To everyone Thank you so much for your responses. You have been very helpful. And yes, to Forrest, Quaker genealogy is addictive. Also, I have heard from many Cousins here today and that is nice. Looks like many of us are related. Linda

Excellent, Forrest Thank you! Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: Forrest Plumstead To: Linda Peacock Cc: QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they have to be members? Hi Linda welcome to the group! If genealogy is addicting then Quaker genealogy is an epidemic! To answer your question Gwen Bjorkman writes in the introduction to her book Quaker Marriage Certificates - Pasquotank, Perquimans, Piney Woods, and Suttons Creek Monthly Meetings, North Carolina, 1677-1800 "Not all of the subscribing witnesses were North Carolinians (many Virginians may be noted) nor were they all Quakers. The name of Paul Palmer, the first Baptist minister in North Carolina. appears in Perquimans along with Government officials (and Anglicans) Thomas Harvey, Thomas Harding, Henry Clayton, and Richard Everard (It can not be determined whether the last was Governor Everard or his son.) Attendance by such public figures may have been merely a neighborly act, but their presence may have imparted a sanction to Quaker marriages which were (until 1778) often regarded as irregular if not illicit." Hope this helps On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Linda Peacock <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> wrote: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- 73 WB5HQO Forrest Ham Radio WB5HQO http://forrest.3h.com/main.html Plumstead and Associated Families: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fplum/ NAQCC Member # 3678 FPQRP # 2642 SKCC Member # 6855 QRPadillo # 59

That is very interesting, Tom Thank you! Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: Thomas Hamm To: Dott114029@aol.com Cc: lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk ; QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 10:24 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they ... Stewart Baldwin, who occasionally contributes to this list, wrote an interesting article on this a few years back. He found that it was the practice in some Pennsylvania monthly meetings that relatives of the bride and groom signed in the column below the bride's and groom's signatures. But it was not uniform. For example, at New Garden, North Carolina, only the names of twelve witnesses to the marriage were recorded. I have seen some marriage certificates with only two columns of witness signatures. And I've seen a number with three columns with men and women intermixed. Anyone could attend a Friends meeting for worship. Normally weddings took place at the conclusion of a midweek meeting for worship. (Thus you can assume that your Quaker ancestor probably was married on a Wednesday or Thursday.) So witnesses did not have to be members. Tom Hamm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Dott114029@aol.com To: lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk, QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 3:49:56 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they ... In my research on the marriage documents of Quakers, there were three columns of lists of names. The first column was for male guests to sign. The middle column was for women guests to sign. The third column on the right was for the family to sign, the bride and groom usually being first, then the grooms parents, brides parents and son on down that column. I could be wrong and I'm sure you will get more information from more historians, but that's how I understood it to be. I have a little information on Samuel Woolman who died in 1750 if you want it. Dottie In a message dated 1/17/2012 11:54:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk writes: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thank you Dottie. Yes, I would like information about Samuel Woolman. I descend from John Woolman and Elizabeth Borton. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: Dott114029@aol.com To: lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk ; QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 9:49 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they ... In my research on the marriage documents of Quakers, there were three columns of lists of names. The first column was for male guests to sign. The middle column was for women guests to sign. The third column on the right was for the family to sign, the bride and groom usually being first, then the grooms parents, brides parents and son on down that column. I could be wrong and I'm sure you will get more information from more historians, but that's how I understood it to be. I have a little information on Samuel Woolman who died in 1750 if you want it. Dottie In a message dated 1/17/2012 11:54:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk writes: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock

The practice of saving a space under the bride and groom's signatures applied in almost modern times.  My brother married in 1949 under the care of Germantown MM (Coulter Street, Orthodox). Tthe certificate was beatifully lettered by our father, a civil engineer who was a draftsman early in his career.  I recall signing in that honored spot.   Eleanor From: Thomas Hamm <tomh@earlham.edu> To: Dott114029@aol.com Cc: QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 4:24 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they ... Stewart Baldwin, who occasionally contributes to this list, wrote an interesting article on this a few years back. He found that it was the practice in some Pennsylvania monthly meetings that relatives of the bride and groom signed in the column below the bride's and groom's signatures. But it was not uniform. For example, at New Garden, North Carolina, only the names of twelve witnesses to the marriage were recorded. I have seen some marriage certificates with only two columns of witness signatures. And I've seen a number with three columns with men and women intermixed. Anyone could attend a Friends meeting for worship. Normally weddings took place at the conclusion of a midweek meeting for worship. (Thus you can assume that your Quaker ancestor probably was married on a Wednesday or Thursday.) So witnesses did not have to be members. Tom Hamm ----- Original Message ----- From: Dott114029@aol.com To: lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk, QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 3:49:56 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they ... In my research on the marriage documents of Quakers, there were three columns of lists of names. The first column was for male guests to sign. The middle column was for women guests to sign. The third column on the right was for the family to sign, the bride and groom usually being first, then the grooms parents, brides parents and son on down that column. I could be wrong and I'm sure you will get more information from more historians, but that's how I understood it to be. I have a little information on Samuel Woolman who died in 1750 if you want it. Dottie In a message dated 1/17/2012 11:54:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk writes: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Stewart Baldwin, who occasionally contributes to this list, wrote an interesting article on this a few years back. He found that it was the practice in some Pennsylvania monthly meetings that relatives of the bride and groom signed in the column below the bride's and groom's signatures. But it was not uniform. For example, at New Garden, North Carolina, only the names of twelve witnesses to the marriage were recorded. I have seen some marriage certificates with only two columns of witness signatures. And I've seen a number with three columns with men and women intermixed. Anyone could attend a Friends meeting for worship. Normally weddings took place at the conclusion of a midweek meeting for worship. (Thus you can assume that your Quaker ancestor probably was married on a Wednesday or Thursday.) So witnesses did not have to be members. Tom Hamm ----- Original Message ----- From: Dott114029@aol.com To: lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk, QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 3:49:56 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they ... In my research on the marriage documents of Quakers, there were three columns of lists of names. The first column was for male guests to sign. The middle column was for women guests to sign. The third column on the right was for the family to sign, the bride and groom usually being first, then the grooms parents, brides parents and son on down that column. I could be wrong and I'm sure you will get more information from more historians, but that's how I understood it to be. I have a little information on Samuel Woolman who died in 1750 if you want it. Dottie In a message dated 1/17/2012 11:54:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk writes: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In my research on the marriage documents of Quakers, there were three columns of lists of names. The first column was for male guests to sign. The middle column was for women guests to sign. The third column on the right was for the family to sign, the bride and groom usually being first, then the grooms parents, brides parents and son on down that column. I could be wrong and I'm sure you will get more information from more historians, but that's how I understood it to be. I have a little information on Samuel Woolman who died in 1750 if you want it. Dottie In a message dated 1/17/2012 11:54:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk writes: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Linda welcome to the group! If genealogy is addicting then Quaker genealogy is an epidemic! To answer your question Gwen Bjorkman writes in the introduction to her book *Quaker Marriage Certificates - Pasquotank, Perquimans, Piney Woods, and Suttons Creek Monthly Meetings, North Carolina, 1677-1800* "Not all of the subscribing witnesses were North Carolinians (many Virginians may be noted) nor were they all Quakers. The name of Paul Palmer, the first Baptist minister in North Carolina. appears in Perquimans along with Government officials (and Anglicans) Thomas Harvey, Thomas Harding, Henry Clayton, and Richard Everard (It can not be determined whether the last was Governor Everard or his son.) Attendance by such public figures may have been merely a neighborly act, but their presence may have imparted a sanction to Quaker marriages which were (until 1778) often regarded as irregular if not illicit." Hope this helps On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Linda Peacock < lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> wrote: > Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be > members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. > > Linda > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> > To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM > Subject: [Q-R] Friends´ marriage witnesses in 1700´s American Colonies - > did > they have to be members? > > > I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were > the witnesses of Friends´ marriages in the 1700´s in the American Colonies > also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be > members, or join if not a prior member. But let´s say one of the partners > converted to the Friends´ faith. Could that person´s Father or Mother be a > witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? > > Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are > pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, > Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my > paternal grandfather´s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). > My > grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a > Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much > more about the family if anyone is interested in that. > > Yours truly, > Linda Peacock > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- 73 WB5HQO Forrest Ham Radio WB5HQO http://forrest.3h.com/main.html Plumstead and Associated Families: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fplum/ NAQCC Member # 3678 FPQRP # 2642 SKCC Member # 6855 QRPadillo # 59

The Rachel Powell who was a member at Westland appears to have been the daughter of Joseph & Elizabeth Brown. The Browns transferred their membership to Hopewell MM in 1781 (Hopewell Friends History, p. 417). During the early 1780s, the membership of Friends settled at Westland was kept at Hopewell. When Westland became a monthly meeting in 1785, the Browns were among the original members.   Soon thereafter, however, the Brown children began to lose their membership, mainly for disorderly marriage. Their eldest daughter Ann apologized for her disorderly marriage in 1786, but Rachel lost her membership in 1787, Isaiah in 1795, Samuel in 1794, Leah in 1791, and Joseph in 1792. This information comes from the records of Westland MM in the _Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genalogy_, vol. 4, Ann Arbor MI: Wm Wade Hinshaw, 1946), pp. 22-23.   Seth ________________________________ From: FredandMaryFrances Powell <fredandmaryfran@gmail.com> To: QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 9:36 AM Subject: [Q-R] Westland MM Washington County, PA I am trying to find an online source of the Westland MM records of Washington Co., PA. The earliest records available are of interest. Of special interest is Rachel POWEL/POWELL who left Sadsbury, Chester Co., PA about 1786 to attend the Westland MM. Any POWEL/POWELL before 1800 is also of interest. How would I properly cite this source of Quaker records? TIA Mary Fran ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I am trying to find an online source of the Westland MM records of Washington Co., PA. The earliest records available are of interest. Of special interest is Rachel POWEL/POWELL who left Sadsbury, Chester Co., PA about 1786 to attend the Westland MM. Any POWEL/POWELL before 1800 is also of interest. How would I properly cite this source of Quaker records? TIA Mary Fran

Hi, Need Jacob's parents.  Jacob Horn & Margaret J Taylor m 10/6/1850 Randolph County, Indiana, per index on Indiana State Library site - Marriages through 1850. In the 1850 US Census, Jacob (age 26, b NC) & Margaret (age 23, b NC) are listed in Greensfork Township, Randolph County, Indiana.  Also listed are Miriam Horn, age 49, b NC, Mariam Horn, age 18, b NC, and Jeremiah Horn, age 17, b Ind. Jacob & Margaret's son, Arthur Daniel Horn, m Iona W. Fulghum 10/23/1880, Randolph County . Jacob, Margaret, Arthur & Iona are buried in Arba Cemetery. Thanks in advance for any information, help. Susan

Message: 1 Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 13:59:20 -0800 From: Mary Ferm <mmferm@gmail.com> "About 1829 received from Sarah Smith a request that her four minor children (viz) Zimrhoda (age 8), Sarah Jane (age 6), Chloe (age 4) and William B. (age 2) should be taken under the care of friends David W. Baker and Stephan Aldrich in company with women. Friends are appointed to take the necessary case... And report." (before 2nd mo 11 D, 1829) "The committee in Sarah Smiths case report they have attended to their appointment and propose that her four minor children be taken under the care of Friends which is united with by the meeting". What is almost certainly happening here is that the four children are being received as MEMBERS. There is no guardianship issue involved. If both parents were Friends, then their children were considered birthright members. If one parent was not a Friend at the time of a child's birth, then that child (and any other children born in the same circumstances) was not automatically considered a member. They could become a member if one or both parents requested it if the meeting was sure that the children were being raised as Friends. In this circumstances as it is only Sarah Smith who is requesting, I suspect that she is a member but her husband is not. Chris Densmore

