Forgot to add; one of the many definitions of "quarter" given by Johnson - 1755 - is a division or area set aside for some purpose or need. Thus a "football quarter" is a "soccer field". Paul Can anyone tell us -- without too many jokes -- just what a "football quarter" is? Pat

Very interesting...... Thanks ----- Original Message ----- From: VAThomson@aol.com To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 9:43 AM Subject: [VAROOTS] Mary & Thomas Kirby Here's an interesting deed: York County, Virginia Records 1659-1662 (Weisiger III) Thomas Kirby of New Poquoson Parish, York Co., for considerations, especially in consideration of engagement of Peter Plovier of Walterchis Creek in Warwick County, to administer physick, medicine and chirurgery, as he the said Kirby or any of his family shall occasion to make use of, for life, and all to be done free to said Kirby, grants to said Peter Plovier, 100 acres, being on plantation of said Kirby, joining platation (sic) of football quarter, sent to Daniel Fisher's plantation. 28 Jan. 1659 Thomas (7) Kirby Wit: John Markham, John (I) Bell I, Thomas Kirby, with consent of my wife, have sold to Mr. Peter Plovier a parcel of land; and I, Mary Kirby, wife to said Thomas, do affirm it. 9 Jan. 1660. Thomas (7) Kirby, Mary Kirby ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

"The deed was to Jane Smith, et uxor" means to me, "Jane Smith and her wife". Pretty progressive for those times. :) Bob Juch http://www.Juch.org -----Original Message----- From: Ms2001@aol.com [mailto:Ms2001@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 8:44 AM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] UX HARVEY Rex! Your explainations are AWESOME! We have missed you all these years - glad you have joined us now! My Latin is non-existant but I did find this in "What Did They Mean By That? - A Dictionary of Historical Terms for Genealogists" by Paul Drake, J>D> published by Heritage Books. "et ux., et uxor" (Lat) and wife; and husband" e.g., "The deed was to Jane Smith, et uxor, hence even though the husband's name did not appear, the researcher knew that Jane was then married." Bev

Sounds to me like husband and wife were in the same plot and they chose to register them in cemetery records that way --- DEBnLEX@aol.com wrote: > BEV, > IT WAS FOUND ON THE CEMETARY RECORDS" ROSEHILL > CEMETARY, PANOLA COUNTY, > SARDIS, MISSISSIPPI. > A.L. UX HARVEY > CHRISTIAN UX HARVEY > JUST ABOUT EVERY LISTING HAD IT. > > DEBBIE > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion > online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Opps!!!!! I shouldn't respond to e mail in the middle of the night! James Baker was a DRUMMER BOY, not a bugle boy! They did not yet have bugles during the revolution! Officers, BTW, usually received 1,200 acre grants. Elizabeth

OK, the phrase "football quarter" has now shown up at least twice in this discussion. I know the season has started, but surely. . . . <G> Can anyone tell us -- without too many jokes -- just what a "football quarter" is? Pat -----Original Message----- From: VAThomson@aol.com [mailto:VAThomson@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 07:44 To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [VAROOTS] Mary & Thomas Kirby Here's an interesting deed: York County, Virginia Records 1659-1662 (Weisiger III) Thomas Kirby of New Poquoson Parish, York Co., for considerations, especially in consideration of engagement of Peter Plovier of Walterchis Creek in Warwick County, to administer physick, medicine and chirurgery, as he the said Kirby or any of his family shall occasion to make use of, for life, and all to be done free to said Kirby, grants to said Peter Plovier, 100 acres, being on plantation of said Kirby, joining platation (sic) of football quarter, sent to Daniel Fisher's plantation. 28 Jan. 1659 Thomas (7) Kirby Wit: John Markham, John (I) Bell I, Thomas Kirby, with consent of my wife, have sold to Mr. Peter Plovier a parcel of land; and I, Mary Kirby, wife to said Thomas, do affirm it. 9 Jan. 1660. Thomas (7) Kirby, Mary Kirby ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

The term "et ux" was used in formal writings where it was helpful to the reader to reveal that the wife was a party to the business relationship, yet where her given name was not required, as in many contracts, particularly in courts' orders, minute books, and entries, and occasionally in deeds where her precise identity was not necessary to the transfer. It was a term of description and used as an adjective. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ms2001@aol.com To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 10:41 PM Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] UX HARVEY Can you tell us how it was used? Give us the exact quote, please. Bev ========Original Message======== Subj: [VAROOTS] UX HARVEY Date: 9/5/2003 10:11:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:DEBnLEX@aol.com">DEBnLEX@aol.com</A> Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> To: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> Sent from the Internet (Details) IN DOING MY RESEARCH, I NOTICED A DESCENDENT'S NAME AS BEING 'UX' HARVEY INSTEAD OF JUST 'HARVEY' DOES 'UX' HAVE A CERTAIN MEANING? THANKS, DEBBIE ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

