting for the final analysis. The lab had indicated that we are the first family they have tested that can provide a long pedigree in many cases. Here, they are undoubtedly referring to the Suffolk, Norfolk and Jersey branches of the Payne family that can all trace their roots into the 15th century with some certainty. Because of this, they see this as an opportunity for them to take a closer look at the analysis process. Although it may extend our wait, we can only benefit from the scrutiny they are giving us. But we should remember that in the end, the suggested pedigree that they have come up with at this preliminary stage may change. So what follows is the best we can do for now until that final report is made available to us. Out of our 23 participants, the lab has identified 7 main ancestral groups. Two of these groups have been identified as primary groups, and they believe that all 7 had shared a common ancestor. We will know more about this in the final report. The chart may be viewed at http://papayne.rootsweb.com/dna-project . An explanation, as best it can be explained at this point, is included below: The 2 primary groups identified are as follows: Group 1: Charles Payne (b. ca. 1798) of Tennessee, who married Elizabeth Davis. Thomas Payne (b. 1664) of Lancaster and Middlesex County, Va., who married Mary Montagu and Elizabeth Elliott. Isaiah Payne (b. 1735) of Dorchester County, Maryland, who married Ann Williams. William Payne (b. 1805) who married Celia Lewis. Of these individuals in group 1, the participants DNA samples were nearly identical, having only 1 mutation between them. The lab has stated that these individuals had, without a doubt, been closely related. In the final analysis, we hope that this statement will become more specific by indicating the number of generations separating them from a common ancestor. As a member of this group myself, I found the results surprising. It clearly links my ancestor Isaiah Payne [who is believed to have been a descendant of Thomas Payne and Jane Smallpiece of St. Mary's, Maryland], with Thomas Payne and his father, Ralph Payne, of Lancaster and Middlesex County, Virginia. "The Paynes of Virginia" by Col. Brooke Payne mentions this family and goes so far as to suggest that the immigrant John Payne had been related to them due to their numerous associations. Thomas, his brother Ralph, and Ralphs son Thomas Payne are believed to have been descendants of Stephen, Abraham and Charles Payne of Jersey in the Channel Islands, who had fled to St. Kitts in the Caribbean Islands after the battle of Worcester in 1641. The other surprise here, however, is that there was no match between this group and our 1 participant from Jersey [TP+??-1410-01 in our test]. This information will cause us to seek other participants from the Jersey family as we cannot rule out at this point the possibility of a non-paternity issue or error in the genealogy of the one participant we had. Testing at least one other member of this family will determine whether group 1 should look to another branch of the Payne family for their ancestors, thus laying to rest the old family traditions that Stephen Payn and his descendants had been members of the Jersey family. At the same time, it would not hurt to test more descendants from each of the individuals in group 1, just to ensure the continuity in the results. It would also appear that another participant can be added to this group, but we will have to wait for the final report to be sure. George Payne (d. 1744) of Virginia, who married Mary Woodson [GP+MW-1744-01 in our test], was a descendant of the immigrant John Payne. This participants DNA seemingly differs from those in group 1 in 4 loci. However, 2 of the differences fall under the DYS389 and DYS389II loci. The information provided by the lab states that "Loci DYS389I and DYS289II move in tandem. Therefore, when there is a mutation in DYS389I, it will also appear to be in DYS389II. When comparing one individual to another, if DYS389I and DYS389II differ by the same number of repeats, it should be counted as one mutation." Also, the mutation under DYS386B has not yet been calibrated. Therefore, there may be a much closer match in the DNA samples indicating a closer relationship between this participant and Group 1. This would mean that all of the individuals in Group 1 could be near kinsmen of the immigrant John Payne, which would support Col. Brooke Paynes suggestion made in 1935- only, Brooke wasn't aware that Ralph and Thomas had kin in Maryland, as I suspected they did. Group 2: John Payne (b. 1820) of North Carolina. Thomas Payne (b. 1787) of Tennessee. Jesse Payne (b. 1828) of Georgia, who married Mary Kate Mabry. William Payne (d. 1780) of Virginia, who married Sarah Manes. Samuel Payne (d. 1848) of Georgia, who married Lucy Echols. The participants whose ancestors had been the first 3 in this list (John, Thomas and Jesse) match in every detail of their DNA- all 24 loci were a match. No question that they were closely related. The last two in the list had only one mutation from the first three, and it was in the same loci, indicating that they had possible descended from one individual (whose DNA contained this one mutation) as opposed to just the same line. There are 2 other distinguishable groups identified, as follows: Group 3: Thomas Paine (d. 1706) of Massachusetts, whom married Mary Snow. There were 2 participants as descendants of Thomas Paine. This was confirmed by the DNA analysis which showed 1 mutation at loci DYS462. Group 4: Benjamin Payne (b. ca. 1750) of Virginia William Payne (b. 1863) of Virginia, who married Mollie Simmons. Of the remaining groups the lab identified, the most pronounced differences came from the descendants of Stephen Paine and Rose Adcocke of Massachusetts, and Frank Payne of Vermont. There were many differences in their sample when compared to any of the rest. As for all the remaining participants, it is difficult for me to say how they may or may not fit into one of the other groups. By and large, the samples look very comparable to many of the others, so I will wait to hear what the lab has to say on these. To summarize the data, several groups have been identified and the lab fells that some of these groups shared a common ancestor. Their explanation of this finding is expected to follow in their final report. I will make the final report available in a similar way when it arrives. We have had a great beginning with this project. We now have a foundation [thanks to these initial 23 individuals] that others can build on in the future. It has established our Payne family DNA signature. It has revealed some surprises for us that I believe many people would never have anticipated. In some cases, the results clearly show a close kinship between branches previously thought to have none. I suspect this knowledge will increase as more Paynes elect to participate. I have been asked about another round of testing, and I am willing to coordinate that effort should the need arise [and I sincerely hope that it does]. I believe this first round indicates just how necessary it is for us to continue with the project.

