Jayne, I have Ellis's and it won't cost you for me to take a look. Boops ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 3:21 PM Subject: [RIGENWEB] Researcher in RI > Dear List: > > Does anyone know of a good researcher in RI who doesn't charge exorbitant > fees? I have hired researchers several times; some charge too much, > others are > reasonable. I would want a researcher to start in Coventry. I am not sure > where else I might want him/her to look for my ELLISes. > > Thanks. > > Jayne > [email protected] > > > > ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL > at > http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear List: Does anyone know of a good researcher in RI who doesn't charge exorbitant fees? I have hired researchers several times; some charge too much, others are reasonable. I would want a researcher to start in Coventry. I am not sure where else I might want him/her to look for my ELLISes. Thanks. Jayne [email protected] ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

Hi Jane I believe that if enough subscribers to these lists, ask for the Press to do this, it might not only be helpful to us, who can no longer get to these places, but also put some dollars into the library coffers. Each and every library is looking for ways to increase funding. I wouldn't mind contributing to the local level, but refuse to have anything to do with Ancestry or similar paid for view sites. NEHGS is another matter, and have always supported them. As with many members of the RIGENWEB, we are not able to get hands on, anymore. When I was younger, I would drive down and get originals. Now that it isn't possible, or at least not feasible, I would love to be able to access those records, whether on line or on CD. Picton needs to make a profit to produce these volumes, and the library's need capital to support their work. In mine own estimation, they could do it either way, by subscription on line, or by CD. This is Bonnie in Canada new handle "Boops" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jane Fiske" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 2:33 PM Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] Primary Records > Bonnie, it might not be as impossible as it looks. Picton Press, owned by > Lewis Bunker Rohrbach, has digitized all Maine town records and published > CDs for each town. Mr. Rohrbach has indicated willingness to do the same > for RI, and there were negotiations in the works with West Greenwich some > time ago, but I don't know if anything came of it or not. The problem > with > RI is that each town has jurisdiction over its own records, so no one > organization, like the Maine Archives, can make the decision and grant > permission (it's done from microfilm). Picton would do it in return for > the > right to sell the CDs, and the town would get a copy of the CDs, rather > like > the Mormon microfilming except that they won't sell the film. I don't > think > Picton would ever go after this agressively, but it might help if some > people interested in the idea would do some lobbying in the right places - > the RI town clerks' offices. > Jane > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "bonnie" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 1:14 AM > Subject: [RIGENWEB] Primary Records > > >> >> On Aug 28, 2007, at 3:50 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >>> Guess we should visit the Town Halls if possible to verify each >>> entry. Makes you wonder what else might have been transcribed wrong. >>> Don Taylor >> >> Yes. Then there are those of us who are thousands of miles away from >> those Town Halls. My dream is when all these old volumes will be >> available online! Anyone know if there is any grand plan for that in >> Rhode Island? >> >> Bonnie, dreaming... >> in Oakland, California >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Bonnie, it might not be as impossible as it looks. Picton Press, owned by Lewis Bunker Rohrbach, has digitized all Maine town records and published CDs for each town. Mr. Rohrbach has indicated willingness to do the same for RI, and there were negotiations in the works with West Greenwich some time ago, but I don't know if anything came of it or not. The problem with RI is that each town has jurisdiction over its own records, so no one organization, like the Maine Archives, can make the decision and grant permission (it's done from microfilm). Picton would do it in return for the right to sell the CDs, and the town would get a copy of the CDs, rather like the Mormon microfilming except that they won't sell the film. I don't think Picton would ever go after this agressively, but it might help if some people interested in the idea would do some lobbying in the right places - the RI town clerks' offices. Jane ----- Original Message ----- From: "bonnie" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 1:14 AM Subject: [RIGENWEB] Primary Records > > On Aug 28, 2007, at 3:50 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >> Guess we should visit the Town Halls if possible to verify each >> entry. Makes you wonder what else might have been transcribed wrong. >> Don Taylor > > Yes. Then there are those of us who are thousands of miles away from > those Town Halls. My dream is when all these old volumes will be > available online! Anyone know if there is any grand plan for that in > Rhode Island? > > Bonnie, dreaming... > in Oakland, California > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

