I am seeking a cousin that I have lost contact with. her name is: Joyce (Hamell,Ohrtman Knudson) last address I had for her was:Ft Dodge, Iowa. I have a letter written by her grandfather Keith Hamell with a date of 3/23~P.O. Box569, Ft. Dodge. I thought perhaps she would like to have it. The letter was written to my grandmother Lena Frances (Hamell) Conaway, Keith's sister. Geanellen Kuranko geanellen@comcast.net

Did you review and request feedback for administrators to look at your batches where you have objections? This is very important. As an indexer and as arbitrator, I know the feedback is very important. Arbitrators can be wrong. David Samuelsen On 8/4/2012 7:19 AM, Lena Truster wrote: > I assisted with indexing. Many times I looked up names and places and entered correct spelling only to have them changed despite my objections for FamilySearch.

I am trying to prove generational relationship between the Revolutionary War Patriot George HENRY (m. Lydia Wheatley) and his son George HENRY (m. Permillia FIDDLER) and grandson John (m. Pricilla WAGNER/WAGNANT). I have been told that there is proof in a Henry Family Bible Records (info mentions numbers "272493+309"). These records are supposed to be in the possession of the VA State Archives. Does anyone have a copy of the family pages from this Bible in their possession and who would be willing to share copies (at my expense)?

I assisted with indexing. Many times I looked up names and places and entered correct spelling only to have them changed despite my objections for FamilySearch.

checking on 1930 for 1940 spelings is not allowed. I should know because I talked with hadquarters about it. David S. On 8/4/2012 2:09 AM, Samuel Levee wrote: > My family in the 1940 census is listed as Goldford, even though the name is clearly printed by the enumerator as Goldfarb. I couldn't understand how two different indexers could make the same obvious error. Helen's comment explained it. > > In the 1930 census the wrong name of Goldford was also used. Two wrongs don't make a right. Indexers of the 1940 census should have written down what they saw and not concerned themselves with what was in the 1930 census. Any of us that have reviewed census records know that enumerators make spelling errors and their writing is not always clear. When you see something clearly written, use that info, irregardless of what someone thought they saw when indexing a previous census.

My family in the 1940 census is listed as Goldford, even though the name is clearly printed by the enumerator as Goldfarb. I couldn't understand how two different indexers could make the same obvious error. Helen's comment explained it. In the 1930 census the wrong name of Goldford was also used. Two wrongs don't make a right. Indexers of the 1940 census should have written down what they saw and not concerned themselves with what was in the 1930 census. Any of us that have reviewed census records know that enumerators make spelling errors and their writing is not always clear. When you see something clearly written, use that info, irregardless of what someone thought they saw when indexing a previous census. S. L. Levee On Aug 4, 2012, at 12:00 AM, roots-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <Dddarwin@aol.com> > To: <ROOTS@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 11:02 AM > Subject: [ROOTS-L] ANCESTRY - 1940 CENSUS > > > -- > > Message: 6 > Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 15:02:15 -0400 > From: Helen P <leaf.raker2@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] ANCESTRY - 1940 CENSUS > To: ROOTS@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <CANkxRF5O8zsU70ptGCWdy_X_hB0wUqVtbR_VpzDt+4r6CGLU9g@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I did indexing of the 1940 for familysearch and many times I used the 1930 > census to check for spelling of names and used google for area names. > Helen. > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Helen P <leaf.raker2@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Too quickly... I have found many errors in transcription that are very >> obvious if time is taken to look over the writing. Not only names but also >> town and street names, when a quick check with google maps could clear up >> the spelling. >> Helen >> >> >> >>

Lou Ann I would like to acquire the book you have for sale Cherokee Indians and old settlers. I believe you wanted to sell for $30.00 plus shipping of $3.00. I have hunted about everywhere for my mothers parents and believe they were in Cherokee County. Please let me know how you want this money etc. I will be happy to take it off your hands. I will be gone on this weekend to see my wife's ailing parents ( in their upper 80's. I will get back back to you as soon as possible. Thanks a million James C. Watson Spicewood Texas , of Watson's of Corrigan and Cherokee County. Does Library have room for artifacts from Miller family Groveton Texas? Thanks Jim Watson

What about other US territories? I keep forgetting to check for them. Also there are lots of projects still to be indexed, no reason for us to quit now <G> Eliz On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM, W David Samuelsen <dsam52@sampubco.com> wrote: > not done! > > Puerto Rico 1940 is being indexed. > > And there's th naturalizations. Calls are made to continue, to do it now. > > David S. > > On 8/3/2012 11:27 AM, Sallie wrote: >> FAmilySearch is done, too, and I will miss working on them. >> Sallie Texas > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I thought the FHL library always had the lookup service, have used it many times over the years. Used to be four dollars for each look up and then small charge for photocopying. Most times the service was good. A few times I got?the form?back with handwritten notes that?an index had too many similar names or?something was too blurry. I usually just waited and resubmitted it knowing it was likely that another volunteer might try harder and that usually worked.??Great lookup service.