ux next to the name just indicated wife of Harvey. If it said "et ux" it meant "and wife" --- Ms2001@aol.com wrote: > Can you tell us how it was used? Give us the > exact quote, please. > > Bev > > ========Original Message======== > Subj: [VAROOTS] UX HARVEY > Date: 9/5/2003 10:11:03 PM Eastern Daylight > Time > From: <A > HREF="mailto:DEBnLEX@aol.com">DEBnLEX@aol.com</A> > > Reply-to: <A > HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> > > To: <A > HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> > > Sent from the Internet (Details) > > > > IN DOING MY RESEARCH, I NOTICED A DESCENDENT'S > NAME AS BEING 'UX' HARVEY > INSTEAD OF JUST 'HARVEY' DOES 'UX' HAVE A > CERTAIN MEANING? > THANKS, > DEBBIE > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion > online genealogy records, go > to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion > online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Can you tell us how it was used? Give us the exact quote, please. Bev ========Original Message======== Subj: [VAROOTS] UX HARVEY Date: 9/5/2003 10:11:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:DEBnLEX@aol.com">DEBnLEX@aol.com</A> Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> To: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> Sent from the Internet (Details) IN DOING MY RESEARCH, I NOTICED A DESCENDENT'S NAME AS BEING 'UX' HARVEY INSTEAD OF JUST 'HARVEY' DOES 'UX' HAVE A CERTAIN MEANING? THANKS, DEBBIE ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

I have a copy of a half sheet of paper that is a military warrant for 200 acres in KY. for James Baker, a bugle boy for the VA. Continental Line. These warrants are in VA.'s records. Sometimes there were details too on the grant itself. You can order a full color copy of your ancestor's KY. Land Grant (the original on parchment with an official wax seal) from the Ass't. Sec. of State in Frankfort. (if it weren't stolen a few years ago before security was tight!) Ms. Kandi Atkinson is in charge of them. I forget the price of the copy. Elizabeth Kaspar Rex Kirby wrote: > Thanks for the additional input...... > Other than for those who may have purchased their land, do you > know whether or not a person had to fill out a written application > of "petition" of some sort to get a patent or grant? And if so, were > those documents kept by the land office? >

IN DOING MY RESEARCH, I NOTICED A DESCENDENT'S NAME AS BEING 'UX' HARVEY INSTEAD OF JUST 'HARVEY' DOES 'UX' HAVE A CERTAIN MEANING? THANKS, DEBBIE

"Ux" is an abbreviation for "Uxor" meaning "a wife". ----- Original Message ----- From: DEBnLEX@aol.com To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 9:10 PM Subject: [VAROOTS] UX HARVEY IN DOING MY RESEARCH, I NOTICED A DESCENDENT'S NAME AS BEING 'UX' HARVEY INSTEAD OF JUST 'HARVEY' DOES 'UX' HAVE A CERTAIN MEANING? THANKS, DEBBIE ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Hi Rex, Don't know if you have this information, but thought I would send it to just in case. Hope Stanly all kerby family info from william and mary quarterly vol 14 no 3 page 154-158 and from "A History of Poquoson, Virginia" by Thomas Vincent Watkins.... THOMAS KERBY DIED 1 JUNE 1668. HIS WILL WAS MADE 6 MARCH 1668, A MONTH BEFORE THE RENNOVATION OF HIS HOUSE AND FOUR MONTHS BEFORE HIS DEATH. I GIVE TO MY SON ROBERT MY WHOLE SEAT OF LAND. IN CASE HE DEPART THIS LIFE IN HIS MINORITY LEAVING NO ISSUE AND MY WIFE MARY THEN SURVIVING HIM, THE LAND TO BE FOR THE ONLY USE AND BEHOOF OF MY SAID WIFE, WHO IS MOTHER OF MY SON.....WITT HENRY FREEMAN, WILLIAM MERRY, ROBER SHELSTON. PROBATE OF THE WILL WAS SECURED BY MARY KERBY THE RELICT AND EXECUTRIX AT A COURT 24 JUNE 1668. THE TONE OF THE WILL SOUNDS LIKE THOMAS KERBY HAD BEEN MARRIED BEFORE AND THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN PREVIOUS ISSUE; HAD ROBERT BEEN THE ONLY SON, THE LAW OF PRIMOGENITURE WOULD HAVE SECURED ROBERT'S TITLE TO THE LAND. PROVISION WAS MADE IN THE WILL THAT THERE WOULD BE NO INTERFERENCE FROM OTHER POSSIBLE HEIRS. THOMAS KERBY WAS LIVING IN CHARLES PARISH, YORK COUNTY, AS EARLY AS 1645. HE DIED JUNE 20, 1668. HIS WILL MENTIONS ONLY ONE SON ROBERT, WHOM HE DESIRES TO BE TAUGHT READING AND WRITING. HE MARRIED MARY , WHO DIED AND WAS BURIED FEB 8, 1686. The Thomas Kirby plantation "butted" upon Football Quarter Creek and is the land on Bunting's Lane. Thomas Curson patented land on the west side of Football Quarter Creek. It was located on a branch called "Key OaK". This land descended to his grandson, Thomas Kirby, who was also grandson to Thomas Kirby mentioned above.............. THE 200 ACRE PATENT FOR LAND ON FOOTBALL QUARTER CREEK WAS EXCHANGED FOR A JOINT GRANT WITH THOMAS KERBY FOR 350 ACRES IN THE MOCKJACK BAY