there seems a discrepancy regarding the first date mentioned, and his date of death, but the dates are reproduced as written in the book... from "Printers and Printing in Providence, 1762 - 1907" prepared by a committee of Providence Typographical Union #33 as a souvenir of the 50th anniversary of its institution printed in 1907 "The Journeymen" (part 6) pp. III - IV. "EDWARD T. ANGELL - This is his own story as told to a Journal reporter Sept. 3, 1906, the 40th anniversary of his beginning work on the paper: 'The 26th of next March I will be 67, and I have lived all the time in this State. I went to school in this city and in the country - to the Scituate Seminary, a boarding school. 'When I was 18 I started in to learn the printing trade, and began at the Journal job office on Washington row. After serving my time I went to Newport and then came back to this city and worked on the Post. Next I tried the New England Diadem, a weekly temperance paper. I set type in B.N. Sherman's office in Pawtucket, on the Morning Mirror in this city, the Kent County Atlas and the Providence Tribune. 'About the time I first began the trade, I joined the fire department, almost as soon as it was started. I used to run with the boys and stayed with them, until pay was received for services, when I left, as that was the time when I came on the Journal and I couldn't attend to it. 'The first piece of work the foreman at the Journal gave me was an article from the London Times. It was about the great race for the America's cup. (This was in 1852, when he subbed for a regular.) It was nearly a column in length and I got it all. In those days the man at the case set the entire article, big or little, just as it happened to run. If he needed assistance, when some of the other men were through with their work they would set some of the last end of the copy for him.' Sept. 3, 1896, the employee in the Journal composing room presented Ned with a large and handsomely decorated meeschaum pipe, with a yard or more of plug tobacco. Everybody gathered about the old man as he curiously looked around on the circle of his fellow workers. This speech was read by one of the men: 'In view of the fact that you have been employed on the Journal for a period of two score years, and to commemorate the occasion, your fellow employes [sic] have delegated me to present to you on their behalf this beautiful meerschaum pipe, with the hope that the only smoking you do will be done in this world. We also hope that you will be very careful of it, as the best medical authorities, including Drs. Rose and Eddy, say that 'hitting the pipe' is very injurious to the health. In conclusion, we with you many years of happiness.' Ned was initiated into Providence Union Dec. 9, 1891. He died June 26, 1902, in his 73d year. Interment was at the North Burial Ground." continued in part 7.

On Aug 28, 2007, at 3:50 PM, [email protected] wrote: > From: "Bonnie Weber" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] WADE-HAWKINS (not HOPKINS!) - a correction > Hi Don > > I don't know where Bonnie got the scan, I took it from a photocopy of the primary record which appeared in the book "Jonathan Wade of Ipswich, Massachusetts" by Doris P. Schultz (1989) I am not familiar with the primary record volumes at the local level in RI myself, Don, so am unable to answer your earlier question as to whether some records were omitted in transcription. Human error would seem to predict that such happens on occasion. It is simply always the best to consult the primary records. Most of us cannot, however. I would think local communities could scan their old volumes and offer them by subscription a la Ancestry.com -- but on their own, so that the local community reaps all the proceeds. I should think such a project would soon pay for itself. There are enough family history addicts out there who, like myself, would be all too glad to cough up a membership fee for such service. Sure would rather see local communities benefit instead of commercial enterprises like Ancestry, with which I have something of a love-hate relationship. > but it is right, and we were wrong. > This isn't a first, but there are not many who will dispute the > original > records that we have access to. > > As with your own line, sometimes, you just have to dig a little > deeper, and > that is what Bonnie did. I don't really deserve the credit here. Others have found the the original record before me -- but the important thing is, like you both are saying... getting to that primary record. Another record source that is often overlooked by us beginners is that of the land records. We tend to focus on birth-marriage-death and probate records, but land records can have such nuggets! They are often a good bit harder to read though. Another dream of mine is that each community would not only put all these land records online but also any old maps tied into the land records (when such maps exist). Seeing where your ancestor lived and who lived in the vicinity sometimes is extremely helpful in trying to trace no-name wives, etc. Well, one can dream..... Bonnie Oakland, California