Seek information regarding Cyrus C. Payne (Paine) born Rensselaer Co., N. Y. about 1825, son of Joseph Payne and Phebe Palmer. He married Antoinette (born Saratoga, N. Y.) and had the following children while living at Barre, Orleans County, New York: 1. Mary Louise, b. July 22, 1847, 2. Thomas Fenner, b. about 1849, 3. Charles H., b. about 1851, and 4. Adele, born Illinois about 1857. Cyrus and Antoinette known to be living at Kankakee, Illinois in 1867. I believe this is the same Cyrus C. Payne who enlisted, along with his brother, Thomas F., in the 155th Illinois Infantry on January 18, 1865, at Beaver or Beaverville, Illinois. Antoinette later found to be living, as a widow, at 263 Grand River Avenue, Detroit, Michigan, 1890, with son, Thomas Fenner Payne. Will trade information on this branch of Payne Family.

Hello Everyone, I am in the process of contacting our DNA project participants to release some of the results I have received. Naturally, I want to inform them first before making the results known to everyone else. Plus, we are still waiting on the final report from Dr. Woodward... I have mailed each of the participants, but some of the mail was returned to me as undeliverable, so either e-mail addresses have changed or some other error occurred in the delivery. Therefore, I need to post this request to the list that in the event that any PARTICIPANT in our project DID NOT receive my e-mail notification giving the web address to the results, please contact me off list. For everyone else, please continue to be patient a little longer! As soon as all of the participants have been informed and have had a chance to digest the results, they will be made available to everyone else. Thank you, Patrick

Hello Everyone, I gave the lab a call a short time ago to let them know I had sent some information they requested. Afterwards, I couldn't help but ask for some details and was able to get a quick summary from them on the results. First, she said that this study was very interesting for her as it differs from any other that she's worked on. On the details she provided, it was brief and I tried to take notes as we went, but forgive me if I can't elaborate much on the meaning just yet. She was talking way over my head... Of 23 participants, she said that 5 were distinct and separate from all the others. They have identified two of what they call "ancestral types." One of which is the basis of what she referred to as the "consensus sequence," and identified that participant as the descendant of Isaiah Payne, b. 1735, of Dorchester County, Maryland. That would be me! This was really interesting as I have not found nearly as much evidence for connections with other branches from my Maryland family as I have for other branches. Still, she said that 4 or 5 other participants were "closely related" to this consensus sequence (me). This should prove very exciting as only one other participant, a descendant of Moses Payne and Elizabeth Walker (identified in our study as MP+EW-1706-01) had a known relationship to Isaiah. That leaves 3 or 4 other participants that will connect with Isaiahs line (or from Isaiah to their line as the case may be). They have identified 20 separate lineages out of our 23 participants. However, of the 18 remaining participants (less the 5 distinct participants mentioned), she indicated that we all appear to share a common ancestor. This will get narrowed down more closely in each case as they evaluate the results for the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) for each participant. Some of these participants have a more recent common ancestor than others. I take that to mean a range from just prior to immigration from England in the 17th century to a more distant common ancestor at an earlier time. The final results should indicate that time period and hopefully help us to determine who these individuals had been. What does this all mean? It's hard to say before the analysis is complete, but it at least tells us that we are in for several surprises! My last question was how long we'd have to sit on these pins and needles waiting for the final results. She thought another week should do it, but stressed that their goal is to provide us with the best analysis possible, so we should only use that as an estimate. It could be a bit sooner or a bit later. I thought you might want to hear these details as sketchy as they are at this point. It was enough to get me excited though! Regards, Patrick