AREA ACROSS THE YORK RIVER. THIS JOINT PATENT OF MOORE AND KERBY IS MISSING BUT ON 10 OCTOBER 1642, THIS PATENT WAS ASSIGNED TO THOMAS SYMMONS. THE HEADRIGHTS FOR THIS JOINT PATENT WERE JOHN EDDEN, PETER BAYERS, ELLIN AUDREY (FIRST WIFE OF THOMAS KERBY), GILBERT REYNOLDS. WILLIAM RICHARDS, AND BARBARY CHAPMAN. THE LAST THREE OF THESE NAMES ARE THE SAME AS FOUND IN THE JOSEPH MOORE GRANT. THE OTHER THEREE NAMES ARE THE HEADRIGHTS OWNED BY KIRBY. THIS MEANS THAT JOSEPH MOORE SACRIFICED HIS 200 ACRE GRANT ON FOOTBALL QUARTER FOR A JOINT OWNERSHIP WITH KIRBY IN THE MOCKJACK BAY AREA. THIS ASSIGNMENT OF THIS LAND TO THOMAS SYMMONS WAS AN EXCHANGE OF LAND BETWEEN THOMAS SYMMONS AND THOMAS KERBY. IT APPEARS ALSO THAT JOSEPH MOORE WAS DECEASED AT THE TIME THE TRANSFER OF LAND BETWEEN SYMMONS AND KIRBY WAS MADE. THE FIRST PATENT OF THOMAS SYMMONS IS MENTIONED IN A PATENT TO HENRY FREEMAN. THIS FIRST SYMMONS GRANT WAS ISSUED ON 11 FEBRUARY 1635. THE SECOND PATENT WHICH IS A RENEWAL OF THE FIRST IS DATED 23 MAY 1637. 50 ACRES BUTTING UPON A CREEK NEAR ADJOINING LAND OF HUMPHRY LOYD, AND 50 ACRES NEAR LAND OF THOMAS RAY, BOUNDED ON THE NORTHEAST WITH A SEDGIE CREEK AND ON THE SOUTHEAST WITH A PYNER SWAMP. DUE FOR TRANSPORTAION OF HIS WIFE ALICE ROBINS AND A SERVANT NAMED RICHARD KEY. THE THIRD PATENT DATED, 25 NOVEMBER 1637. TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRENENTS SHALL COME, I SIR JOHN HARVEY, KNT, DOE WITH THE CONSENT OF THE COUNCILL OF STATE ACCORDINGLY GIVE AND GRAUNT UNTO THOMAS SYMMONS, 450 ACRES OF LAND SITUATE, LYING AND BEING IN THE COUNTY OF CHARLES RIVER, BUTTING UPON FOOTEBALL QUARTER CREEK SOUTH, RUNNING PARALLEL TO A BRANCH OF SAID CREEK NEAR NORTHWEST UNTIL IT MEETS WITH THE PALNTAION OF SAID THOMAS SYMMONS, THE SOUTHWEST SIDE BOUNDED WITH THE LANDS OF WILLIAM FREEMAN, THE WEST SIDE BOUNDED WITH THE LAND OF ANDREW HUNTINGTON AND WHAT THIS GIFT OF LAND SHOULD WANT OF 450 ACRES IS TO BEE SUPPLIED BETWEEN THE PLANTATIONS OF GILBERT SYMMONS AND THE SAID THOMAS SYMMONS, RUNNING HALF A MILE INTO THE WOODS. THE LAND, 450 ACRES BEING DUE UNTO HIM THE SAID THOMAS SYMMONS BY AND FOR THE TRANSPORTAION AT HIS OWN EXPENSE AND CHARGES OF NINE PERSONS INTO THIS COLONY WHOSE NAMES ARE IN THE RECORDS MENTIONED UNDER THIS PATENT. JOHN CARTER, GEORRGE HADERWILL, ROBERT ROBINS, DOROTHY GLOVER, RICHARD TOMPSON, JAMES LISTER, RICHARD HINTON, SOMON CULY, WILLIAM HADEWELL. THIS PATENT WAS ASSIGNED TO THOMAS KIRBY, PLANTER, ON 28 DECEMBER 1642. WITNESSES; PETER RANSOME AND EDWARD BEREMAN. THIS WAS AN EXCHANGE OF LAND BETWEEN THOMAS SYMMONS AND THOMAS KIRBY. THE SYMMONS LAND ON FOOTBALL QUATER CREEK WAS TRADED FOR LAND IN THE MOCKJACK BAY AREA ACROSS THE YORK RIVER TAHT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY PATENTED BY KIRBY AND JOSEPH MOORE JOINTLY. THOMAS SYMMONS WAS DECEASED BEFOR 26 OF MARCH 1646, FOR A COURT OF THAT DATE IN YORK COUTY, A SUIT BETWEEN FRANCIS WILLIS, ADMINISTRATOR OF THOMAS SYMMONS DECEASED, PLAINTIFF AND THOMAS KIRBY CONCERNING CATTLE WAS PRESENTED. THOMAS SYMMONS IS SAID TO BE DECEASED IN A PATENT OF THOMAS PURIFOY AND MRS TEMPERANCE PEPPETT IN MOCKJACK BAY, 15 SEPTEMBER 1652. THIS MEANS THAT BY 1646 THOMAS KIRBY HAD BECOME ESTABLISHED ON HIS PLANTATION ON FOOTBALL QUARTER CREEK AND THAT THOMAS SYMMONS HAD MOVED MOST OF HIS POSSESSIONS TO MOCKJACK BAY ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rex Kirby" <rex@tyler.net> To: <VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:53 PM Subject: RE: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers > Bev and Paul, > > Thank you both for the information and the web site... > Now for a couple of questions... > > Bev, you mentioned land patent to Lt. Richard Popeley > "for the transportation of 25 persons including Thomas > Kirbye" and then Kirbye was assigned the land of Thomas > Symons ...who received the land for the transportation of > 9 persons on Nov 25, 1637." > > Correct me if I am wrong but would "transportation" mean > bringing folks over from ? by ship to America? Am I to > infer that Thomas Kirbye was a passenger on broad > Popeley's ship and he could have been a "freeman, slave > or indentured servant"? I assume further that Lt. Popeley > did this sometime before June 10, 1635 perhaps as far > back as two years or more. Is there anyway of knowing > when Lt Popeley transported these 25 individuals. How > would I find the name of the ship and the list of those > 25 individuals and the classification of Kirbye as a > passenger? > > As to the assignment of land to Kirbye in 1642 which had > earlier been patented to Symons for transporting 9 people > on Nov 25, 1637...Would that mean that Kirbye, if an > indentured servant on Lt. Popeley's ship, was no longer > indentured by 1642 which then enabled him to own land? > I couldn't help but notice that 1642 minus 7 equals 1635. > Would that suggest that Kirbye got here in 1635 as an > indentured servant, served his seven years and then was > able to own land in his own name by 1642? > > Can you refer me to any website