On Aug 28, 2007, at 3:50 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Guess we should visit the Town Halls if possible to verify each > entry. Makes you wonder what else might have been transcribed wrong. > Don Taylor Yes. Then there are those of us who are thousands of miles away from those Town Halls. My dream is when all these old volumes will be available online! Anyone know if there is any grand plan for that in Rhode Island? Bonnie, dreaming... in Oakland, California

Bonnie in Canada. No, it's not so cute! You know how easily I get confused. My ADHD kicks in, you know. I think that we will have to come up with another tag for Bonnie in California. Maybe you could be Bonniecan and she could be Bonniecal. No, wait, I'm confused again. What's my name? Don T. Bonnie Weber <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Don I don't know where Bonnie got the scan, but it is right, and we were wrong. This isn't a first, but there are not many who will dispute the original records that we have access to. As with your own line, sometimes, you just have to dig a little deeper, and that is what Bonnie did. Sure wish I could travel like the old days, and visit the libraries again. Well, we have 2 Bonnie's on the list now. Bonnie in CA and Bonnie in CA One is Oakland, California and me, I am Oakville, Canada. Isn't that cute! Bonnie (CANADA) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Taylor" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:19 PM Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] WADE-HAWKINS (not HOPKINS!) - a correction > Bonnie and anyone else who can tell me. Was this "Old Book" Scituate RI > vol 1 used by Arnold in his Vital Records od Rhode Island? Or, might > there be enties NOT in Arnold's ? > As for the transcription error that you found, I know for a fact that > Arnold's does have some. My second great grandparents were William S. > Taylor and Amanda Leavens. Arnold's has her marrying William Sayles on the > same date. If I had not had a copy of the marriage record written by the > Elder who performed the marriage, I would have been in throuble on that > line. Guess we should visit the Town Halls if possible to verify each > entry. Makes you wonder what else might have been transcribed wrong. > Don Taylor > > bonnie wrote: > > Dear Group, and especially Bonnie W. and Todd H. who have been so > gracious in writing me off-list. > Gracious is the right word. You both believe my source erred in the > contention that it was Ruth HAWKINS, not HOPKINS who in 1731 > Scituate RI married Nathaniel WADE. I think you both wanted to spare > me some embarrassment and therefore wrote off-list. Thank you! And > thank you for your many helpful comments! The force of your > convictions almost made me change my tree ! > > In my most recent prior post I asked if anyone had access to the > "Old Book" Scituate RI Vol I and cited the page and an appendix. I > didn't realize at the time that the "Appendix No." did not have > anything to do with the original entry, but instead referred to a > photocopy of that record in an appendix in the Schultz volume on > the Wades which I now have before me. > > As this information is in conflict with a lot of established writing > (Arnold's VR and Early Hopkins Marriages ) on the subject, I thought > I should address this to the entire group. > > There is no doubt whatsoever that the original script quite clearly > has Nathaniel Wade's wife's name spelled with a 'w' and not a 'p' > There is no rounded form preceding the 'k' at all, no descending line > for a lower case 'p' -- instead there is a clearly formed 'w' which > matches the lower case 'w's elsewhere in the same hand. (It is true > that the name appears to be spelled more like "Howkins" than > "Hawkins.") As Hopkins is the same name as that of the Justice of > the Peace, Stephen Hopkins, who performed the marriage, and as a > Susanna Hopkins is in the very next marriage entry, these multiple > occurrances of the Hopkins name in close proximity lead me to believe > that Ruth HAWKINS' name was accidently transcribed incorrectly as > Hopkins in secondary sources. > > Ruth (HAWKINS) Wade herself was married secondly to Zebedee HOPKINS > in 1758, resulting in her appearing as "Ruth Hopkins" in her mother's > will. > > I may be able to make a scan of this entry, but I am not sure if the > quality of the image in the book, an old fashioned 2nd generation > photocopy, will be clear enough. If you would like to see what kind > of a scan I can produce, please let me know off list. [Bonnie and > Todd, you will be sent a copy, of course]. > > I invite anyone with access to the Vol I Scituate RI records to take > a look for yourselves. > > "Scituate June the 26th 1731---- > [illegible in image] Nathaniel Wade and Ruth Howkins both Refients of > this town of Scituate were Lawfully married to Each other by me-- > Stephen Hopkins, Justice P-- > "Recorded by me Jofeph Browne Town Clerk---" > [from "Old Book" Vol I:14 Scituate RI records] > > > > Bonnie > Oakland, California > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --------------------------------- > Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who > knows. > Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --------------------------------- Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.