> Friends of Bush River Quakers, Newberry SC, reach 10th Year! > > It is hard to believe that it was 10 years ago on Martin Luther King, Jr., > National Day of Service, January 21, 2002, that our "Friends of the Bush > River Quaker Cemetery" met in Newberry, South Carolina for our First Bush > River Quaker Cemetery Clean Up Day. We were fed and kept warm by our > local friends from the Newberry Genealogical Society and the Newberry > Historic Society. What great day that was, even though we all had to make > trips to Walmart for rain gear! And what a thrill it was for me to meet > personally so many people that I had only talked to through email. I > especially remember Ron Edmundson's enthusiasm and still miss his constant > stream of great ideas. On that weekend we all, working together, managed > to make the one acre cemetery more accessible than it had been in many > years. > > Since 2002 our group has been together several more times in Newberry. We > all became amateur archeologists for the 2005 Cemetery Survey Day. We > had a wonderful Homecoming Weekend in 2008 and another informal gathering > in 2010. Many of you have reported you've visited the Cemetery on your > individual research trips, too. > > Even though we live all over the country, we can now keep in touch with > the entire group of friends and researchers through our rootsweb > sc-bushriverquakers list. We all have made good friends and research > sources among our subscribers. I think that our rootsweb group must be the > most informative and helpful of all the 1000s available! And coming soon, > thanks to Forrest Plumstead, we will have a full fledged web site devoted > to our families and research reports. > > The "Historic Bush River Quaker Cemetery" book, published to report the > findings of Survey Day, was our first and only fundraiser through the > years. It completely sold out through several printings and can be found > in more than 50 Quaker Research and genealogical collections throughout > the country. Other than the income from book sales, we rely solely on > donations from groups and individuals. The continued support of the > North Carolina Yearly Meeting, the Palmetto Meeting, and the Valentine > Hollingsworth, Sr., Society have been very important to us through the > years. Many individuals, too, have pledged a yearly amount to help out. > It costs our group about $800 a year for regular monthly maintenance. We > have to keep a fund in reserve, too, for emergencies like the storm that > felled 7 large trees several years ago. > > We now have a committee involved in the oversight of Cemetery Care. But > we always welcome everyone's input, especially since most of us live some > distance from Newberry. If you visit the Cemetery and you see something > that needs attention, please let us know. Our contact information is on > the maps in the recently installed information box. > > For me, personally, my involvement in this group has been the most > satisfying experience I could imagine. I hope that for you, too, the > friendship and resource sharing among our members has made your research > into the Quaker families of Newberry a special part of your life. > > We need the help, input, and resources of each and every one of you for > our continued success in achieving the goal of having the Cemetery > accessible every day of the year. What are your thoughts for the future of > our project? Let us hear from you! > > And thank you, again, for everything you all have done for this project! > > Judy Russell > 1051 Forrest Hills Drive > Bogart, GA 30622 > > Please feel free to forward this newsletter to others who might be > interested. It is also available online at: > http://askgrannyus.posterous.com/newsletter-friends-of-bush-river-10th-anniver

Hi, I have encountered a situation in which a wife who was a member of the Society of Friends requested guardians for her minor children, while her husband was still living. This was at the Farmington, NY, meeting: (words in parentheses are mine) "About 1829 received from Sarah Smith a request that her four minor children (viz) Zimrhoda (age 8), Sarah Jane (age 6), Chloe (age 4) and William B. (age 2) should be taken under the care of friends David W. Baker and Stephan Aldrich in company with women. Friends are appointed to take the necessary case... And report." (before 2nd mo 11 D, 1829) "The committee in Sarah Smiths case report they have attended to their appointment and propose that her four minor children be taken under the care of Friends which is united with by the meeting". (Sarah and William were married about 1803. Why did Sarah feel her children needed a guardian? What was happening with her husband William? Age 2 seems a little young to be apprenticed. The older children mentioned were girls.) 1830 William Smith was received on request. (Was this the same William Smith? Sarah's husband often went by "William P. Smith".) In 1838: "Wm P Smith & family. To Adrian (Michigan) Monthly Meeting of friends. Wm P. Smith and Sarah his wife have removed with their minor children William and Sarah J. and settled in the limits of your meeting. This may certify that they are members of our religious society and that with our exception their temporal affairs are settled." (So Sarah's husband was definitely a member by then. It looks like two of the girls mentioned in 1829 stayed in NY, possibly with older siblings.) The Farmington meeting had started out in a somewhat unusual way: 1789-90 – Pioneer Friends settled in Farmington, Ontario County, coming from Adams, Massachusetts. They left their ‘home’ meeting without due form, and so, were ‘disowned.’ 