or article discussing > how a person became "un-indentured" so to speak? > Who kept up with who was and who wasn't indentured? > Were there any papers, certificates or whatever issued > by any governmental agency? In other words, how would > anyone know when an indentured servant was no longer > indentured? > > I am somewhat lost on this little "ship" and will appreciate > any help either or you or anyone else can provide that > will light my way to shore... > > Thanks, Rex Kirby > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Drake [mailto:pauldrake@charter.net] > Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 12:28 PM > To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] HULETTS IN VA > > Here are the VA patents visible on line in photocopies of the original, thus > open to you and more complete and accurate than are Nugent's Abstracts, > where there are many errors and misinterpretations. > > You can search VA Land Office Patents by name of ancestor from the bottom of > this page if you do not know the Vol. and page numbers. Paul > http://eagle.vsla.edu/lonn/ > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go > to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 >

Bev, Part of my problem was as I indicated to Pat I was looking at Jefferson Co as it is shown on map today. I had to put my 1700 glasses on to get a better view of the big picture... What I now realize is that Kirby's tract of 85 acres in Jefferson Co, KY in 1792 may not have been anywhere near Jefferson Co, KY as we know it today. As a family researcher, I have to keep reminding myself to view the territory and locations as they existed at the time of the event. Otherwise I find myself looking for someone a long way from where they actually were. Rex -----Original Message----- From: Ms2001@aol.com [mailto:Ms2001@aol.com] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 12:48 PM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers I cannot answer most of your questions - perhaps Paul can - but the short answer is that the land was in KY - Jefferson County was always in the KY territory and certainly in Ky after it became a state which was apparantly close to his date of recordation. Kentucky County was formed in 1777 when Fincastle was divided into Kentucky, Montgomery and Washington Counties. It was split into Fayette, Lincoln and Jefferson shortly afterwards in 1780. I would imagine that it took some time to transfer everything over to KY courts. Also remember it took many days to ride all the way over to KY. Paul? Can you shed more light on this? Bev ========Original Message======== Subj: RE: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Date: 9/5/2003 1:28:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:rex@tyler.net">rex@tyler.net</A> Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> To: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> Sent from the Internet (Details) Thanks, Bev The Samuel Kirby grant is dated 26 April 1792 according to the VA land site but specifically states in a Note that the land was located in Jefferson Co, KY which suggests to me that by April KY was a state. If so, at that point, how would VA be able to issue a grant for land lying in KY? Or could the transaction have been somewhat earlier and the "date" shown is the date it was recorded rather than the date of the grant? Or if the land was actually part of VA at the time of the grant does that mean that someone after the fact of KY becoming a separate state sat down and plotted out each track to be able to state the location as being Jefferson Co, KY? One other detail...did a person or family have to live on the land (or contiguous land) to get the patent or grant? My problem is simply that I'm trying to figure out where Samuel Kirby lived -- VA or KY or perhaps neither? I didn't realize until I started this research that I was so deficient in my education concerning colonial America... It's back to the books for me...but really you and Paul have been very helpful. Rex -----Original Message----- From: Ms2001@aol.com [mailto:Ms2001@aol.com] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 11:33 AM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Kentucky became a state in 1792 - up to that point it was part of Virginia. It's hard to track legal documents if you do not know the formation of Virginia cities and counties and thr states that spun off from Virginia. Virginia started with 8 'shires' or counties. Those developed into 100 in the 1950s but has been reduced as some of them have incorporated and become independent cities. Many families lived in 5 or 6 different counties and never moved! If a patent says 'adjoins his own land', then obviously he did own land ther before the patent. This land could be been purchased or it could have been a patent - some pages of the old patent books are illegible or destroyed. You might check county records to see if there is a purchase recorded. Bev ========Original Message======== Subj: RE: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Date: 