Hi Don I don't know where Bonnie got the scan, but it is right, and we were wrong. This isn't a first, but there are not many who will dispute the original records that we have access to. As with your own line, sometimes, you just have to dig a little deeper, and that is what Bonnie did. Sure wish I could travel like the old days, and visit the libraries again. Well, we have 2 Bonnie's on the list now. Bonnie in CA and Bonnie in CA One is Oakland, California and me, I am Oakville, Canada. Isn't that cute! Bonnie (CANADA) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Taylor" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:19 PM Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] WADE-HAWKINS (not HOPKINS!) - a correction > Bonnie and anyone else who can tell me. Was this "Old Book" Scituate RI > vol 1 used by Arnold in his Vital Records od Rhode Island? Or, might > there be enties NOT in Arnold's ? > As for the transcription error that you found, I know for a fact that > Arnold's does have some. My second great grandparents were William S. > Taylor and Amanda Leavens. Arnold's has her marrying William Sayles on the > same date. If I had not had a copy of the marriage record written by the > Elder who performed the marriage, I would have been in throuble on that > line. Guess we should visit the Town Halls if possible to verify each > entry. Makes you wonder what else might have been transcribed wrong. > Don Taylor > > bonnie <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Group, and especially Bonnie W. and Todd H. who have been so > gracious in writing me off-list. > Gracious is the right word. You both believe my source erred in the > contention that it was Ruth HAWKINS, not HOPKINS who in 1731 > Scituate RI married Nathaniel WADE. I think you both wanted to spare > me some embarrassment and therefore wrote off-list. Thank you! And > thank you for your many helpful comments! The force of your > convictions almost made me change my tree ! > > In my most recent prior post I asked if anyone had access to the > "Old Book" Scituate RI Vol I and cited the page and an appendix. I > didn't realize at the time that the "Appendix No." did not have > anything to do with the original entry, but instead referred to a > photocopy of that record in an appendix in the Schultz volume on > the Wades which I now have before me. > > As this information is in conflict with a lot of established writing > (Arnold's VR and Early Hopkins Marriages ) on the subject, I thought > I should address this to the entire group. > > There is no doubt whatsoever that the original script quite clearly > has Nathaniel Wade's wife's name spelled with a 'w' and not a 'p' > There is no rounded form preceding the 'k' at all, no descending line > for a lower case 'p' -- instead there is a clearly formed 'w' which > matches the lower case 'w's elsewhere in the same hand. (It is true > that the name appears to be spelled more like "Howkins" than > "Hawkins.") As Hopkins is the same name as that of the Justice of > the Peace, Stephen Hopkins, who performed the marriage, and as a > Susanna Hopkins is in the very next marriage entry, these multiple > occurrances of the Hopkins name in close proximity lead me to believe > that Ruth HAWKINS' name was accidently transcribed incorrectly as > Hopkins in secondary sources. > > Ruth (HAWKINS) Wade herself was married secondly to Zebedee HOPKINS > in 1758, resulting in her appearing as "Ruth Hopkins" in her mother's > will. > > I may be able to make a scan of this entry, but I am not sure if the > quality of the image in the book, an old fashioned 2nd generation > photocopy, will be clear enough. If you would like to see what kind > of a scan I can produce, please let me know off list. [Bonnie and > Todd, you will be sent a copy, of course]. > > I invite anyone with access to the Vol I Scituate RI records to take > a look for yourselves. > > "Scituate June the 26th 1731---- > [illegible in image] Nathaniel Wade and Ruth Howkins both Refients of > this town of Scituate were Lawfully married to Each other by me-- > Stephen Hopkins, Justice P-- > "Recorded by me Jofeph Browne Town Clerk---" > [from "Old Book" Vol I:14 Scituate RI records] > > > > Bonnie > Oakland, California > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --------------------------------- > Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who > knows. > Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Don, I know that there are probably some entries that, for one reason or another, did not make it into Arnold's. My great-great grandparents, George Washington Crandall and Sarah Hannah Carpenter, had quite a few kids in South Kingstown but none made it into Arnold's. Years after the events, someone brought a copy of the family Bible records down to SK and then the births finally made it into the SK records, but that was long after Arnold's books were published. The Taylor story is interesting because I am thinking someone mistook the "Taylor" for the occupation "Tailor." One of the many William Potters in SK was a victim of that mixup, except that he was a tailor (and they spelled it "taylor" in the records) and somehow the occupation got mistaken as his last name. I finally figured out that William Potter Taylor was just William Potter - alas he was not mine, but I did finally get my line back! It's always best to use Arnold's to help obtain the original record from the town where the event happened. I am sure others can share stories of being led astray by similar mixups. Donna in RI ---- Donald Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > Bonnie and anyone else who can tell me. Was this "Old Book" Scituate RI vol 1 used by Arnold in his Vital Records od Rhode Island? Or, might there be enties NOT in Arnold's ? > As for the transcription error that you found, I know for a fact that Arnold's does have some. My second great grandparents were William S. Taylor and Amanda Leavens. Arnold's has her marrying William Sayles on the same date. If I had not had a copy of the marriage record written by the Elder who performed the marriage, I would have been in throuble on that line. Guess we should visit the Town Halls if possible to verify each entry. Makes you wonder what else might have been transcribed wrong. > Don Taylor > > bonnie <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Group, and especially Bonnie W. and Todd H. who have been so > gracious in writing me off-list. > Gracious is the right word. You both believe my source erred in the > contention that it was Ruth HAWKINS, not HOPKINS who in 1731 > Scituate RI married Nathaniel WADE. I think you both wanted to spare > me some embarrassment and therefore wrote off-list. Thank you! And > thank you for your many helpful comments! The force of your > convictions almost made me change my tree ! > > In my most recent prior post I asked if anyone had access to the > "Old Book" Scituate RI Vol I and cited the page and an appendix. I > didn't realize at the time that the "Appendix No." did not have > anything to do with the original entry, but instead referred to a > photocopy of that record in an appendix in the Schultz volume on > the Wades which I now have before me. > > As this information is in conflict with a lot of established writing > (Arnold's VR and Early Hopkins Marriages ) on the subject, I thought > I should address this to the entire group. > > There is no doubt whatsoever that the original script quite clearly > has Nathaniel Wade's wife's name spelled with a 'w' and not a 'p' > There is no rounded form preceding the 'k' at all, no descending line > for a lower case 'p' -- instead there is a clearly formed 'w' which > matches the lower case 'w's elsewhere in the same hand. (It is true > that the name appears to be spelled more like "Howkins" than > "Hawkins.") As Hopkins is the same name as that of the Justice of > the Peace, Stephen Hopkins, who performed the marriage, and as a > Susanna Hopkins is in the very next marriage entry, these multiple > occurrances of the Hopkins name in close proximity lead me to believe > that Ruth HAWKINS' name was accidently transcribed incorrectly as > Hopkins in secondary sources. > > Ruth (HAWKINS) Wade herself was married secondly to Zebedee HOPKINS > in 1758, resulting in her appearing as "Ruth Hopkins" in her mother's > will. > > I may be able to make a scan of this entry, but I am not sure if the > quality of the image in the book, an old fashioned 2nd generation > photocopy, will be clear enough. If you would like to see what kind > of a scan I can produce, please let me know off list. [Bonnie and > Todd, you will be sent a copy, of course]. > > I invite anyone with access to the Vol I Scituate RI records to take > a look for yourselves. > > "Scituate June the 26th 1731---- > [illegible in image] Nathaniel Wade and Ruth Howkins both Refients of > this town of Scituate were Lawfully married to Each other by me-- > Stephen Hopkins, Justice P-- > "Recorded by me Jofeph Browne Town Clerk---" > [from "Old Book" Vol I:14 Scituate RI records] > > > > Bonnie > Oakland, California > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --------------------------------- > Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. > Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

from "Printers and Printing in Providence, 1762 - 1907" prepared by a committee of Providence Typographical Union #33 as a souvenir of the 50th anniversary of its institution printed in 1907 "The Journeymen" (part 10) p. V. "CHARLES L. F. ATKINSON - Born Newport, R.I., Jan. 15, 1833; learned printing with James Atkinson in that city; worked in Providence in 1869; died in Newport, Feb. 7, 1892. JAMES H. ATKINSON - Died at the R.I. Hospital, Sept. 22, 1904, aged 78 years. He was the oldest son of Hon. James Atkinson, for several years Mayor, and at one time Postmaster of Newport. On his mother's side he was related to Gov. Wanton, and was a cousin of Mrs. Sarah Helen Whitman, the poetess. He was a lineal descendant of Gov. Walter Clarke of Newport, who held office in 1676. At one time his father was publisher of the Newport Advertiser. The first record of him as a printer in this city is in the 1850 Directory, and since that year he worked in the book and job offices here until a few years before his death. He was initiated into Providence Union Sept. 11, 1869. JOHN B. ATKINSON - Born Newport, R.I., Feb. 27, 1831; learned printing in that city with his father, James Atkinson, beginning in 1847; worked on the Daily Post in Providence in 1850; died in Lowell, Mass., June 10, 1852. James Atkinson, father of James H., John B. and Oliver M., was a famous Newport printer. OLIVER M. ATKINSON - Born Newport, R.I., July 28, 1838; learned printing in his father's (James Atkinson) office in that city, beginning 1847; initiated into Providence Union March 11, 1865; died in Newport June 2, 1880." continued in part 11.

from "Printers and Printing in Providence, 1762 - 1907" prepared by a committee of Providence Typographical Union #33 as a souvenir of the 50th anniversary of its institution printed in 1907 "The Journeymen" (part 9) p. V. "GEORGE O. ARNOLD - Died Providence Oct. 29, 1885, aged 64 years; his name appears in the 1850 Directory as a printer, and until 1856, when he kept a periodical depot at 178 North Main street. GEORGE TAFT ARNOLD - Died Providence March 8, 1874, aged 49 years; he began work on the Journal in August, 1846, and continued there, with occasional absences, until his death. He was a charter member of Providence Typographical Union in 1857. LEWIS L. M. ARNOLD (Deacon) - Born Providence in March, 1833; began to learn printing in the office of the Daily Post, but left to go to sea. After spending several years in the coasting trade he returned to printing, working in the job office of Henry Tillinghast, on Market square, and also on the Norwich Bulletin. He served in the Navy during the Civil War; was a petty officer on the Hartford when that vessel was Farragut's flagship, and was in her during the passage of Forts Jackson and St. Philip on the Mississippi, below New Orleans. He returned to printing again in 1864 in the Journal composing room, remaining there the balance of his life. The sobriquet of 'Deacon,' by which he was known to hundreds of the craft, was given to him by George T. Arnold for the quiet, sober way in which he went about his duties. In emergencies he often acted as foreman of the Journal. He was initiated into Providence Union Feb. 11, 1871. He died at the Rhode Island Hospital Jan. 12, 1885, in the Henry B. Anthony free bed." continued in part 10.

