Brenda wrote: After poking around online, I'm wondering if there's a possibility that C. H. HATLER in actual images of the 1850 census, might have been E. H. HATLER (Dist. 4, Household 109). If you have access to this census, would you be able to check that for me? Thanks very much. Brenda Brenda, I checked Ancestry for Hatler, Weakley, TN soundex 1850 and found 2 families in District 3: HH 88/88 C. Hatler/Hatter 25 male TN married within the year Jane 20 " T. Lang 24 male TN HH 89/89 M. B. Hatler/Hatter 30 male VA? Elizabeth 24 TN Mary 5 Enoch 3 Alexander 1 I then checked for Hatter, Weakley, TN soundex 1850 and found 1 family in District 4: HH 109/109 C. Hatter/Hatler 48 female SC plus Jane, Allen, Margaret, Sarah, George, Manda, Elizabeth,William ?, and J. Baker male. For this household, everything was the same as you have except there was only 1 initial shown for Ms. H--clearly a "C". Although these families were indexed as one Hatter and one Hatler, I could tell no difference in the spelling--they both looked like the crossing of the "t" extended across both letters. Hope this helps--looks like it might just raise another question?? Jewel ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Thanks very much, Jewel. James and Alexander Hatler were ministers and seem to have been the "best-known" of the early Hatlers. Right now, since I'm new to researching the Hatler line, everything's a bit of a puzzle, but I appreciate every clue. Thanks again. Brenda ----- Original Message ----- From: <Eharsma@aol.com>