9/5/2003 11:18:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:rex@tyler.net">rex@tyler.net</A> Reply-to: HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com To: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> Sent from the Internet (Details) Paul, You have been most helpful in helping unravel just what these records mean or should I say what they don't tell us about our very early ancestors. But there are two more puzzling items about these records, patents and/or grants or conveyances by other means such as deeds or the certificates you mention: I noticed the description of the property in a number of instances referred to land which "adjoins his own land." If that means what I think it means, then it would indicate that the grantee in this particular patent or grant already owned land adjacent to this land. Logically, I would then surmise there was an earlier grant or patent to this same grantee. If so, why can't I find the earlier grant or patent indexed in the records? What part of the records am I overlooking? The second item that puzzles me- and again at the risk of showing my ignorance of VA and KY history (which I admit) - there are any number of grants or patents recorded in VA which refer to land in KY. One in particular, a grant to Samuel Kirby 26 April 1792 of 584 acres located in Jefferson Co, KY. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Jefferson Co on the opposite side of KY from the VA/KY line? If I am reading that correctly does that mean that either the colonial land office of VA or the Commonwealth of VA issued patents and/or grants to land lying in KY? If so, did the grantee live in VA or in KY? How would VA be able to dole out land lying in KY? I haven't located or looked at an old map of colonial VA just yet but did it extend all the way to the western side of KY. If so, why would the description of the land refer to a particular county in KY. Or could it be that the location of the land shown on the VA land site was supplied by someone long after the original patent or grant? I was unable to access the actual document since I don't have the TIFF reader (but will solve that problem today -maybe) I guess my real question is simply whether or not a person found as a grantee in the VA land records actually lived in VA on the date of or at about the time of the patent or grant? In other words where did Samuel Kirby live in 1792 - VA or KY? Or did he live in VA, move to KY and then apply for the grant in VA? Does this mean that just because a person is listed as a grantee of a patent or grant in VA land records that person may not have lived in VA? Straighten me out here Paul. This is crucial to my search for ancestors. Rex -----Original Message----- From: Paul Drake [mailto:pauldrake@charter.net] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 7:51 AM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers When land escheated for whatever reason (usually for failure to "seat"it) the regranting of that tract quite usually was by "certificate" and not again by grant. You will find many such certificates mentioned in Nugent and in the works by others following her efforts. Notice that assignments or patent rights usually only appeared in the records of the county in which the land was situate. ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Thanks for the additional input. I had wondered why there was such disparity in the acreage amount of the patents and/or grants and I had noticed that many of them were for 400 acres. I am sure there were many other reasons to explain the widely varying acreage amounts. Other than for those who may have purchased their land, do you know whether or not a person had to fill out a written application of "petition" of some sort to get a patent or grant? And if so, were those documents kept by the land office? Specifically, is there any way for me to know why Samuel Kirby's grant was for 584 acres and Thomas Kirby's was for 85 1/2? I saw one grant for over 11,000 acres to one individual and another grant for 30 acres to someone else. Did the land office have any guidelines to go by? Or is this one of those items I label "That's just the way it was." By the way, present day appraisal and/or tax offices maintain maps of the county showing ownership by name of every square inch of land, the shape and size of any improvements, etc. Was anything like this done in early VA? If so, were those records preserved? Rex -----Original Message----- From: E.A. Kaspar [mailto:E-Kaspar@wiu.edu] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 1:18 PM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [VAROOTS] KY. Land Grants and Warrants Many Virginians, including my ancestor, Martin, Baker, received land grants in KY. (KY., remember was part of VA. until 1792.) Many received the land for their service in either the French and Indian War (by the British beginning in 1763) or later for service in the Revolution (beginning in 1782; only 11%, however, of grants went to