snailmail P.O. Box 2272 Danville, VA 24541 email VANCSOC@Juno.com It's a GREAT place! Anne ----- Original Message ----- From: Nancy Long <nancyl100@lanset.com> To: Anne Nemeth-Barath <mrsnb@adelphia.net> Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 2:20 PM Subject: Re: [VAPITTSY-L] VANCSOC.Juno.com > Can you please post it on the site so everyone can use it? > > Thanks, > Nancy > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Anne Nemeth-Barath" <mrsnb@adelphia.net> > To: <VAPITTSY-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 10:07 PM > Subject: [VAPITTSY-L] VANCSOC.Juno.com > > > > Thank you all who took time to correct my VA/NC Genealogical Society > > archives site. This time I got it added to my addresses correctly! > > Anne > > > > > > ==== VAPITTSY Mailing List ==== > > Pittsylvania County Files online! Visit the Pittsylvania County Archives > at http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/va/pittsylv.htm > > >

Sorry, I've been out of town... email VANCSOC@Juno.com snailmail P.O. Box 2272 Danville, VA 24541 It's a GREAT place! Anne ----- Original Message ----- From: <Gary2Hs@aol.com> To: Anne Nemeth-Barath <mrsnb@adelphia.net> Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 10:55 AM Subject: Fwd: VAPITTSY-D Digest V00 #322 > In a message dated 10/8/00 5:01:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > VAPITTSY-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: > > << Anne Nemeth-Barath" <mrsnb@adelphia.net >> > > Please share the address for the VA/NC Genealogical Society. > > Gary Eichhorst > Burke, VA > >

I have copies for sale. They have a reference copy at the society, but not for copying or sale. The price is $21 including shipping and mailing. If you go to my website, there is a description and an order blank. http://pws.gamewood.net/~deanie/mlbindex.html. Mary Leigh Didi Rief wrote: > 10/11/00 > > Mrs. Boisseau .... > > Mr. Anderson at the VA/NC Gen. Soc. says that you have copies of the Camden > Parish book for sale. Does the sale benefit the Society? And, what is the > price of the book? Apparently there are copies at the Society but there is > doubt about the price. > > Thanks! > > DR

Sorry gang, did not see the original query, but the early District Court up to about 1812 was at New London, which is Campbell Co. When I went to Campbell and asked about any Loose papers surviving,from a 1794 suit, they did not know what I was talking about. In a later 1870ish suit in Pittsy, it stated that it had been sent to Halifax. Take this as an unofficial observance on my part, but may provide a clue. Margie Brown

The District Court encompasses more than one county - hence the name District, and at least in the 19th century, Pittsylvania appears to have been in the same district as Campbell Co and the Independent city of Lynchburg (whose records are not in Campbell Co). However, I am not an expert on the VA court system, so I bow to other's opinions. Mary Leigh "Gene R. Griffith" wrote: > I would think that they would be sent to the County seat of Pittsylvania Co, > Chatham,VA. Court House. This is where most records are kept. > Lynchburg,VA has nothing to do with Pittsylvania Co.VA. > They are two different places. Lynchburg ,VA is in Campbell County,VA > location. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Mary Leigh Boisseau <deanie@gamewood.net> > To: <VAPITTSY-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 5:35 PM > Subject: [VAPITTSY-L] [Fwd: Returned mail: User unknown] > > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > --------------18DB560B4945388520F58E96 > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > > Maybe you can get it this way Lucille. > > > > --------------18DB560B4945388520F58E96 > > Content-Type: message/rfc822 > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Content-Disposition: inline > > > > Return-Path: <> > > Received: from pws.gamewood.net (root@pws.gamewood.net [199.0.155.48]) > > by fox.gamewood.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32628 > > for <deanie@gamewood.net>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:45 -0400 > > Received: from localhost (localhost) > > by pws.gamewood.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with internal id NAA18993; > > Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:42 -0400 > > Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:42 -0400 > > From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@gamewood.net> > > Message-Id: <200010101715.NAA18993@pws.gamewood.net> > > To: <deanie@gamewood.net> > > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; > > boundary="NAA18993.971198142/pws.gamewood.net" > > Subject: Returned mail: User unknown > > Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) > > X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 > > > > This is a MIME-encapsulated message > > > > --NAA18993.971198142/pws.gamewood.net > > > > The original message was received at Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:41 -0400 > > from mx1417.pubip.gamewood.net [205.161.154.132] > > > > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- > > <lcpayne@digdat.com> > > > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > > ... while talking to mail.digdat.com.: > > >>> RCPT To:<lcpayne@digdat.com> > > <<< 550 not local host digdat.com, not a gateway > > 550 <lcpayne@digdat.com>... User unknown > > > > --NAA18993.971198142/pws.gamewood.net > > Content-Type: message/delivery-status > > > > Reporting-MTA: dns; pws.gamewood.net > > Received-From-MTA: DNS; mx1417.pubip.gamewood.net > > Arrival-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:41 -0400 > > > > Final-Recipient: RFC822; lcpayne@digdat.com > > Action: failed > > Status: 5.1.1 > > Remote-MTA: DNS; mail.digdat.com > > Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 not local host digdat.com, not a gateway > > Last-Attempt-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:42 -0400 > > > > --NAA18993.971198142/pws.gamewood.net > > Content-Type: message/rfc822 > > > > Return-Path: <deanie@gamewood.net> > > Received: from gamewood.net (mx1417.pubip.gamewood.net [205.161.154.132]) > > by pws.gamewood.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA18991 > > for <lcpayne@digdat.com>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:41 -0400 > > Message-ID: <39E3515C.8E778C51@gamewood.net> > > Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:26:52 -0400 > > From: Mary Leigh Boisseau <deanie@gamewood.net> > > Reply-To: deanie@gamewood.net > > X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Win98; U) > > X-Accept-Language: en > > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > To: Lucille Payne <lcpayne@digdat.com> > > Subject: Re: District Courts > > References: <200010091730.SM00214@lcpayne.digdat.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > > I MAY BE WRONG, but I think that cases sent from Pittsylvania Co to > > District Court were sent to Lynchburg. Sorry I can't be more help than > > this. > > > > Mary Leigh > > > > Lucille Payne wrote: > > > > > Dear Mary Leigh: > > > > > > I have been planning to write and ask you a question > > > abou > > > > > > ==== VAPITTSY Mailing List ==== > > Find tons of Pitsylvania County info at the Pittsylvania County VAGenWeb > Project! http://www.rootsweb.com/~vapittsy/ > > > > > >