1794 – Pennsylvania Friends arrived in Western New York to oversee the Canandaigua Treaty process between the Senecas and the United States. They found that the Farmington Quakers were holding meetings in good order and recommended that they be brought ‘under the care’ of an established Friends meeting. Easton Meeting, in Saratoga County, accepted Farmington Meeting as a ‘preparative meeting.’ 1803 – Farmington Meeting became a Monthly Meeting, consisting of three large preparative meetings at Farmington, Macedon and Palmyra. There is at least one account in a local history that indicates that some of the original settlers took a while to return to the meeting after having been disowned. Could this have been William's situation? He was born about 1781, so would have been about age 13 when the Farmington Meeting was accepted as a preparative meeting. Would this guardianship have meant that the children actually lived with the guardians? Or would this have been for a more limited amount of time, for example for religious instruction? Could William have decided to become a member so that he could retain custody of this children? Could this have to do with the Hicksite split (1828)? I have not found William and Sarah's marriage record, and I don't know their parents. Yet. Thanks for any ideas. Mary

Thank you everyone who has contributed so well to my questions. The minute I heard it was James M. Haworth, I knew who he was, as I researched his lineage back to George & Sarah (Scarborough) Haworth a few years ago in connection with a query to the Haworth Assn. of America. I remember now that we did have a mention of him at one of our national reunions. Lots of reading to follow up on, thank you all again. Marilyn Winton Totten From: whaworth@cox.net To: skyloran@hotmail.com; mlwinton@hotmail.com CC: bilwalsh@swbell.net; quaker-roots@rootsweb.com; haworth@msn.com; rclondon@att.net; trsw@aol.com; edwinton68@hotmail.com Subject: RE: [Q-R] John P. Miles, Indian Agent Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 22:29:08 -0600 Just did a 10-minute search on (“agent haworth”) and (“agent Haworth” indian + quaker).Here are some of the many results: o The life and adventures of a Quaker among the Indians, By Thomas C. Battey, page 141 o http://www.populationme.com/All/History/BuffaloWarsHaley.pdf (63 references to agent Haworth, pg. 13 says many Quakers opposed his assignment as indian agent since he had raised a company of volunteers to fight in the Civil War.) o http://digital.library.okstate.edu/Chronicles/v010/v010p204.html o http://genforum.genealogy.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?forum=haworth&url=%2Fhaworth%2F&path=%2Fhaworth%2F&terms=agent&boolean=AND o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_K._Sanderson o http://rebelcherokee.labdiva.com/isatai.html o http://www.ausbcomp.com/~bbott/cowley/Oldnews/FLYERS/TRIBES.HTM o http://www.hennessey.lib.ok.us/milesltr2.htm o http://php.indiana.edu/~tkavanag/comtext.htm o http://amertribes.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=comanche&action=display&thread=613 o http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/19thcentury/articles/redriverwar.aspx o http://rebelcherokee.labdiva.com/kiowacalndr.html o http://www.archive.org/stream/annualreportindian00unitrich/annualreportindian00unitrich_djvu.txt o http://cncsoc3.blogspot.com/2010/08/assignment-11.html o http://www.nevadaoutdoorschool.org/InterpretiveKits/PLPT/PLPTOldWinnemucca.pdf -Wendell From: Loran Haworth [mailto:skyloran@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 7:55 PM To: Marilyn Winton Totten Cc: <bilwalsh@swbell.net>; <quaker-roots@rootsweb.com>; Ron Haworth; Richard London; Richard Winton; Edward; Wendell Haworth Subject: Re: [Q-R] John P. Miles, Indian Agent Hi Marilyn, I read this with interest. I remember reading about an agent Haworth at one of reunions or perhaps as part of a reunion presentation for what it worth. I wonder if this could be the same person. Cheers Loran Sent from my iPad On Jan 9, 2012, at 5:16 PM, Marilyn Winton Totten <mlwinton@hotmail.com> wrote: What is just as interesting to me, is the mention of "Agent Haworth". I would bet that he is also a Quaker. Haworth was my mother's maiden name, and my grandfather Haworth (b. Indiana 1880) was a birthright Friend. I know that many of the Indian Agents were Quakers. I will now try to do some research on this "Agent Haworth" and notify other members of the Haworth Association of America. An interesting account Billie, thanks for posting it. Marilyn Winton Totten > Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 15:23:51 -0600 > From: bilwalsh@swbell.net > To: quaker-roots@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Q-R] John P. Miles > > There's nothing in that article that I could argue with. In the late > 1800's Indian Territory was a major hideout for all sorts of bad guys. > I can believe that Pat Hennessy could have been killed by white men > parading as Indians. > > My primary reason for posting was that Mr. Miles was a quaker and might > be of interest to someone. > > On 01/09/2012 02:34 PM, Kimberly Spangrude wrote: > > There is more to this story than meets the eye. I don't pretend to know all the details, but the entire account was disputed. Here is