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 ==== > > >