from "Printers and Printing in Providence, 1762 - 1907" prepared by a committee of Providence Typographical Union #33 as a souvenir of the 50th anniversary of its institution printed in 1907 "The Journeymen" (part 4) p. III. "F. L. ALLEN - Born 1879; learned printing in Providence and was initiated into No. 33 May 27, 1900. JOHN W. ALLEN - Born Lewiston, Me., March 12, 1866; learned printing at Portland, Me., beginning in 1878; admitted to Providence Union by card at July meeting, 1905; participated in the effort for eight-hour day in 1906; now night ad man on Journal. ISRAEL AMSBURY - Died Feb. 15, 1887, in his 73d year, in Poland, N.Y., where he had resided for the last three of four years of his life. He had occupied a very prominent part in the printing trade in Providence, beginning in 1842 as partner in the firm of Church & Amsbury, publishers of the Evening Chronicle; in 1844 he was interested in the publication of the Daily Transcript; in 1847 member of the firm of Amsbury & Lincoln, which published the R.I. Temperance Pledge; in 1853 partner in firm of Greene, Amsbury & Co., publishers of the Daily Tribune; in 1855 he worked at 24 Westminster street; in 1856 and 1857 was foreman of the Tribune, and for about 20 years before he retired from business was foreman of the book and job office of Hiram H. Thomas & Co., afterward the Providence Press Co. He was secretary of the first organization of printers in this city in 1854; initiated into Providence Union Sept. 8, 1860; vice president in 1860 and 1861; President and also delegate in 1862. WILLIAM N. AMSBURY - Died Providence, Aug. 10, 1849, in his 45th year. In 1844 he was employed at the Transcript office. FREDERICK B. AMSDEN - Born Chicopee, Mass., Jan. 31, 1850; learned printing in book room of Springfield Republican, beginning 1866; worked at Knoxville, Tenn, Chicago, Ill., Adrian, Mich., Toledo, O., Boston, Mass.; on Providence Journal for about 18 years; became a member of Providence Union by card Jan. 19, 1874; was initiated into the reorganized Union Feb. 28, 1886; at present employed at Franklin Press." continued in part 5.

Bonnie and anyone else who can tell me. Was this "Old Book" Scituate RI vol 1 used by Arnold in his Vital Records od Rhode Island? Or, might there be enties NOT in Arnold's ? As for the transcription error that you found, I know for a fact that Arnold's does have some. My second great grandparents were William S. Taylor and Amanda Leavens. Arnold's has her marrying William Sayles on the same date. If I had not had a copy of the marriage record written by the Elder who performed the marriage, I would have been in throuble on that line. Guess we should visit the Town Halls if possible to verify each entry. Makes you wonder what else might have been transcribed wrong. Don Taylor bonnie <[email protected]> wrote: Dear Group, and especially Bonnie W. and Todd H. who have been so gracious in writing me off-list. Gracious is the right word. You both believe my source erred in the contention that it was Ruth HAWKINS, not HOPKINS who in 1731 Scituate RI married Nathaniel WADE. I think you both wanted to spare me some embarrassment and therefore wrote off-list. Thank you! And thank you for your many helpful comments! The force of your convictions almost made me change my tree ! In my most recent prior post I asked if anyone had access to the "Old Book" Scituate RI Vol I and cited the page and an appendix. I didn't realize at the time that the "Appendix No." did not have anything to do with the original entry, but instead referred to a photocopy of that record in an appendix in the Schultz volume on the Wades which I now have before me. As this information is in conflict with a lot of established writing (Arnold's VR and Early Hopkins Marriages ) on the subject, I thought I should address this to the entire group. There is no doubt whatsoever that the original script quite clearly has Nathaniel Wade's wife's name spelled with a 'w' and not a 'p' There is no rounded form preceding the 'k' at all, no descending line for a lower case 'p' -- instead there is a clearly formed 'w' which matches the lower case 'w's elsewhere in the same hand. (It is true that the name appears to be spelled more like "Howkins" than "Hawkins.") As Hopkins is the same name as that of the Justice of the Peace, Stephen Hopkins, who performed the marriage, and as a Susanna Hopkins is in the very next marriage entry, these multiple occurrances of the Hopkins name in close proximity lead me to believe that Ruth HAWKINS' name was accidently transcribed incorrectly as Hopkins in secondary sources. Ruth (HAWKINS) Wade herself was married secondly to Zebedee HOPKINS in 1758, resulting in her appearing as "Ruth Hopkins" in her mother's will. I may be able to make a scan of this entry, but I am not sure if the quality of the image in the book, an old fashioned 2nd generation photocopy, will be clear enough. If you would like to see what kind of a scan I can produce, please let me know off list. [Bonnie and Todd, you will be sent a copy, of course]. I invite anyone with access to the Vol I Scituate RI records to take a look for yourselves. "Scituate June the 26th 1731---- [illegible in image] Nathaniel Wade and Ruth Howkins both Refients of this town of Scituate were Lawfully married to Each other by me-- Stephen Hopkins, Justice P-- "Recorded by me Jofeph Browne Town Clerk---" [from "Old Book" Vol I:14 Scituate RI records] Bonnie Oakland, California ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --------------------------------- Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