an article called Dueling Historians that addresses the issue: > > http://www.hennessey.lib.ok.us/whokilled.htm > > Kim Spangrude > > On Jan 9, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Billie Walsh wrote: > > > >> I thought someone might be interested in this: > >> > >> > >> > >> The State Journal., July 10, 1874 > >> (Jefferson City, Mo.) 1872-1886 > >> > >> Hon. E. P. Smith, Commissioner. Washington: > >> I have just arrived from the Cheyenne and Arapahoe agency, on the > >> north fork of Indian river. Hostile Cheyennes, Comanches and Kiowas made > >> their appearance in the vicinity of the agency on the second inst. On > >> same day they killed and scalped Wm. Watkins, thirty miles north of the > >> agency. Five war parties seemed to be moving in the direction of the > >> trail from the agency to Caldwell, Kansas. > >> I at once dispatched a courier to Fort Sill, for troops, to protect > >> the agency, which were temporarily granted. On the morning of the fifth > >> we mustered a small party of employees to escort me through to Caldwell. > >> Hostile Indians had been seen at Kingfisher’s ranche proceeding > >> north. We took all the men and stock to Lee& Reynolds’ ranche, on > >> Turkey creek, and on the 2d inst. the Indians attacked this ranche, but > >> were repulsed, getting only some horses. > >> Four miles north of Barker’s ranche we found four men, Pat. > >> Hennessy, Geo. Fund, Thos. Callaway, and one unknown lying in the road > >> murdered. They had their wagons loaded with coffee and sugar for Agent > >> Haworth, all of which was destroyed or taken away. All the men were > >> scalped. Hennessy had been tied to his wagon and burned. The fire was > >> still burning. > >> We gave them a hasty burial and proceeded to the next ranche. Here > >> we found teamsters, stages, etc., concentrated. They reported a war > >> party of about one hundred having passed north and east that morning; > >> the ranche men had kept them off. We took a child from this place and > >> gave the men all the ammunition we had to spare. > >> The next ranche we reached after dark. The Indians had gone into > >> camp four miles east on Skeleton creek. I advised all ranche men and > >> freight men to abandon their places, which they did, and by making good > >> use of the night, we reached Caldwell yesterday. > >> We found Laflin’s ox train at Pond creek, twenty-five miles south of > >> Caldwell, and fear this train, loaded with subsistence for the three > >> agencies, will be captured, as we saw hostile Indians In that vicinity, > >> and the party had only three guns. > >> My chief clerk is in command of the party. There are now but two > >> ranches occupied on this road, and we fear their fate before help can > >> reach them. > >> I have no doubt the Indians will clean everything until they are > >> repulsed. This is their proclamation. > >> I have offered my own life in passing through their lines to save > >> others, and I now ask and expect to recruit two or three companies of > >> cavalry, and to be stationed at Baker's ranche, to protect the > >> government interests on this road and the agency. > >> These troops should be transported as quickly as possible to Wichita > >> by rail. No hostile Indians shall be quartered at the agency, and I must > >> have troops to back it up. > >> Let the hostile element be struck, and with such power as shall make > >> the work final and effectual. > >> I now go to Leavenworth, awaiting instructions, and ready to go with > >> Gen. Pope. Signed John P. Miles, Indian Agent." > >> Mr. Miles is a Quaker, and considered by the interior department to > >> be a cool and thoroughly reliable agent. His request for troops has been > >> endorsed and recommended for immediate attention by the military > >> authorities at the war department. > >> The hostile Indians referred to are estimated to number two thousand, > >> comprising about one-fourth of the Cheyenne, Kiowa and Arapahoe tribes. > >> > >> -- > >> “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain > >> the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the > >> government lest it come to dominate our lives and interests”. > >> > >> - Patrick Henry - > >> > >> > >> _ _... ..._ _ > >> _._ ._ ..... ._.. ... .._ > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > > -- > “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain > the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the > government lest it come to dominate our lives and interests”. > > - Patrick Henry - > > > _ _... ..._ _ > _._ ._ ..... ._.. ... .._ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The posting, shown below, was made by Tom McDavitt, January 18, 2004, on the Haworth Family Genealogy Forum. Tom has briefed the family at several of our national reunion.. The name of James Mahlon Haworth has surfaced often, in our family history. Ron Haworth www.haworthassociation.org JAMES Mahlon HAWORTH was born in Clinton County, Ohio, November 19, 1831. Is a member by birthright of the Society of Friends (Quakers). He is decended from James Haworth, England, through George (the emigrant), James , George H., Mahlon and George Dillion Haworth (his father). Previous to the war, was engaged in farming and merchandising. Was for many years connected with the Clinton County Agricultural Society, filling the position of president in 1861. Was elected County Treasurer in 1856, and re-elected in 1858, holding the office four years and three months, his term closing in September, 1861, when he recruited a company of which he was elected Captain, and going to Camp Chase was assigned to the Fortieth Ohio Infantry, which regiment was ordered to Eastern Kentucky, and became a part of a brigade under command of General James A. Garfield on whose staff he served as A.A.A. General, until the General was ordered to another part of the country. He resigned his captaincy on February 7, 1863 on account of increasing infirmities and returned to his home for restoration. In 1865, he removed to Cincinnati and engaged in the wholesale drygoods business, until 1870, when broken health, requiring a change of climate, he removed to Olathe, Kas., from where, in the fall of 1872, he was appointed United States Indian Agent and placed in charge of the Kiowa and Comanche Indians, near Fort Sill, Indian Territory, remaining there until April 1878. He was one of a commission for locating the Sioux, in the summer of 1878, soon after which he was appointed a special Indian Agent at large, and on February, 1879, was appointed United States Indian Inspector, which position he held until July, 1882, when he was appointed Inspector of Indian Schools, an office created by the session of Congress which had just closed, the duties being of a supervising care of all the Indian schools in the United States, excepting the five nations in the Indian Territory. [NOTE: J.M. Haworth was the first superintendent of All Indian Schools] THE GRAVE JAMES M. HAWORTH.--Superintendent of Indian Schools, died suddenly in Albuquerque, New Mexico, March 12th, 1885, in his 53rd year. Funeral services were held at the M. E. Church, Olathe, Kansas, March 16, at 1 o'clock P.M., under the direction of the I.O.O.F. and A.F. & A.M., and were largely attended. The deceased was one of the most highly esteemed men in Johnson county, and his sudden taking off is mourned by all. J.M. Haworth is my GG grandfather. ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.0.0.888, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.19020) http://www.pctools.com/ =======

Took me a while to remember where I read this: Darlington -- named for Brinton Darlington who was sent to the site in 1869 to establish an agency for the Cheyenne and Arapahos. A Quaker, he was much loved by the Indians but was unequal in physical strength for the strenuous task and died in 1872. His body lies in the Indian cemetery one mile south of Concho. Mr Hayworth was sent as his replacement as I recall from somewhere. -- “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government lest it come to dominate our lives and interests”. - Patrick Henry - _ _... ..._ _ _._ ._ ..... ._.. ... .._

Just did a 10-minute search on (“agent haworth”) and (“agent Haworth” indian + quaker).Here are some of the many results: o The life and adventures of a Quaker among the Indians, By Thomas C. Battey, page 141 o http://www.populationme.com/All/History/BuffaloWarsHaley.pdf (63 references to agent Haworth, pg. 13 says many Quakers opposed his assignment as indian agent since he had raised a company of volunteers to fight in the Civil War.) o http://digital.library.okstate.edu/Chronicles/v010/v010p204.html o http://genforum.genealogy.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?forum=haworth <http://genforum.genealogy.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?forum=haworth&url=%2Fhaworth%2F&path=%2Fhaworth%2F&terms=agent&boolean=AND> &url=%2Fhaworth%2F&path=%2Fhaworth%2F&terms=agent&boolean=AND o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_K._Sanderson o http://rebelcherokee.labdiva.com/isatai.html o http://www.ausbcomp.com/~bbott/cowley/Oldnews/FLYERS/TRIBES.HTM o http://www.hennessey.lib.ok.us/milesltr2.htm o http://php.indiana.edu/~tkavanag/comtext.htm o http://amertribes.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=comanche <http://amertribes.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=comanche&action=display&thread=613> &action=display&thread=613 o http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/19thcentury/articles/redriverwar.aspx o http://rebelcherokee.labdiva.com/kiowacalndr.html o http://www.archive.org/stream/annualreportindian00unitrich/annualreportindian00unitrich_djvu.txt o http://cncsoc3.blogspot.com/2010/08/assignment-11.html o http://www.nevadaoutdoorschool.org/InterpretiveKits/PLPT/PLPTOldWinnemucca.pdf -Wendell From: Loran Haworth [mailto:skyloran@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 7:55 PM To: Marilyn Winton Totten Cc: <bilwalsh@swbell.net>; <quaker-roots@rootsweb.com>; Ron Haworth; Richard London; Richard Winton; Edward; Wendell Haworth Subject: Re: [Q-R] John P. Miles, Indian Agent Hi Marilyn, I read this with interest. I remember reading about an agent Haworth at one of reunions or perhaps as part of a reunion presentation for what it worth. I wonder if this could be the same person. Cheers Loran Sent from my iPad On Jan 9, 2012, at 5:16 PM, Marilyn Winton Totten <mlwinton@hotmail.com> wrote: What is just as interesting to me, is the mention of "Agent Haworth". I would bet that he is also a Quaker. Haworth was my mother's maiden name, and my grandfather Haworth (b. Indiana 1880) was a birthright Friend. I know that many of the Indian Agents were Quakers. I will now try to do some research on this "Agent Haworth" and notify other members of the Haworth Association of