Thanks; sure will !! If I have it has gotten here in the last two days. Thanks again, and I SURELY sorry !!!!!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul" <martee@citlink.net> To: "Paul" <martee@citlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 2:02 PM Subject: Re: [DRAKE-L] Note from List Mom I think you have a virus. Please check your files. Paul wrote: > > 'Barb Marshall' wrote: > ==== > - I would like to remind everyone that the Rootsweb > - people have asked everyone NOT to place all > - their family names at the end of messages. > - > - The reason for this request is that these names > - jam the memory and confuse the search programs, > - resulting in ineffective search efforts done on > - specific names. Unrelated names do not belong > - in messages for a specific name search board. > - If I type in Drake while using the Rootsweb > - search option and get m ...' > > > Take a look to the attachment. > > ----------------------------------------- ------------------------------- > Name: New_Napster_Site.DOC.scr > New_Napster_Site.DOC.scr Type: Screen Saver (application/x-unknown-content-type-scrfile) > Encoding: base64

I believe that the evergreen ground cover that you are thinking of is Vinca minor also known as Periwinkle. It is/was very common in old graveyards and cemeteries. As a matter of fact, a patch of periwinkle growing out in the middle of nowhere is often a sign that there may be some graves somewhere. The Crape myrtle tree aka Lagerstroemia indica has also been a popular cemetery tree in the south. But it is not evergreen. It does have, however, a beautiful bark that is lovely year round and the flowers, which come in a range of colors from various shades of red and pink to white and lavender, are very fetching in the late summer.The hardiness zone for Crape myrtle is from zone 7 to 9. Deane F. Mills York County, VA > List: > > I said earlier that crepe myrtle and cedar trees were good signs for small > family cemeteries...I don't know what I was thinking, but it should not have > been crepe myrtle. A kind lister corrected me on tha! I meant some sort of > ivy/ground cover that is green year round. Can anyone tell us what the name > of that sort of ground cover I am thinking of? > > Craig Kilby > > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > USGenWeb Archives Census Project > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/ > > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 > Source for Family History Online. Go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB >

You are thinking of periwinkle. It stays green all year and is always a sure sign that you have found an old cemetery. GAyle

I've watched many notes come and go on this subject lately. Paul is right in what the "law" states. The lesson here is to be sure you check the deed books for a separate "examination" of the wife later in the deed or even court books. There were many deeds in my research which did not have immediate attachments - and none of been found. That doesn't mean they were not recorded elsewhere. So, please remember to not depend on a deed implying that a wife had died previous to the selling of a certain property. Bob Jordan jorbob@webtv.net

In a message dated 4/24/01 11:31:37 AM, CASHKILBY@aol.com writes: << List: I said earlier that crepe myrtle and cedar trees were good signs for small family cemeteries...I don't know what I was thinking, but it should not have been crepe myrtle. A kind lister corrected me on tha! I meant some sort of ivy/ground cover that is green year round. Can anyone tell us what the name of that sort of ground cover I am thinking of? Craig Kilby >> Periwinkle is usually the ground cover used to cover cemetery plots. It also has a pale purple or lavender flower that comes on it in the spring John Fox

List: I said earlier that crepe myrtle and cedar trees were good signs for small family cemeteries...I don't know what I was thinking, but it should not have been crepe myrtle. A kind lister corrected me on tha! I meant some sort of ivy/ground cover that is green year round. Can anyone tell us what the name of that sort of ground cover I am thinking of? Craig Kilby

In a message dated 04/23/2001 2:19:19 PM Central Daylight Time, martee@citlink.net writes: > The question usually is not whether the names > of wives appeared in the deeds of husbands, > it is whether or not by reason of her death > before him, by court entry, by a separate > oath, or by an assent being appended to the > deed, that wife did in fact agree to the > sale. This has been an enlightening discussion, but it hasn't addressed my question which had to do with when changes in practice took place. In my deeds in Sumner Co., TN, shortly after 1800, the wives names were not listed in the body of the deed of sale nor were they questioned separate and apart from their husbands concerning the sale. These are deeds drawn up by men known to be married at the time. I have to fast forward to 1892 to find another deed that doesn't involve an heir, and this deed to farm property included the wife's name in the body of the deed and had a statement by a JP to the effect that she had been questioned separate and apart from her husband. On to 1944, another deed to farm property included the wife's name in the body of the deed and she was not questioned separate and apart from her husband. These changes are no doubt due to changes in Tennessee state laws, and it was for that reason that I addressed my question to Paul, a fellow Tennessean, off list. But I suspect that other states experienced the same or similar evolutions in women's property rights, so I'm readdressing my queston here. Thanks. I'm learning a lot from y'all. Joyce

thanks for the explanation on surveyors, first chain, second chain. I misspelt my ancestors name in that message! He was John Hilburn and he worked as second chain (which I assume means he was the one representing the seller of the property). If anyone can point me in the direction of more explanations or lists of/on surveyors of VA and NC pre-1800's I would appreciate it! thanks again!

Craig, I cannot stay quiet for one more minute. Why don't you stop trying to bait Paul ? You do not know him and you simply like to start arguments or see in you can embarrass him, which you could never do. This list is not a forum for you to sit in judgment on any of us. Remember? me you called a b----, which only made me laugh. But......why don't you try to CONTRIBUTE information rather than waiting for others to contribute and then picking what OTHERS SAY to pieces. Don't you have ANYTHING to contribute that is not dissecting others words?

Apparently my server or whatever is sending multiple copies of the same message. Sorry 'bout that, and sorry for the inadvertent statement that women could not inherit. I surely meant that they could inherit anything, but that land and most other property gained by them during coverture became the property of their husbands. Will be gone for a while. Paul

In a message dated 4/23/01 8:18:53 PM, martee@citlink.net writes: << Incidentally, VA abolished entails in 1776, thus thwarting the last of the efforts (legal devices) used to dodge the law that declared that land devised or conveyed to women became that of their husbands (NY, even before then, as I recall). Paul >> We have so many amazing subject tonight! Paul, this is a complicated area, but weren't entails and efforts to dodge them also a way to avoid primogeniture laws and otherwise free up clear title for a sale of land? Wasn't that the purpose of lease and release? I am rusty on this subject and wonder if there is a good web page to explain all the intricacies of entail and docking of fee, etc. Craig

Paul. Your original message was quoted in my reply (below) and you most assuredly did say as a fact that "Women could not inherit land in those times" which was 1787 per the original post. Regardless, you have corrected the error and we are all now in agreement on the issue. Entailments and docking is quite another kettle of fish not exclusively related to land ownership by females. And a few woman refused to ever marry for the reason that as long as they were single, they owned the land. Craig In a message dated 4/23/01 7:55:24 PM, martee@citlink.net writes: << I did not say women could not inherit land; I DID say that if they did, the land became that of the marriage, and not her own, and the husband could sell it. To counteract that legal dilemma, entailments were attempted at late as 1750. Those were docked by statute. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: <CASHKILBY@aol.com> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 9:31 PM Subject: Re: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] will interpretation | | In a message dated 4/21/01 7:13:35 PM, martee@citlink.net writes:\ | | He seems to have conveyed to her a life | estate (women could not inherit land in VA in | those times) and left the legal remainder to | the [three] God-children. >> | | Paul--I do not agree that woman could not inherit land in 1787. I have many | wills conveying land to daughters either by will or by law. What is your | source for this statement? | | Craig Kilby | | | ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== | Hosted by Rootsweb http://www.rootsweb.com | | | ============================== | Join the RootsWeb WorldConnect Project: | Linking the world, one GEDCOM at a time. | http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com |

In a message dated 4/23/01 4:46:00 PM, KDale60909@aol.com writes: << In the > colonies and early states, not only were the > positions of surveyor and chain carrier VERY > important ones by reason of the sacrosanct > nature of real estate in the view of our > ancestors, but also those positions were > often hired and paid for by the county or the > commonwealth/colony. In fact, oaths were > administered and reputations for honesty were > prerequisite for those offices. >> I hope the list will forgive my many posts tonight, but I've not read e-mail for many days. I'm on a research assignment in VA/MD/NC...I too was intrigued by the statement that chain carriers represented both buyer and seller. Makes good sense. I have never encountered a situation where the chain carrier was a hired position, however. My own experience has been that they were either sons or near neighbors of the party whose land was being surveyed. Also, surveys in my experience were usually reserved for the original patent, not upon resale to another party, but were of course used for division of estates. So, I am wondering where the notion of chain carriers for "buyer and seller" arose? Craig Kilby