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------18DB560B4945388520F58E96 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Maybe you can get it this way Lucille. --------------18DB560B4945388520F58E96 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <> Received: from pws.gamewood.net (root@pws.gamewood.net [199.0.155.48]) by fox.gamewood.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32628 for <deanie@gamewood.net>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:45 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost) by pws.gamewood.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with internal id NAA18993; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:42 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:42 -0400 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@gamewood.net> Message-Id: <200010101715.NAA18993@pws.gamewood.net> To: <deanie@gamewood.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="NAA18993.971198142/pws.gamewood.net" Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 This is a MIME-encapsulated message --NAA18993.971198142/pws.gamewood.net The original message was received at Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:41 -0400 from mx1417.pubip.gamewood.net [205.161.154.132] ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <lcpayne@digdat.com> ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mail.digdat.com.: >>> RCPT To:<lcpayne@digdat.com> <<< 550 not local host digdat.com, not a gateway 550 <lcpayne@digdat.com>... User unknown --NAA18993.971198142/pws.gamewood.net Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; pws.gamewood.net Received-From-MTA: DNS; mx1417.pubip.gamewood.net Arrival-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:41 -0400 Final-Recipient: RFC822; lcpayne@digdat.com Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; mail.digdat.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 not local host digdat.com, not a gateway Last-Attempt-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:42 -0400 --NAA18993.971198142/pws.gamewood.net Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: <deanie@gamewood.net> Received: from gamewood.net (mx1417.pubip.gamewood.net [205.161.154.132]) by pws.gamewood.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA18991 for <lcpayne@digdat.com>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:15:41 -0400 Message-ID: <39E3515C.8E778C51@gamewood.net> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:26:52 -0400 From: Mary Leigh Boisseau <deanie@gamewood.net> Reply-To: deanie@gamewood.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lucille Payne <lcpayne@digdat.com> Subject: Re: District Courts References: <200010091730.SM00214@lcpayne.digdat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I MAY BE WRONG, but I think that cases sent from Pittsylvania Co to District Court were sent to Lynchburg. Sorry I can't be more help than this. Mary Leigh Lucille Payne wrote: > Dear Mary Leigh: > > I have been planning to write and ask you a question > abou

DANVILLE, PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY, VIRGINIA BIRTHS, 1853-96 Settled in 1793 and incorporated in 1835, the city of Danville is situated within Pittsylvania County and located in southern Virginia. This database is collection of birth records from the city between 1855 and 1896. Providing valuable information regarding more than 5,400 individuals, the records were taken from existing county documents held by the state. Researchers will find each person's name, race, sex, birth date, and parents' names. Source Information: Fridley, Beth, comp., "Danville City, Pittsylvania County, Virginia Births, 1853-96." [database online] Provo, UT: Ancestry.com, 2000-. Original Data: "Danville and Pittsylvania County, Virginia Births." Library of Virginia. To search this database, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/search/rectype/inddbs/4791.htm

