I guess that this shows that it is not wise to read your mail in reverse order. Thank you everyone. I found the website and the vendor information. Good hunting, Laurel A. Dickinson canistota@kalama.com John Blair wrote: > > Dear All, > > If you will visit the Lewis Co. Genealogical Society website there is > more on the Vendor Fair there.

I am new to the Lewis County list and will be posting information concerning the lines that I am researching in Lewis soon. The mention of a Vendor Fair caught my eye. Where and at what times is this fair being held? Any information will be appreciated. Laurel A. Dickinson (Mrs.) canistota@kalama.com Castle Rock Boyd Lopez wrote: > > I will be joining the Lewis Co. Genealogical Society and am > planning on going to the Vendor Fair at Forest on May 15th! I would love to>>> >

Wanted to let everyone know that The Lewis Co Genealogical Society also is taking all of these requests/queries and sharing with the members at their meetings to see if they can help us in anyway! They may end up being a help to many of us! John Blair

Dear All, If you will visit the Lewis Co. Genealogical Society website there is more on the Vendor Fair there. It is at the Forest Grange on May 15th, 1999. There is also on the website a Membership Form if you are interested in becoming part of the Genealogical Society, Individual membership is $12.00 a year and includes a subscription! The web address is: http://www.localaccess.com/lcgs/ John Blair/listowner

I will be joining the Lewis Co. Genealogical Society and am planning on going to the Vendor Fair at Forest on May 15th! I would love to>>> What is the vendors fair?? I have a post going to the list about family stories. At least I would think a ships sinking would end up being a family story. boyd

Just a note all three of Lavonnes book are really interesting and they have stories that people tell of their families I have bought all three for gifts to my Day who was born and raised in the Big Bottom Valley. He enjoys then very much and anyone interested in this area would too. Tami -----Original Message----- From: John Blair <jblair@kalama.com> To: WALEWIS-L@rootsweb.com <WALEWIS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Saturday, April 10, 1999 10:22 AM Subject: [WALEWIS-L] Early Settlers of Morton & Mineral >My mom is sending me the book "No Where to Look but Up" (in reference to the >heavy timber of Lewis Co.) by Lavonne Woods Sparkman. There are 3 of these >books and they are about the early settlers of Morton and Mineral. I'm sure >they can be obtained in a local bookstore. WHen I get the first one I'll >let you know what surnames are in it. John Blair/listowner > > >==== WALEWIS Mailing List ==== > Old Genealogists never die, they just lose their census. > >

Hey John, You sure didn't offend me with the posting. I like a healthy debate as is obvious. I do not mean to turn anybody away or make anyone feel like their own way of digging is wrong. We ALL rely on each other in this work. I am not angry in any way. No apology is neeeded. You did nothing wrong as far as I am concerned. Carolyn Randall

Discussion passed by Rootsweb! Obviously there are different thoughts out there concerning RESEARCH, and I would encourage all of you to gather what ever you can, however you can, and do the best you can! In my own research, and in the book in process that I am a part of, we always try our best to detail, and when there are conflicting details, or missing details, etc. (and who doesn't have them) we NOTE such!, sometimes you might see this statement in my work, "Birthdate from gravestone,******, family Bible*****, .......that just lets other people know there are possibly different variations or unproven facts! No harm in sharing both! and in fact that's what I prefer to do.........and my favorite part of genealogy are the "stories" of my descendants........usually I will preface the story with "handed down through the family, " or some other explanatory comment and most serious genealogists know that stories aren't always factual!.....I PROPOSE a truce on the subject since I'm the guilty one who put it on our website!.......Do your best, and try and document as well as possible! and PLEASE our Lewis Co. Genealogical Society hasn't even been a part of this discussion!....I will be joining the Lewis Co. Genealogical Society and am planning on going to the Vendor Fair at Forest on May 15th! I would love to see as many locals on the list as possible! We are great bunch of researchers and like a close family!....Let's keep it that way!....Again my apologies for passing that info on especially if it offended anyone! John Blair/Listowner. and hopefully a PEACEMAKER......I am a Pastor!