veterans.). Officers received much more land than did the enlisted men. Also a man could purchase a land grant either from the VA. government ( 400 acres for $2.25 per hundred under the law of 1779) or from grantees who wanted money rather than the land. Because many did not realize that their land both had to be lived on (usually for a year) with a crop raised, and also had to be registered, they lost their land. There were many tangled law suits. See Kentucky Ancestry by Roseann R. Hogan, Ancestry, S.L.C., 1992. Or for a list of soldiers' names in the War of 1812: Calendar of Warrants for Land in Kentucky, by Phillip Taylor, Gen. Pub. Co., 1967. E. Kaspar ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Paul, I suppose with the requirements you mentioned some one had to verify their fulfillment and/or completion. Did the land office have inspectors who rode around looking for those in compliance or those not in compliance? Who in VA made the ultimate decision that a person or family was in compliance and got to keep their land, or if not, had to move? I can see where three years of hard labor and three years of taxes but a bit shy of some requirement resulting in forfeiture of a patent or grant would put the whole controversy in some Court. Are there records of those proceedings? Rex -----Original Message----- From: Paul Drake [mailto:pauldrake@charter.net] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 1:39 PM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers A person did not have to live on the land to obtain the patent - but he had to settle the land within three years and pay the taxes in order to keep it. Bev *** or pay someone else to "put it under the plow" and construct a habitable cabin and occupy it. Many speculators from VA (and elsewhere) never saw their patent land, yet "seated" it as said, and by sale, land contract, or otherwise developed the land and sold it off. ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

UX is latin for wife --- DEBnLEX@aol.com wrote: > IN DOING MY RESEARCH, I NOTICED A DESCENDENT'S > NAME AS BEING 'UX' HARVEY > INSTEAD OF JUST 'HARVEY' DOES 'UX' HAVE A > CERTAIN MEANING? THANKS, > DEBBIE > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion > online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Thank you very much for the address- Bev for sending it to me, Paul for sharing it with us all. Pat

Hello rex@tyler.net, In reference to your comment: è One other detail...did a person or family have to live on è the land (or contiguous land) to get the patent or grant? A person did not have to live on the land to obtain the patent - but he had to settle the land within three years and pay the taxes in order to keep it. Bev ========Original Message======== Subj: RE: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Date: 9/5/2003 1:28:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:rex@tyler.net">rex@tyler.net</A> Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> To: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> Sent from the Internet (Details) Thanks, Bev The Samuel Kirby grant is dated 26 April 1792 according to the VA land site but specifically states in a Note that the land was located in Jefferson Co, KY which suggests to me that by April KY was a state. If so, at that point, how would VA be able to issue a grant for land lying in KY? Or could the transaction have been somewhat earlier and the "date" shown is the date it was recorded rather than the date of the grant? Or if the land was actually part of VA at the time of the grant does that mean that someone after the fact of KY becoming a separate state sat down and plotted out each track to be able to state the location as being Jefferson Co, KY? One other detail...did a person or family have to live on the land (or contiguous land) to get the patent or grant? My problem is simply that I'm trying to figure out where Samuel Kirby lived -- VA or KY or perhaps neither? I didn't realize until I started this research that I was so deficient in my education concerning colonial America... It's back to the books for me...but really you and Paul have been very helpful. Rex -----Original Message----- From: Ms2001@aol.com [mailto:Ms2001@aol.com] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 11:33 AM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Kentucky became a state in 1792 - up to that point it was part of Virginia. It's hard to track legal documents if you do not know the formation of Virginia cities and counties and thr states that spun off from Virginia. Virginia started with 8 'shires' or counties. Those developed into 100 in the 1950s but has been reduced as some of them have incorporated and become independent cities. Many families lived in 5 or 6 different counties and never moved! If a patent says 'adjoins his own land', then obviously he did own land ther before the patent. This land could be been purchased or it could have been a patent - some pages of the old patent books are illegible or destroyed. You might check county