The phone number to the Bassett Historical Center is (540) 629-9191. Cindy (Hubbard) Headen -----Original Message----- From: Tom Jones <tomjones@toad.net> To: VAPITTSY-L@rootsweb.com <VAPITTSY-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Monday, October 09, 2000 10:19 PM Subject: [VAPITTSY-L] Other library resources near Pittsylvania >Gang, > >This note is prompted by Liz Mingus' question from a couple days ago: > >Here are a couple other worthwhile places to visit if you're in the >Pittsylvania area: > >Jones Memorial Library >(804) 846-0501 >2311 Memorial Ave., >Lynchburg, VA 24501 >http://www.jmlibrary.org/ > >Bassett Library >(540) 629-9840 >Rte. 57 in Bassett, VA >this is in Henry County, but I've found material on Pittsylvania families >here. > >Of course there's the Pittsylvania Courthouse -- >I don't have the address handy, but as you proceed South on Business US 29 >in Chatham (Main St.), it's on the left. Just watch for the historical >marker. Park in the rear of the building by turning left on Bank St. > >Tom > > >==== VAPITTSY Mailing List ==== >To subscribe to other county mailing lists visit http://www.rootsweb.com >

Gang, This note is prompted by Liz Mingus' question from a couple days ago: Here are a couple other worthwhile places to visit if you're in the Pittsylvania area: Jones Memorial Library (804) 846-0501 2311 Memorial Ave., Lynchburg, VA 24501 http://www.jmlibrary.org/ Bassett Library (540) 629-9840 Rte. 57 in Bassett, VA this is in Henry County, but I've found material on Pittsylvania families here. Of course there's the Pittsylvania Courthouse -- I don't have the address handy, but as you proceed South on Business US 29 in Chatham (Main St.), it's on the left. Just watch for the historical marker. Park in the rear of the building by turning left on Bank St. Tom

Re: Message #5 by Mary Leigh Boisseau----- Mary, can you tell us a little about the Camden Parish Overseers of the Poor after about 1800? I have read that Lewis Atkinson was one of the Overseers during this period. What does this job entail, and what does the job tell us about the person who is an Overseer? Thanks, Archie Holmes Holmesatkinson@cs.com

Marge, I do not have the Yantis book. However, my sense was that the tax in question is property tax, and adults could be exempt only as indigent, physically deficient or metnally deficient. Anyone OWNING land was not exempt from taxes as far as I can see during this period except maybe extreme old age for veterans. Look how many times land was sold (and still is) because of back taxes owed. Illness or old age were the only ways slaves were exempt from taxes, as far as I know. However, mental illness is not the ONLY reason fathers left sons' (or daughters') property in trust. In many cases (see old Baptist preacher Harris), the father was afraid the heir would waste or squander away the inheritance through drink, gambling, wild women, or bad friends - thus assigning trustees for that heir's share. In the case of daughters, the fathers were often protecting the inheritance from untrusted sons-in-law. So, I think the researcher is in trouble if mental illness is assumed without any other "clues." But no, I don't think it gets you out of paying land taxes unless you are also indigent . Property taxes may be another matter entirely. I am going to also copy this to the county site to further confuse the issue. Mgbrown105@aol.com wrote: > Re: the message from Archdon per the Brawner question, citing Netti Yantis, > this just doesn't ring true to me. Do you have her book to check? Think > that may be a later reading of exemptions. Just guessing, but I know > mentally retarded adults paid no taxes! Just curious. Margie

I don't think being a woman exempted one from tax if one were also the head of househould. One of my Shirley ancestors remained unmarried and is on the tax lists for many years. Norma ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Leigh Boisseau" <deanie@gamewood.net> To: <VAPITTSY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 2:18 PM Subject: [VAPITTSY-L] Re: John Brawner & exemptions > Marge, I do not have the Yantis book. However, my sense was that the tax in > question is property tax, and adults could be exempt only as indigent, > physically deficient or metnally deficient. Anyone OWNING land was not exempt > from taxes as far as I can see during this period except maybe extreme old age > for veterans. Look how many times land was sold (and still is) because of back > taxes owed. Illness or old age were the only ways slaves were exempt from > taxes, as far as I know. > > However, mental illness is not the ONLY reason fathers left sons' (or > daughters') property in trust. In many cases (see old Baptist preacher > Harris), the father was afraid the heir would waste or squander away the > inheritance through drink, gambling, wild women, or bad friends - thus > assigning trustees for that heir's share. In the case of daughters, the > fathers were often protecting the inheritance from untrusted sons-in-law. > > So, I think the researcher is in trouble if mental illness is assumed without > any other "clues." But no, I don't think it gets you out of paying land taxes > unless you are also indigent . Property taxes may be another matter entirely. > > I am going to also copy this to the county site to further confuse the issue. > > > > Mgbrown105@aol.com wrote: > > > Re: the message from Archdon per the Brawner question, citing Netti Yantis, > > this just doesn't ring true to me. Do you have her book to check? Think > > that may be a later reading of exemptions. Just guessing, but I know > > mentally retarded adults paid no taxes! Just curious. Margie > > > ==== VAPITTSY Mailing List ==== > New folks are joining the list everyday. Have you posted your surnames and/or queries recently? > >