In a message dated 4/23/01 10:33:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, CASHKILBY@aol.com writes: << Paul--I do not agree that woman could not inherit land in 1787. I have many wills conveying land to daughters either by will or by law. What is your source for this statement? Craig Kilby >> I knew there was another post I meant to respond to. Here is an example of daughters inheriting from excerpts from the Louisa Co 1754 will of Christopher Clark, which to the best of my knowledge (I do believe I'd know about it) was not challenged in court: Will: In the name of God, Amen. I, Christopher Clark, being in sound mind and memory, thanks to God Almighty, for it but calling to mind the uncertainties of ye life, make this my last will and testament asfollows: ..................... 3. I give my loving daughter, Rachel Moorman, four hundred acres of land in Hanover Co. near to Capt. Thomas Dancey, and one negro woman named Moll, with her increase and all things else that she has had in her possession whatever of mine. .............. &. I give my loving daughter Elizabeth Anthony, four hundred acres of land in Goochland Co. on Footer Creek near south Fork of James River, two young negroes, Moll and Jenny, cows and calves, one feather bed and furniture..... In witness to the above promises I have hereunto set my hand and fixedmy seal this 14th day of August, 1741. Christopher Clark TEST: Thomas Martin (heir) Ann Martin (Daughter of Charles Moorman, Sr.) James Waring X (his mark) At a court held for Louisa Co. the 28th day of May 1754 this will was proved this day in open court by the oath of Thomas Martin and affirmation of Ann Martin and admitted to record and is recorded.Test. James Littlepage, Clerk Circuit Court. Best Regards, Janet Hunter

My ancestor was in TN in the early 1800 , and the only land records available for that county are "Land Entry Book" and "Deeds of Bargain and Sale". The Land Entries start with his name, certificate or warrant #, description of the land .etc and then signed by him as Locater.Does this mean that he was a surveyor by profession, or only for his own land ? Shouldn't there be a book that records the deeds, or was the entry the final ownership ? I had hoped the deeds would give me the name of his wife, but none were signed by her although I know she was alive when the sales were made. I finally caught up with him in SC, where I did find three deeds where she relinquished her dower rights , but not on any of the other deeds. I concluded that the deeds she signed were for land she had inherited from her father. Am I right in assuming this ?Marietta > > > > ==

Hi list: Please, lets get this Jefferson farce off of this list and get back to what the list was meant to be! If we can't stick to documented family links I will have to unsuscribe. Bob W. jleehunt1@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 4/23/01 8:44:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > jagile@casstel.net writes: > > << n the discussion of Sally and Thomas Jefferson these words caught my > attention, "having a motive or Opportunity to bed Sally without being > detected" another interesting group of words were "privacy" and > "alert servants." >> > > Hello Jo Ann, > > I appreciate your comments. My intention in putting the post on the list was > to provide an example of research and analysis relevant to us all. Tempting > though it may be, the intention wasn't to open up a debate on the always > engaging topics of did Thomas bed Sally/how did he treat his slaves/what > really were his views on slavery/why didn't he free all of his while alive or > in his will like Geo Washington did/was Thomas typical of other slaveowners, > etc. > > However, (for all of you on the list also), concerns of other members have > been expressed to me that such a debate might begin on the Southside list as > a result of my post and escalate rapidly and emotionally, having an overall > negative effect on our purpose here, alienating some of our participants to > the point that we might lose several. > > I certainly don't want to see that happen so encourage you to comment to me > privately. This list has been for three years extremely important to my > research on my direct ancestors, probably THE most important single list (and > believe me you don't want to know how many I am on), especially now that I'm > looking at my children's paternal lines and they are flopping all over my > own in Southside and James River northern bordering counties, one even > literally next door in Louisa. (FYI, think "small world"..I met their father > in Long Beach, CA; his father from TX -- his VA lines via Deep South states; > my parents both from Ozarks of MO, my VA lines via TN or KY from VA or direct > from VA). > > I do have strong feelings about the whole Jefferson-Hemmings issue and your > comments, and will certainly email you a private response shortly, as I am > having a difficult enough time keeping quiet as it is here :-). > > Best Regards, > Janet (Baugh) Hunter > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > USGenWeb Archives Census Project > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/ > > ============================== > Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp

In a message dated 4/22/01 12:05:35 PM, martee@citlink.net writes: << So, NO signature on a deed of the wife almost without exception means there was NO wife at the date of the deed. >> I must take exception to this, but also ask a question. I have many situations where a wife did not relinquish her dower in a property though by other records I know she was alive. These cases seem to involve land either patented by the husband but which was not their primary farm, or land he had purchased prior to his marriage. Was the wife's dower excluded to certain properties such as the home plantation or land acquired after the marriage? Or did wives just fail to relinquish dowers at times, or otherwise the relinquishments were not recorded? Craig Kilby

It is a fact that this happen in every corner of America - an slave owner having relations with a slave. It has been known in oral history and in written history that Jefferson and many other owners had relationships with there slaves. Some famous many other not. What America rewrites history again? 1600's to 1865 servants not slaves. Interesting. Privacy Interesting. The fact is that as an African American Family we know, Families of the owners know, The wife knew, the people of the town know were our roots start. We know why Master Smiths family comes to visit. Known secrets that are not secrets, just not talked about. In the end it will not matter if they accept them as Jefferson descendents as African Americans we know and will always know. Mulatto Quadroon Octoroon ----- Original Message ----- From: <jleehunt1@aol.com> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 8:53 PM Subject: Re: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Analysis of Evidence -- Jefferson Scholars Report > In a message dated 4/23/01 8:44:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > jagile@casstel.net writes: > > << n the discussion of Sally and Thomas Jefferson these words caught my > attention, "having a motive or Opportunity to bed Sally without being > detected" another interesting group of words were "privacy" and > "alert servants." >> > > Hello Jo Ann, > > I appreciate your comments. My intention in putting the post on the list was > to provide an example of research and analysis relevant to us all. Tempting > though it may be, the intention wasn't to open up a debate on the always > engaging topics of did Thomas bed Sally/how did he treat his slaves/what > really were his views on slavery/why didn't he free all of his while alive or > in his will like Geo Washington did/was Thomas typical of other slaveowners, > etc. > > However, (for all of you on the list also), concerns of other members have > been expressed to me that such a debate might begin on the Southside list as > a result of my post and escalate rapidly and emotionally, having an overall > negative effect on our purpose here, alienating some of our participants to > the point that we might lose several. > > I certainly don't want to see that happen so encourage you to comment to me > privately. This list has been for three years extremely important to my > research on my direct ancestors, probably THE most important single list (and > believe me you don't want to know how many I am on), especially now that I'm > looking at my children's paternal lines and they are flopping all over my > own in Southside and James River northern bordering counties, one even > literally next door in Louisa. (FYI, think "small world"..I met their father > in Long Beach, CA; his father from TX -- his VA lines via Deep South states; > my parents both from Ozarks of MO, my VA lines via TN or KY from VA or direct > from VA). > > I do have strong feelings about the whole Jefferson-Hemmings issue and your > comments, and will certainly email you a private response shortly, as I am > having a difficult enough time keeping quiet as it is here :-). > > Best Regards, > Janet (Baugh) Hunter > > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > USGenWeb Archives Census Project > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/ > > > ============================== > Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp >

Cedar trees and crepe myrtle are very common elements of old cemeteries as they represent eternal life since they are green year round. These are always good clues when looking for old cemeteries. Craig Kilby

In a message dated 4/21/01 7:13:35 PM, martee@citlink.net writes:\ He [Hicks Bowen] seems to have conveyed to her [wife Elizabeth] a life estate (women could not inherit land in VA in those times) [1787] and left the legal remainder to the [three] God-children. >> Paul--I do not agree that woman could not inherit land in 1787. I have many wills conveying land to daughters either by will or by law. What is your source for this statement? Craig Kilby