American Samoa, Virgin Islands and Guam are three others I haven't seen yet. David On 8/3/2012 2:50 PM, Eliz Hanebury wrote: > What about other US territories? I keep forgetting to check for them. > > Also there are lots of projects still to be indexed, no reason for us > to quit now <G> > > > > Eliz

I did indexing of the 1940 for familysearch and many times I used the 1930 census to check for spelling of names and used google for area names. Helen. On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Helen P <leaf.raker2@gmail.com> wrote: > Too quickly... I have found many errors in transcription that are very > obvious if time is taken to look over the writing. Not only names but also > town and street names, when a quick check with google maps could clear up > the spelling. > Helen > > > > > > -- > Raking the leaves of my ancestors back to my tree. > -- Raking the leaves of my ancestors back to my tree.

not done! Puerto Rico 1940 is being indexed. And there's th naturalizations. Calls are made to continue, to do it now. David S. On 8/3/2012 11:27 AM, Sallie wrote: > FAmilySearch is done, too, and I will miss working on them. > Sallie Texas

Too quickly... I have found many errors in transcription that are very obvious if time is taken to look over the writing. Not only names but also town and street names, when a quick check with google maps could clear up the spelling. Helen On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:02 PM, <Dddarwin@aol.com> wrote: > Hi all, > I received an email from Ancestry.com this morning that the 1940 Census has > been "All Indexed" so that should help looking for family. > > Done much sooner than I thought (grin). > Gretchen > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to > roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > -- Raking the leaves of my ancestors back to my tree.

FAmilySearch is done, too, and I will miss working on them. Sallie Texas ----- Original Message ----- From: <Dddarwin@aol.com> To: <ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 11:02 AM Subject: [ROOTS-L] ANCESTRY - 1940 CENSUS > Hi all, > I received an email from Ancestry.com this morning that the 1940 Census > has > been "All Indexed" so that should help looking for family. > > Done much sooner than I thought (grin). > Gretchen > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to > roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5174 - Release Date: 08/03/12 >

Hi all, I received an email from Ancestry.com this morning that the 1940 Census has been "All Indexed" so that should help looking for family. Done much sooner than I thought (grin). Gretchen

Thanks to Shirley for sharing information regarding Colonial marriages. I found it very interesting. As a matter of fact, I wish to also thank her for her "This and That Tips" over the past few years. Her round-up of genealogical lore has added sparkle as well as depth to this list. Cheers from Liz -----Original Message----- From: roots-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Shirley Hornbeck Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 8:58 AM To: ROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Cc: hornbeck@s-hornbeck.com Subject: [ROOTS-L] THIS AND THAT Tips MARRIAGE RECORDS: During the colonial period, [--- snipped] HANDFAST: [--- snipped] SYMBOLIC CROSSROADS WEDDING: [--- snipped] Shirley Hornbeck - www.s-hornbeck.com HORNBECK SURNAME RESOURCE CENTER: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hornbeck/hsrc/home.htm THIS & THAT GENEALOGY TIPS: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hornbeck/index.htm Order from: http://www.genealogical.com/products/This%20and%20That%20Genealogy%20Tips/93 77.html ===== If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

MARRIAGE RECORDS: During the colonial period, the law required a true and perfect parish register. After 1780, ministers were required to report all marriages to the county court clerk whose duty it was to see that the returns were entered in a book kept for that purpose. In 1783 the law recognized that the scarcity of ministers in the western counties had produced a situation whereby not only dissenting ministers, but some magistrates and others had been induced to solemnize marriages. The amended act of 1784 removed the four ministers per denomination per county restriction for marriages and permitted any ordained minister to perform marriages. Also Quakers and Mennonites were permitted to marry under their own customs, but the clerk of the meeting was to make a return to the county clerk. The county record books which have survived are sometimes titled "Marriage Records" or " Marriage Registers," although they might contain only the entry of the marriage bond and not the actual return. HANDFAST: H/F after a person's name on birth and marriage records means "Handfast". Basically it is a sign of the confirmation of a type of "uncanonical, private or even probationary form of marriage". Handfasting was for announcing a union between a man and woman who wished to live together as husband and wife before receiving the blessing of the church. The couple would stand before a group of their peers, hold their clasped hands above their heads and state their intentions. The agreement was good for a year and a day or until the preacher came to perform the rites of the church. If at the end of the specified time, each wished to go his own way, they could do so with no ties. No matter what happened, any child born of a Handfast would inherit. SYMBOLIC CROSSROADS WEDDING: A crossroads wedding was one in which the marriage was held at a crossroads after the sun had set with the bride wearing only her shift. This was done to show she had no debts to bring to the marriage. Shirley Hornbeck -THIS & THAT GENEALOGY TIPS: <http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~hornbeck> <http://www.genealogybookshop.com/genealogybookshop/files/General,General_Reference/9377.html> Shirley Hornbeck - www.s-hornbeck.com HORNBECK SURNAME RESOURCE CENTER: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hornbeck/hsrc/home.htm THIS & THAT GENEALOGY TIPS: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hornbeck/index.htm Order from: http://www.genealogical.com/products/This%20and%20That%20Genealogy%20Tips/9377.html

Here is a link to GenealogyBank's list of ‎75 Kentucky newspapers now online dating from 1794 to Today See: bit.ly/MT4JA6

Here's an interesting article - you see articles abt twins getting married - but you don't often see triplets. See: on.fb.me/OEpKhx

By looking at a modern map of Greenville, and comparing it with the ED maps, it looks like the intersection of 21st Street and Gaylord Street would fall within ED 23-76. The Moss household, with parents Amos and Nina and daughters Vivian, Betty J., Carolyn, Shelby J., and Beverly, are found at the bottom of image 11 and the top of image 12. Drew Smith On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:56 AM, <Red5781@aol.com> wrote: > Hello All, > I am having a difficult time locating the ED for an area in Greenville, > SC. The address I am trying to locate is 21st St & Gaylord St. The Morse site > does not list streets in Greenville that are numbers. I am trying to find > Amos & Nina MOSS. Any help would be appreciated. > Thank you, > Terry