How do you figure that it was ever part of Mass.? I think you must be confusing it with Tiverton and Little Compton, across the river. Portsmouth is on the Island of Aquidneck, and that was never part of Mass. ----- Original Message ----- From: "tanderz" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 11:11 PM Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] ? Portsmouth, RI part of MA > sorry to intervene, but the answer is yes > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Harry Huntoon" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 6:13 AM > Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] ? Portsmouth, RI part of MA > > >> No, it was never part of Plymouth Colony or Massachusetts. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] >> On Behalf Of [email protected] >> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 9:09 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [RIGENWEB] ? Portsmouth, RI part of MA >> >> Was Portsmouth, RI part of Massachusetts at any time? >> Thanks for your help. >> Judy Brooks Truchon >> >> >> >> ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new >> AOL >> at >> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes >> in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Rhode Island Boundaries, 1636-1936 by J H Cady repub by RIHS in Nov 1998, p 101. "Portsmouth (as it was later named) was settled in 1638 by Anne Hutchinson and William Coddington, who purchased the island of Aquidneck (the name of which was changed in 1644 to Rhode Island) and laid the foundation of the new town at Pocasset, near the north end of the island. In 1639 another settlement was made at Newport, at the south end of the island, by seceders from Pocasset, the division line of which was made in 1640." To the point, the current RI towns of Tiverton and Little Compton were in the Plymouth Colony until 1747. The island of Rhode Island (Aquidneck) was outside Plymouth Colony always, from what I learned in RI History back a few years. This Cady source has good maps of RI borders over the years, and a narrative to go with it. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of tanderz Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 11:12 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] ? Portsmouth, RI part of MA sorry to intervene, but the answer is yes ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Huntoon" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 6:13 AM Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] ? Portsmouth, RI part of MA > No, it was never part of Plymouth Colony or Massachusetts. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of [email protected] > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 9:09 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [RIGENWEB] ? Portsmouth, RI part of MA > > Was Portsmouth, RI part of Massachusetts at any time? > Thanks for your help. > Judy Brooks Truchon > > > > ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL > at > http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I now have a ** 414 KB ** copy available ( scan of the original marriage record of Nathaniel Wade - Ruth Hawkins) which seems perfectly legible, at least on my computer. Quite an improvement over 2.5 MB! Bonnie Oakland, California

Update: My daughter was able to tweek the scan and get a good, legible image of the Nathaniel Wade - Ruth Hawkins [not Hopkins] 1731 marriage as it was originally recorded in Scituate Vol I (Old Book) p 14. I'll be happy to send a copy of the scan by email to anyone who requests it. The full resolution copy is 2.5 MB. However, I will send it via iPhoto and Mail which should reduce the size automatically. If the resultant image is not clear enough when you receive it, please request a higher res image. Or, you can, of course, ask for the high res image at the outset. ....Do I have any new WADE - HAWKINS cousins as a result of this? :-) I have a personal copy of the Doris P. Schultz 1989 book "Jonathan Wade of Ipswich, Massachusetts." It is Doris Schultz who should have the credit of proving (at least in this discussion) that Nathaniel Wade married Ruth HAWKINS. Here is the info Doris P. Schultz has (minus the footnotes, sources) on this couple: [p 20] : "Nathaniel4 WADE, born 27 Jan 1708/9 at Charlestown, Massachusetts, died 13 May 1754; Freeman, 2 May 1738, Scituate, RI; married, 26 Jun 1731, Ruth HAWKINS, sister of Deborah Hawkins, who married his brother, Nathan. Ruth (Hawkins)Wade married (2nd), 9 Feb 1758, Zebedee HOPKINS, the older brother of her sister-in-law's husband, Elisha Hopkins; she died 7 Dec 1879." Children of Nathaniel and Ruth (Hawkins) Wade were: i. Simon WADE b 11 Dec 1731 ii. Dudley WADE b 1 Dec 1734; married Katharianey (-?