Norma, My experience is when someone gets the line incorrect, and especially without documentation, then I will write it up. Case in point is a recent line on Benjamin and Delilah Motley Terry printed in VA-NC Piedmont. My rebuttal will appear in the coming issue. The writer of the mistaken line, has conceded she was in error, and had no documentation. it's alot of work, and when it is not your own line, which the one above was not mine, you have to decide if it is worth it. regards, Margie brown

In my transcription of the Camden Parish Vestry Book (which also includes after 1776 Overseers of the Poor reports), John Brawner show up as "pensioner" in the Feb 25 Overseers report and his wife joins him in the list in Sept 1788. They continue in the list through March 1797. Then in September of 1797, Mrs. Brawner is the widow of John Brawner and continues on the list alone until September 1799. Then she is no longer in the records I transcribed which go up to 1820. Thus the John Brawner being excused of paying levies in the order book is probably this one, who was married and apparently was destitute. He does not appear to be the brother who had property left under the care of his brothers unless the father's provision was because he had been wasteful of his assets and the father had wanted to preserve something for him. However, my experience in the county families indicate that one did not receive help from the overseers of the poor if one had property. Mary Leigh Boisseau

Mary, did he show up on the Overseer of the Poor report in 1776? Thank you very much for that information! Norma ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Leigh Boisseau" <deanie@gamewood.net> To: <VAPITTSY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 9:37 PM Subject: [VAPITTSY-L] Re John Brawner > In my transcription of the Camden Parish Vestry Book (which also > includes after 1776 Overseers of the Poor reports), John Brawner show up > as "pensioner" in the Feb 25 Overseers report and his wife joins him in > the list in Sept 1788. They continue in the list through March 1797. > Then in September of 1797, Mrs. Brawner is the widow of John Brawner and > continues on the list alone until September 1799. Then she is no longer > in the records I transcribed which go up to 1820. Thus the John Brawner > being excused of paying levies in the order book is probably this one, > who was married and apparently was destitute. He does not appear to be > the brother who had property left under the care of his brothers unless > the father's provision was because he had been wasteful of his assets > and the father had wanted to preserve something for him. However, my > experience in the county families indicate that one did not receive help > from the overseers of the poor if one had property. > > Mary Leigh Boisseau > > > ==== VAPITTSY Mailing List ==== > > >

I have a list of ten reasons why a person may be exempt from levies. They are: 1. Being a white woman; 2. Not being a citizen of Virginia; 3. Being a political employee-everything from a constable to state governor; 4. Being a professor at a college; 5. Being a minister of the Gospel; 6. Being a soldier or sailor; 7. Being old or infirm - the person was exempted by applying to the county court so records of those exempt for this reason can be found in the court order books; 8. Being a ferryman; 9. Being a non-resident. The tax was imposed only once, so if a man owned property in two counties, or in two different "quarters" in one county, he was exempt from the tithe except at his place of residence; and 10. Other reasons. This list came from the preface to "The 1787 Census of Virginia" compiled by Metti Schreiner-Yantis and Florene Speakman Love, Genealogical Books in Print, Springfield, Virginia, pg. xiv.