America. An interesting account Billie, thanks for posting it. Marilyn Winton Totten > Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 15:23:51 -0600 > From: bilwalsh@swbell.net > To: quaker-roots@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Q-R] John P. Miles > > There's nothing in that article that I could argue with. In the late > 1800's Indian Territory was a major hideout for all sorts of bad guys. > I can believe that Pat Hennessy could have been killed by white men > parading as Indians. > > My primary reason for posting was that Mr. Miles was a quaker and might > be of interest to someone. > > On 01/09/2012 02:34 PM, Kimberly Spangrude wrote: > > There is more to this story than meets the eye. I don't pretend to know all the details, but the entire account was disputed. Here is an article called Dueling Historians that addresses the issue: > > http://www.hennessey.lib.ok.us/whokilled.htm > > Kim Spangrude > > On Jan 9, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Billie Walsh wrote: > > > >> I thought someone might be interested in this: > >> > >> > >> > >> The State Journal., July 10, 1874 > >> (Jefferson City, Mo.) 1872-1886 > >> > >> Hon. E. P. Smith, Commissioner. Washington: > >> I have just arrived from the Cheyenne and Arapahoe agency, on the > >> north fork of Indian river. Hostile Cheyennes, Comanches and Kiowas made > >> their appearance in the vicinity of the agency on the second inst. On > >> same day they killed and scalped Wm. Watkins, thirty miles north of the > >> agency. Five war parties seemed to be moving in the direction of the > >> trail from the agency to Caldwell, Kansas. > >> I at once dispatched a courier to Fort Sill, for troops, to protect > >> the agency, which were temporarily granted. On the morning of the fifth > >> we mustered a small party of employees to escort me through to Caldwell. > >> Hostile Indians had been seen at Kingfisher’s ranche proceeding > >> north. We took all the men and stock to Lee& Reynolds’ ranche, on > >> Turkey creek, and on the 2d inst. the Indians attacked this ranche, but > >> were repulsed, getting only some horses. > >> Four miles north of Barker’s ranche we found four men, Pat. > >> Hennessy, Geo. Fund, Thos. Callaway, and one unknown lying in the road > >> murdered. They had their wagons loaded with coffee and sugar for Agent > >> Haworth, all of which was destroyed or taken away. All the men were > >> scalped. Hennessy had been tied to his wagon and burned. The fire was > >> still burning. > >> We gave them a hasty burial and proceeded to the next ranche. Here > >> we found teamsters, stages, etc., concentrated. They reported a war > >> party of about one hundred having passed north and east that morning; > >> the ranche men had kept them off. We took a child from this place and > >> gave the men all the ammunition we had to spare. > >> The next ranche we reached after dark. The Indians had gone into > >> camp four miles east on Skeleton creek. I advised all ranche men and > >> freight men to abandon their places, which they did, and by making good > >> use of the night, we reached Caldwell yesterday. > >> We found Laflin’s ox train at Pond creek, twenty-five miles south of > >> Caldwell, and fear this train, loaded with subsistence for the three > >> agencies, will be captured, as we saw hostile Indians In that vicinity, > >> and the party had only three guns. > >> My chief clerk is in command of the party. There are now but two > >> ranches occupied on this road, and we fear their fate before help can > >> reach them. > >> I have no doubt the Indians will clean everything until they are > >> repulsed. This is their proclamation. > >> I have offered my own life in passing through their lines to save > >> others, and I now ask and expect to recruit two or three companies of > >> cavalry, and to be stationed at Baker's ranche, to protect the > >> government interests on this road and the agency. > >> These troops should be transported as quickly as possible to Wichita > >> by rail. No hostile Indians shall be quartered at the agency, and I must > >> have troops to back it up. > >> Let the hostile element be struck, and with such power as shall make > >> the work final and effectual. > >> I now go to Leavenworth, awaiting instructions, and ready to go with > >> Gen. Pope. Signed John P. Miles, Indian Agent." > >> Mr. Miles is a Quaker, and considered by the interior department to > >> be a cool and thoroughly reliable agent. His request for troops has been > >> endorsed and recommended for immediate attention by the military > >> authorities at the war department. > >> The hostile Indians referred to are estimated to number two thousand, > >> comprising about one-fourth of the Cheyenne, Kiowa and Arapahoe tribes. > >> > >> -- > >> “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain > >> the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the > >> government lest it come to dominate our lives and interests”. > >> > >> - Patrick Henry - > >> > >> > >> _ _... ..._ _ > >> _._ ._ ..... ._.. ... .._ > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > > -- > “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain > the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the > government lest it come to dominate our lives and interests”. > > - Patrick Henry - > > > _ _... ..._ _ > _._ ._ ..... ._.. ... .._ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message