Maggie, Do not let this debate stop you from joining the genealogical society. They may have rules, but the wealth of information that the genealogical society has (and works to get out to the people) is wonderful. You will never know if you will like it until you try it. I am not trying to discourage anyone from doing their research in any fashion they like. I only want the expectations of conformity to lighten up a little. I hate to see someone totally give up on anything because they feel they will not be "up to snuff." I am not "up to snuff" on my research according to a lot of people, and it drives me crazy that some people think that the genealogy world would be a better place without my "amatuer" work. I agree with you on a mother knowing when her own child was born, and even knowing who the father was. I know there are exceptions to every rule, but women know when they give birth....LOL. Carolyn

This genealogy research methodology is interesting reading from the side lines. Now my little story about research in the Lewis county area. My wife and I are traveling back home from walking cemeteries when we make one last stop some where north of Kelso. I spy a tall impressive looking spire with lots of inscriptions so I get out to go read them. the man has survived a ship wreck on the Columbia River bar, gives a date, day, month and year. I copied them down and head for home, Astoria, OR. Our little library doesn't have much but what it does have is lots of info on ship wreck in the Columbia river the Pacific Ocean and up the River to Portland and Washington ports. to shorten this story there were no ship wrecks, boat sinking or any other happenings in or around the date on that tombstone. Now when I couldn't find one on the bar I started checking for ship sinking in the area up river and on the ocean. none, nada. thinking the year may have been wrong I made sure there were none on that date with different years. Any way i did a lot of work looking for a ship wreck that may not of happened for some one I have no idea who they were. So even if it's chiseled in stone don't always believe it. looking for Maley, Schmitt, Cox and Wright all in the Lewis County Washington area Boyd Lopez e-mail lope@pacifier.com web page www.pacifier.com/~lope

I hear you Carolyn, I do not wish to cause any problem in this discussion but.......I do wonder for those who have rules.....what do you start with but conjecture? I have stumbled along in my own way and I now have relatives coming out of my ears, a lot of living ones no less that I did not know about....and I got all my info from my dad, my aunt, a cousin in S. Dak. and my own memory..... and went from there. Help from friends, exposure on the Internet and mail from a third cousin who saw me out there, phone calls from others saying I am related to you and on it goes, just any old way I can get them and no rules. I do not even know how to use the FHC archives very well, and most of those are only as accurate as the one who put them there...but I stumble along and have a ball doing it.....at long last I am acquiring some proof, but some is never going to happen and I really do not care. And what is proof? This puzzles me really...Surely the mother of a child should know the birthdate of their child without me having to go get the birth certificate. On many they just do not exist most likely when we get to the really old ones.... I claim them no matter what if they fit in my tree correctly....and will continue to read those cemeteries to try to help others find theirs. I have been asked to join the Genealogical society. Listening to all this makes me not even want to consider it now. Maggie At 11:02 AM 4/10/99 -0700, Carolyn wrote: >People can quote rules of genealogy until they are blue in the face (or >have knarled fingers from typing them) and I will still do my tree >research the way "I" like. I do not tell you that you take your work to >>Some things can never be "proven" to the satisfaction of the few who <snip> >Let's just do our own researching the way we like without asking others >to conform to our own "rules." > >Carolyn Randall > > >==== WALEWIS Mailing List ==== >LEWIS COUNTY, WASHINGTON. One of the most beautiful >places on the face of the earth. Trees everywhere, >green, rivers, creeks, No Place like Home! > > >

People can quote rules of genealogy until they are blue in the face (or have knarled fingers from typing them) and I will still do my tree research the way "I" like. I do not tell you that you take your work to seriously, and to lighten up, do I? If you chose to follow rules or guidelines, great. But for anybody to tell people what is right and what is wrong with their own methods for research is pure "snobbery." Some of us do not strive to be "Professional" genealogists. When it is said, "I don't think I will get any thanks from a future gt.grandchild, or some distant cousin, for research that is carelessly done" I take that as a way of saying that if I chose to do my family tree research any other way than what your quoted guidelines say to do it, then I am doing "careless" work. Please do not insult others by holding them up to your standards. I do not hold you up to my standards (or down, as you may think). How about we just let this debate rest for awhile and continue doing our genealogy work the way we each see fit. If anybody does not like the way I do my research, tough. I do not force ANYBODY to live up to my standards or to accept my work. I do it for me. I hope that others can look at my work and glean some clues to help them on their way to finding what they look for. Have you never ever found a useful clue from a website with a tree that was NOT done by your own strict standards. The day my work and others like mine becomes a complete waste of space, is the day that a lot of people will quit looking. Some things can never be "proven" to the satisfaction of the few who demand it. Is it so important that your family history be correct? What about the grandmother or grandfather that was illegitimate? Can you prove or disprove it when it wasn't "documented?" Will you resort to digging up your DNA samples to "make sure?" Let's just do our own researching the way we like without asking others to conform to our own "rules." Carolyn Randall

My mom is sending me the book "No Where to Look but Up" (in reference to the heavy timber of Lewis Co.) by Lavonne Woods Sparkman. There are 3 of these books and they are about the early settlers of Morton and Mineral. I'm sure they can be obtained in a local bookstore. WHen I get the first one I'll let you know what surnames are in it. John Blair/listowner

> When we warn others that our information is based on "guesswork," we are > doing so out of deference to the use of research guidelines. The extent to > which all researchers know the difference between guesswork and supported > kinship claims determines how much progress the field of genealogy and the > individual researcher can make. Setting and (voluntarily) abiding by > research standards is not a matter of snobbery; it is merely a matter of > qualifying how we know what we think we know. > > We're all in this together. > > Tom Richardson > Minneapolis Mr. Richardson writes an excellent treatise on this subject. It is, of course, a legitimate pursuit of any activity to do so for just pure pleasure: painting, stamp collecting, hiking, quilting . . . . and genealogy. But, I think, that IF a goal in genealogy is to pass on one's work to future generations [and it may not be], then solid research that someone in the future can use to validate the work is fundamental. I don't think I will get any thanks from a future gt.grandchild, or some distant cousin, for research that is carelessly done. [And, I'll have to admit to my fair share of that!] The National Genealogical Society presents it's "Standards For Sound Genealogical Research:" "Remembering always that they are engaged in a quest for truth, family history researchers consistently:" [quoting just three of the articles] • state something as a fact only when it is supported by convincing evidence, and identify the evidence when communicating the fact to others. • limit with words like "probable" or "possible" any statement that is based on less than convincing evidence, and state the reasons for concluding that it is probable or possible. • avoid misleading other researchers by either intentionally or carelessly distributing or publishing inaccurate information. This 3rd article is one of the "great sins" of "Genealogy by Internet." Some books to help one develop these techniques are: 1. "Genealogical Evidence," by Noel C. Stevenson, (Agean Park Press : 1979). 2. "Cite Your Sources," by Richard S. Lackey, (Polyanthos, Inc. : 1980). 3. "Professional Techniques and Tactics in American Genealogical Research." by E. Kay Kirkham, (Everton Pub. : 1973). 4. "Evidence! Citation & Analysis for the Family Historian," Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG, FNGS (pub. unknown : c1997) Jim W. Tackitt, 1830 Johnson Dr., Concord, CA 94520; <jtackitt@jps.net> *************************************************************** Tackett Assn. Website: <http://www.jps.net/jtackitt/index.html>

Anybody recognize these Lewis Co. names? From: Robert Cooper <chetgtr@bellsouth.net> >Thank you for your quick response. >I have a Rebecca Cordelia Compton b. Dec.6th.1844 in TazwellCo. Va. She >was the daughter of Benjamin Wallace Compton and Margaret Ann Cecil >She died Nov. 30th. 1921 in Monroe Co. W.VA. >She married Jacob M. Ratliff Jan.1st.1862. >Jacob was born Oct. 3rd. 1841 in Russell Co. VA. Jacob died July 8th. >1933 in Monroe Co. W.VA. >I have letters to my grandparents from Centralia, Wa. and Oregon as >early as1910 and 1930 and as late as 1961. >Some of the names are Arvy Waters, Wesley Waters, Mitchell, Mollie >Davis, (I think she was a Davis m. to a Davis.)Marie d/o of Mollie. >Sharp, French. One name was unique,Oquella or Oquilla, French. It >appears that was her second marriage.(She had grandchildren age 5 and 2 >and children age 9 and 8). It also appears that Mitchell may have been >the married name of Wesley and Arvy Waters daughter as one christmas >card was signed Mr and Mrs Mitchell and Dad with Dad marked through and >Wesley written next. >Of course the letters opened with Dear Aunt Lou. and since my >Grandparents came from two Ratliff borthersa few generations back, it is >even harder to find the connection. >I know I have rambled but sometimes just a name or place will spark the >fire. >My line is Ward and Ratliff with I know more Compton lines with Rebecca >seeming to be the most direct.I have letters also from Comptons in Va. >to my grandparent (by the way they lived in Wyoming Co. W.Va.) from >about 1920 until their deaths. Also I have a letter from a Compton that >appeared to be from the Matney's. >Thank you so much for you time. I found your post I think through the >Local History web site.

In a message dated 04/10/1999 3:40:03 PM !!!First Boot!!!, jblair@kalama.com writes: << wboatr@erols.com >> The Deskins Cemetery sits on private property. Henry Harrison Deskins, I believe is buried there. I have forwarded this message on to my Deskins cousin, Marsha, who is not a list member. She owns the property in Chehalis. I do not know the location of the property. Marsha's father, Ben Deskins was married to my father's sister, Esther Wright. Marilyn Wright Powers

Passing this to the list from one of my Virginia cousins! Anyone help? From: l w reed <wboatr@erols.com> Hi John, I am so interested in the Deskins Cemetery there in Lewis Co. and contacted someone (darn, can't remember what organization she was with) who suggested I contact the local historical society. I am forwarding you her reply. Can you be of any help with this? I don't know exactly where the Deskins Cemetery is but it is probably Henry Harrison (Bell) Deskins -1860--as I know he migrated from VA. He was married to Dixie Deely Deskins. Can you direct me as to who maybe to contact, or if you think it is somewhere near you? maybe when you have nothing to do (grin) you could check it out. Thanks, Diane

It is a matter os snobbery when we tell others that their work is not "good enough" because they do not meet certain "qualifications." When we expect others to abide by our own rules of research, we are being snobs. I do not owe anybody a qualification of any of my research results, and I do put out my resources with my information as much as possible. If my computer work does not meet another person's standards, then they should just move on and not criticize it. A little advice once in awhile is ok if asked for, but to expect the small time family researcher to meet with the strict standards of the "professional" genealogist is plain ridiculous. Each and every one of us has the right to do our hunting and documenting the way we see fit, and to NOT be spoke down to because we are not taking it so seriously as to feel the need to prove to the world who they are....as if we are all registered purebred humans only if we can prove it!! I am waiting for the "serious" genealigist to start digging up DNA samples from graves to "verify" who they are. That is what the furture holds if we take our family research to extremes. I personally do not think it is the most important detail to my family tree. I think that when my great great grandchildren sit down and flip through the pages of my family tree, they will think to themselves how wonderful it is to "know" where they came from, even if it is just wishful thinking because "great great gramma" didn't prove, verify, document, and swear under oath that all the details were as written. I wish my great great gramma would have done research for me to enjoy, even if it were not exactly the gospel. Carolyn Randall

In general, I find that genealogical researchers are friendly, helpful, and compassionate people. I've seen people in libraries approach a stranger's research question with a vigor and interest that made me think the two were long lost cousins. I recently met through this list a woman in Lewis County who took the time to locate my great grandfather's grave beneath blackberry vines. We all share a common interest in finding our roots even though we may not share a common surname. I don't find this unique solidarity shattered by the discussion of research methodology. In the past, these discussions have saved me from researching the wrong line (family history gave a surname that was off by only one letter), in the wrong place, at the wrong time. I don't want to think about how much time and money I would have spent, in vain and to correct errors, had I accepted the family stories on faith. However, stories, hunches, and internet postings, tempered by a small knowledge of genealogical methods, led me to documentation (birth and marriage certificates) that I would not have been able to find otherwise. It seems to me that the central issue in the posting "something to think about" pertains to how one posits genetic relationships within observed social networks. This issue is distinct from the matter of what medium (e.g., internet) one uses to collect relevant observations that are used in making genetic claims. I think it would be difficult to argue that the internet offers little benefit to the modern genealogical researcher. Computer technology and the internet can reduce the implicit costs of conducting genealogical research and greatly facilitate communication on a global scale. However, the utility of computer-assisted communication and research depends upon how solidly researchers make their claims concerning kinship ties. We can disseminate both valid and erroneous information more quickly and more widely than ever before due to emerging communication technologies. It seems prudent, then, that we all reflect on how we as genealogical researchers bring order out of the chaos of information. Rules and guidelines are not meant to force the individual researcher to conform to a prescribed level of research rigor. The guidelines evolved as a result of the collective experiences of previous researchers who encountered difficulties, errors, and misinformation in their own investigations. Standards for genealogical research are there to make our research efforts more efficient and useful. Additionally, standards facilitate how we researchers communicate our findings and conclusions. Not everyone seeks verification of the information used to make subsequent suppositions about kinship; that's fine. When verification is an issue, however, we must all be able to agree upon standards concerning the quality of evidence we use in drawing the conclusions we reach. Sometimes our data conflict or do not support a commonly held belief. This is a naturally occurring limitation in our field. Guidelines give us reference points for interpreting the value of information that is obtained from a wide variety of sources--whether the information is written in a book or posted to a website. In this sense, genealogical research is not unlike the conduct of a scientific enterprise. When we warn others that our information is based on "guesswork," we are doing so out of deference to the use of research guidelines. The extent to which all researchers know the difference between guesswork and supported kinship claims determines how much progress the field of genealogy and the individual researcher can make. Setting and (voluntarily) abiding by research standards is not a matter of snobbery; it is merely a matter of qualifying how we know what we think we know. We're all in this together. Tom Richardson Minneapolis

I am not pleased by the posting of "something to think about." I for one am doing this family hunt to make *myself* happy. I do not do it to PROVE anything. I do not ask others to take my data as fact, nor do I take others' data as fact, but lets get real on this. I feel good making connections with what Charles Gardes calls "clues." I like to think my family tree is just that....MY family tree. If I am wrong somewhere along the line, then maybe someday I will get to it and correct it, or someone else may bring it to my attention. Some people do most of their genealogical work from behind the keyboard because they have no choice. Being a computer genealogist myself I am offended by people laying down *rules* for everybody to follow. I will follow my own rules and do my own thing. I do not push my work off as gospel and anybody who thinks my work is gospel better read the warning I put out there for others to read and know that my work is all guesswork until verified. I refuse to stop posting my queries and putting my family tree on my web page because someone thinks it isn't proven to their satisfaction. Lots of times I have been lost as to where to even begin a search, and a "clue" online has at least pointed me to the right state to begin looking. Without these "clues" I would not know one thing past my father. I have come into contact with ACTUAL family members from other states with my work online, that I would otherwise have not ever even known existed, yet alone gotten to know. I for one will continue being a computer genealogist because I do it for myself. I do not do it for the "Charles Gardeses" of the genealogical snob club. Look down your noses at me if you like, but I am one happy family tree hunter! Carolyn Randall Lewis Co., WA