Obits - Star Tribune September 6, 2000 BOSWELL, Bernice Herndon - Chatham, VA WALLER, Eliza Taylor - Chatham, VA September 13, 2000 DeALBA, Mildred Watson - Norfolk, VA DOSS, Ocie Shelton - Altavista, VA KEESEE, James W. - Gretna, VA MORRIS, David Taylor - Chicago, IL NEWBILL, Amy Belle - Penhook, VA SOURS, Hazel Satterfield - Halifax, VA September 20, 2000 BRADNER, Elizabeth B. - Chatham, VA LLOYD, Brian Richard - Gretna, VA LUMPKIN, Kemper - Rocky Mount, VA OAKES, Lilliam Catherine Haskins - Danville, VA SHIELDS, Ethel Ramsey - Gretna, VA SEPTEMBER 27, 2000 DAVIS, Elizabeth Haskins - Chatham, VA BRYANT, Robert Lester - Danville, VA DALTON, Clyde Edward - Sandy Level, VA SINK, George Ray - Chatham, VA WYATT, JR., Ben - Gretna, VA Scanning not available at this time. Please provide postal mailing address when requesting copies. Thank You. Jo Ann Lucas

Melanie, I think you are exactly right on John Brawner, since his brothers were charged with his care, further research in Court Records will probably show he was incapiciated , or mentally incompetent. If the person that claims descent has no documentation, I would ignore their claim. Has the querist seen a copy of the actual Will? frequently it will state as much, or later account books should show a guardianship accounting. regards, Margie Brown

Margie, the will that actually applies to the researcher's family isn't used to prove descent of her lineage. As a matter of fact, the researcher's descent is probably through one Benjamin Brawner, the brother of the John that I think was impaired in some way. Benjamin died 1809 in Pittsylvania County, leaving a will naming an entirely different set of offspring than she uses. That's why she needs John. This (Benjamin) was a Catholic family, so records are very hard to come by, except through the Catholic Church. I have no idea if they practiced their religion. I know my John Brawner's line, while marrying into Catholic families, actually endowed or helped to endow Baptist and Methodist Episcopal Churches. While I don't think this particular line had any ministers, we had one grandfather who was quite vocal in his love of the Lord. Several "savings" were credited to his rather loud pleas. I guess no one told him God saves souls, not lives. Norma ----- Original Message ----- From: <Mgbrown105@aol.com> To: <VAPITTSY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 4:53 PM Subject: Re: [VAPITTSY-L] Re: John Brawner > Melanie, I think you are exactly right on John Brawner, since his brothers > were charged with his care, further research in Court Records will probably > show he was incapiciated , or mentally incompetent. If the person that > claims descent has no documentation, I would ignore their claim. Has the > querist seen a copy of the actual Will? frequently it will state as much, or > later account books should show a guardianship accounting. > > regards, Margie Brown > > > ==== VAPITTSY Mailing List ==== > New folks are joining the list everyday. Have you posted your surnames and/or queries recently? > >

At least two John Brawners owned property in other counties. This researcher is taking the records of at least 3 John Brawners and lumping them into one. This researcher has him living in Pittsylvania County long enough to sire a passle of children (which don't belong to any of the John Brawners), owning land in Fairfax County, VA, receiving aid from the parish in Prince William county, owning land in Charles County, MD, dying in one of Pitts or Prince William or Fairfax Counties and his estate probated in Charles County, MD. However, casual reasearchers are taking the researcher to be the current "authority" on the family. In addition, the records of my John Brawner, whose family was and still is quite respectable members of any community, are being assigned to the researcher's John Brawner. Needless to say, it doesn't do my "wah" one bit of good! My family has always kept quite a family history but it was just for fun--and something with which to threaten good behaviour out of our children "if you want to be a member of THIS family...". I'm the first to attempt to document it by today's more rigorous standards, I think. Norma Thompson P.S. Thank you very much for the information. I need that sort of corroberation of my understanding of taxes. I surely don't get out of them for owning property elsewhere! ----- Original Message ----- From: "melanie d. crain" <mdcrain@mindspring.com> To: <VAPITTSY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 2:53 PM Subject: [VAPITTSY-L] Re: John Brawner > Norma, > Thus far, I have seen only a handful of reasons why anyone is exempted > from taxes in the 18th century in Pittsylvania Co.: > 1. advanced age > 2. debilitating health > 3. mental health problems > > The Personal Property Taxes were charged and collected separately from > Land Taxes (and people who owned land paid both types of taxes). Thus > the argument that John Brawner wasn't taxed because he owned land > somewhere else doesn't apply to the Personal Property Taxes which the > Court Order is referring to. > > The law mandated that every white male over 21 pay a head tax on himself > and any other male that age or older who lived in his household in the > county where he resided. Other items of personal property were then > taxed (horses, cows, etc) and those items sometimes changed from year to > year. > > Just curious--did John Brawner own land elsewhere? For strength of > proof, it would seem the whole argument falls apart on that point alone > if the other researcher has no land records to back up their assertion. > > Good luck; hope you get other responses so we can compare our > understanding of these court orders. > > Melanie Crain > > > ==== VAPITTSY Mailing List ==== > Pittsylvania County Files online! Visit the Pittsylvania County Archives at http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/va/pittsylv.htm > >