This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Classification: Query Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/ABC.2ACE/3791.1 Message Board Post: I am searching for the father of my Nancy Ramey who married Revel Bartley (Bartlett). Nancy was born in 1825 in KY was still living on the 1870 Pike Co., Ky Census. I have searched EKY, SwVA, NC and Ky marriage, wills and death records to try to find a connection. I am researching the Remey(Ramey) family as they were French Huguenots and if I can establish who was Nancy's father I can take the family back to their origins into this country at Manakintowne, VA. in 1700. Any help would be appreciated.

List You may want to look at James and Nancy Ramey as they had a son John Ramey born in Ky that was 26 in the 1850 Russell Census and this Nancy is 24 being born in KY. Not a Ramey search but my Hicks family in Russell has married into the Ramey family. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: <muriel101@comcast.net> To: <VARUSSEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 5:09 PM Subject: [VARUSSEL] Re: BLEVINS family > This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. > > Classification: Query > > Message Board URL: > > http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/ABC.2ACE/3791.1 > > Message Board Post: > > I am searching for the father of my Nancy Ramey who married Revel Bartley > (Bartlett). Nancy was born in 1825 in KY was still living on the 1870 Pike > Co., Ky Census. I have searched EKY, SwVA, NC and Ky marriage, wills and > death records to try to find a connection. I am researching the > Remey(Ramey) family as they were French Huguenots and if I can establish > who was Nancy's father I can take the family back to their origins into > this country at Manakintowne, VA. in 1700. Any help would be appreciated. > > > ==== VARUSSEL Mailing List ==== > It is ok to send messages that have genealogical value to the mailing > list. However, if the nature of your messages have turned more personal > and no longer have any real genealogical value then they should probably > be sent in private. >