records to see if there is a purchase recorded. Bev ========Original Message======== Subj: RE: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Date: 9/5/2003 11:18:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:rex@tyler.net">rex@tyler.net</A> Reply-to: HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com To: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> Sent from the Internet (Details) Paul, You have been most helpful in helping unravel just what these records mean or should I say what they don't tell us about our very early ancestors. But there are two more puzzling items about these records, patents and/or grants or conveyances by other means such as deeds or the certificates you mention: I noticed the description of the property in a number of instances referred to land which "adjoins his own land." If that means what I think it means, then it would indicate that the grantee in this particular patent or grant already owned land adjacent to this land. Logically, I would then surmise there was an earlier grant or patent to this same grantee. If so, why can't I find the earlier grant or patent indexed in the records? What part of the records am I overlooking? The second item that puzzles me- and again at the risk of showing my ignorance of VA and KY history (which I admit) - there are any number of grants or patents recorded in VA which refer to land in KY. One in particular, a grant to Samuel Kirby 26 April 1792 of 584 acres located in Jefferson Co, KY. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Jefferson Co on the opposite side of KY from the VA/KY line? If I am reading that correctly does that mean that either the colonial land office of VA or the Commonwealth of VA issued patents and/or grants to land lying in KY? If so, did the grantee live in VA or in KY? How would VA be able to dole out land lying in KY? I haven't located or looked at an old map of colonial VA just yet but did it extend all the way to the western side of KY. If so, why would the description of the land refer to a particular county in KY. Or could it be that the location of the land shown on the VA land site was supplied by someone long after the original patent or grant? I was unable to access the actual document since I don't have the TIFF reader (but will solve that problem today -maybe) I guess my real question is simply whether or not a person found as a grantee in the VA land records actually lived in VA on the date of or at about the time of the patent or grant? In other words where did Samuel Kirby live in 1792 - VA or KY? Or did he live in VA, move to KY and then apply for the grant in VA? Does this mean that just because a person is listed as a grantee of a patent or grant in VA land records that person may not have lived in VA? Straighten me out here Paul. This is crucial to my search for ancestors. Rex -----Original Message----- From: Paul Drake [mailto:pauldrake@charter.net] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 7:51 AM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers When land escheated for whatever reason (usually for failure to "seat"it) the regranting of that tract quite usually was by "certificate" and not again by grant. You will find many such certificates mentioned in Nugent and in the works by others following her efforts. Notice that assignments or patent rights usually only appeared in the records of the county in which the land was situate. ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

I cannot answer most of your questions - perhaps Paul can - but the short answer is that the land was in KY - Jefferson County was always in the KY territory and certainly in Ky after it became a state which was apparantly close to his date of recordation. Kentucky County was formed in 1777 when Fincastle was divided into Kentucky, Montgomery and Washington Counties. It was split into Fayette, Lincoln and Jefferson shortly afterwards in 1780. I would imagine that it took some time to transfer everything over to KY courts. Also remember it took many days to ride all the way over to KY. Paul? Can you shed more light on this? Bev ========Original Message======== Subj: RE: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Date: 9/5/2003 1:28:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:rex@tyler.net">rex@tyler.net</A> Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> To: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> Sent from the Internet (Details) Thanks, Bev The Samuel Kirby grant is dated 26 April 1792 according to the VA land site but specifically states in a Note that the land was located in Jefferson Co, KY which suggests to me that by April KY was a state. If so, at that point, how would VA be able to issue a grant for land lying in KY? Or could the transaction have been somewhat earlier and the "date" shown is the date it was recorded rather than the date of the grant? Or if the land was actually part of VA at the time of the grant does that mean that someone after the fact of KY becoming a separate state sat down and plotted out each track to be able to state the location as being Jefferson Co, KY? One other detail...did a person or family have to live on the land (or contiguous land) to get the patent or grant? My problem is simply that I'm trying to figure out where Samuel Kirby lived -- VA or KY or perhaps neither? I didn't realize until I started this research that I was so deficient in my education concerning colonial America... It's back to the books for me...but really you and Paul have been very helpful. Rex -----Original Message----- From: Ms2001@aol.com [mailto:Ms2001@aol.com] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 11:33 AM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Kentucky became a state in 1792 - up to that point it was part of Virginia. It's hard to track legal documents if you do not know the formation of Virginia cities and counties and thr states that spun off from Virginia. Virginia started with 8 'shires' or counties. Those developed into 100 in the 1950s but has been reduced as some of them have incorporated and become independent cities. Many families lived in 5 or 6 different counties and never moved! If a patent says 'adjoins his own land', then obviously he did own land ther before the patent. This land could be been purchased or it could have been a patent - some pages of the old patent books are illegible or destroyed. You might check county records to see if there is a purchase recorded. Bev ========Original Message======== Subj: RE: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers Date: 9/5/2003 11:18:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: <A HREF="mailto:rex@tyler.net">rex@tyler.net</A> Reply-to: HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com To: <A HREF="mailto:VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com">VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com</A> Sent from the Internet (Details) Paul, You have been most helpful in helping unravel just what these records mean or should I say what they don't tell us about our very early ancestors. But there are two more puzzling items about these records, patents and/or grants or conveyances by other means such as deeds or the certificates you mention: I noticed the description of the property in a number of instances referred to land which "adjoins his own land." If that means what I think it means, then it would indicate that the grantee in this particular patent or grant already owned land adjacent to this land. Logically, I would then surmise there was an earlier grant or patent to this same grantee. If so, why can't I find the earlier grant or patent indexed in the records? What part of the records am I overlooking? The second item that puzzles me- and again at the risk of showing my ignorance of VA and KY history (which I admit) - there are any number of grants or patents recorded in VA which refer to land in KY. One in particular, a grant to Samuel Kirby 26 April 1792 of 584 acres located in Jefferson Co, KY. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Jefferson Co on the opposite side of KY from the VA/KY line? If I am reading that correctly does that mean that either the colonial land office of VA or the Commonwealth of VA issued patents and/or grants to land lying in KY? If so, did the grantee live in VA or in KY? How would VA be able to dole out land lying in KY? I haven't located or looked at an old map of colonial VA just yet but did it extend all the way to the western side of KY. If so, why would the description of the land refer to a particular county in KY. Or could it be that the location of the land shown on the VA land site was supplied by someone long after the original patent or grant? I was unable to access the actual document since I don't have the TIFF reader (but will solve that problem today -maybe) I guess my real question is simply whether or not a person found as a grantee in the VA land records actually lived in VA on the date of or at about the time of the patent or grant? In other words where did Samuel Kirby live in 1792 - VA or KY? Or did he live in VA, move to KY and then apply for the grant in VA? Does this mean that just because a person is listed as a grantee of a patent or grant in VA land records that person may not have lived in VA? Straighten me out here Paul. This is crucial to my search for ancestors. Rex -----Original Message----- From: Paul Drake [mailto:pauldrake@charter.net] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 7:51 AM To: VAROOTS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Cavaliers and Pioneers When land escheated for whatever reason (usually for failure to "seat"it) the regranting of that tract quite usually was by "certificate" and not again by grant. You will find many such certificates mentioned in Nugent and in the works by others following her efforts. Notice that assignments or patent rights usually only appeared in the records of the county in which the land was situate. ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237