-). Children: Nathaniel 6 WADE b 4 Aug 1758 and Alverson WADE b 28 Oct 1761. iii. Mary WADE b 10 Dec 1736, died ca 1779; married (1st) Nehemiah THORNTON who died 28 Dec 1762, leaving a daughter, Achsaph THORNTON, who married, in 1782, William BROWN, at which time her step-father, Jeremiah STEERE, gave her the dowry left for her by her father. Nehemiah Thornton was probably the son of Ebenezer and Ruth (-?-) Thornton who married 8 Oct 1735. Mary WADE married (2nd) ca 1763/4, as his third wife, Jeremiah STEERE, born 22 Feb 1722, son of Samuel and Hannah (FIELD) STEERE; will probated 30 Aug 1803 at Chepachet, RI. (for children of this marriage see the STEERE family books). iv. Ruth WADE b 28 Aug 1740 v. Deborah WADE b 23 May 1744; died bef 1754. vi. John WADE, b 5 Jan 1746; named executor of his mother's will; died 30 Jun 1804, at Foster, RI, named brother Dudley, executor of his will, of which Simon Wade, Jr. was a witness. [end of Wade-Hawkins entry from Doris Schultz's Wade book] I descend from the 3rd child of this marriage, Mary WADE through her second marriage to Jeremiah STEERE, and would be happy to correspond with anyone re this and related lines. Bonnie Oakland, California

Dear Group, and especially Bonnie W. and Todd H. who have been so gracious in writing me off-list. Gracious is the right word. You both believe my source erred in the contention that it was Ruth HAWKINS, not HOPKINS who in 1731 Scituate RI married Nathaniel WADE. I think you both wanted to spare me some embarrassment and therefore wrote off-list. Thank you! And thank you for your many helpful comments! The force of your convictions almost made me change my tree ! In my most recent prior post I asked if anyone had access to the "Old Book" Scituate RI Vol I and cited the page and an appendix. I didn't realize at the time that the "Appendix No." did not have anything to do with the original entry, but instead referred to a photocopy of that record in an appendix in the Schultz volume on the Wades which I now have before me. As this information is in conflict with a lot of established writing (Arnold's VR and Early Hopkins Marriages ) on the subject, I thought I should address this to the entire group. There is no doubt whatsoever that the original script quite clearly has Nathaniel Wade's wife's name spelled with a 'w' and not a 'p' There is no rounded form preceding the 'k' at all, no descending line for a lower case 'p' -- instead there is a clearly formed 'w' which matches the lower case 'w's elsewhere in the same hand. (It is true that the name appears to be spelled more like "Howkins" than "Hawkins.") As Hopkins is the same name as that of the Justice of the Peace, Stephen Hopkins, who performed the marriage, and as a Susanna Hopkins is in the very next marriage entry, these multiple occurrances of the Hopkins name in close proximity lead me to believe that Ruth HAWKINS' name was accidently transcribed incorrectly as Hopkins in secondary sources. Ruth (HAWKINS) Wade herself was married secondly to Zebedee HOPKINS in 1758, resulting in her appearing as "Ruth Hopkins" in her mother's will. I may be able to make a scan of this entry, but I am not sure if the quality of the image in the book, an old fashioned 2nd generation photocopy, will be clear enough. If you would like to see what kind of a scan I can produce, please let me know off list. [Bonnie and Todd, you will be sent a copy, of course]. I invite anyone with access to the Vol I Scituate RI records to take a look for yourselves. "Scituate June the 26th 1731---- [illegible in image] Nathaniel Wade and Ruth Howkins both Refients of this town of Scituate were Lawfully married to Each other by me-- Stephen Hopkins, Justice P-- "Recorded by me Jofeph Browne Town Clerk---" [from "Old Book" Vol I:14 Scituate RI records] Bonnie Oakland, California

sorry to intervene, but the answer is yes ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Huntoon" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 6:13 AM Subject: Re: [RIGENWEB] ? Portsmouth, RI part of MA > No, it was never part of Plymouth Colony or Massachusetts. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of [email protected] > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 9:09 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [RIGENWEB] ? Portsmouth, RI part of MA > > Was Portsmouth, RI part of Massachusetts at any time? > Thanks for your help. > Judy Brooks Truchon > > > > ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL > at > http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >