Hello. I'm searching for parents of Hosea Washburn who m. Hannah Doten in Middleborough. They moved to Maine where they lived with 5 daughters in New Sandwich Town, Lincoln County, Mass (now Wayne, Me)in 1790 census. In 1797 and 8 Hosea signed petitions re incorporating Wayne. Also signing was Japheth Washburn, who was not listed in the 1790 census. A Japheth C. of Wayne and Betsy Lowny of Monmouth had MI on 5 Apr 1802. Were Hosea and Japheth brothers? Marian Tobey Perkins

Am new to this list and wondering if anyone has seen my Manassah Washburn. His Revolutionary War service was from Middleborough and his marriage intent 25 Jan 1789 to Sylvia Caswell was there. He m Sylvia Caswell of Rochester in that town 23 April 1789. They must have gone to Maine fairly soon after their marriage as their son Ephraim was born in Poland, ME on 1 Oct 1789. There were several Washburn family groups in the area at the time and they were defintely not all brothers. There is no record that I can find in the VR of Middleborough or Rochester of his birth. Ephraim and Egloth (Stetson) looked like possible parents, but he is not listed among their children in the Stetson Genealogy. It is possible he is the son of their son Ephraim, but no proof has been found. This Ephraim is the right age ( b1741) but have been unable to locate his marriage or children. Another suggestion , in the Annals of Oxford County, is that he is the grandson of Ephraim and Mary (Polen) Washburn, the son of Ephraim, Jr. At least two of of Ephraim and Mary's children were in the general area. Does anyone have help or suggestions?

Dear Cousin Richard, Thursday 12 February 1998 If I can help you....I am a personal friend of Brenton Washburne. Was the volume you saw in the library a "single" (first issue) gray hard bound publication or a "two" volume red hard bound publication. If it was his "first" issued publication, I am sure he would have made the correction you have noted in his new recently published (red) two volume edition. He is pretty thorough in his research and I know he would be "very" interested in your observation with regards to your family line in how he has it represented. I suggest you write to him if you have questions. His address is: Brenton Washbourne, 5412 Fox Hills Avenue, Buena Park, CA, 90621. He enjoys answering all communications with regard to his Washburn family research. I hope I was of some help to you. Sincerely, Cousin Chuck =========================================================================== >I have been following the discussion by the Chuck Washburn's etc. about how >far back the Washburn family can be legitimately traced. I recall mention >about Brenton Washburn's book on the Washburn family. I was at the >Middleborough, Massachusetts library today and found Brenton's book. My >wife's great-great-grandfather was Philo WASHBURN of Benjamin and Alice >(SHAW) WASHBURN. This appears on the page with entry A2E3 [email protected] in Brenton's >book. I have problems with what Brenton has for Philo's family. I have the >following information on Philo's family: > >DESCENDANCY CHART FOR PHILO WASHBURN >=========================================================================== > Name (Birth/Chr.-Death/Burial) Birth/Chr. Place >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >---------------------------------------------- >1-- Philo WASHBURN (1799-1869) Middleborough,Plymouth,MA,USA > sp-Harriet WHITE (1805-1865) Raynham,Bristol,MA,USA > 2-- Philo Thompson WASHBURN (1827-1890) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA > sp-Hannah SOUTHWORTH (1830-1892) Lakeville,,MA,USA > 2-- Henry Stillman WASHBURN (1829-1889) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA > sp-Emma DEAN (1830-1908) ,,MA,USA > 2-- Otis WASHBURN (1831-1881) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA > sp-Eliza WHITMORE (1829-1910) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA > 2-- Charles WASHBURN (1834-1835) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA > 2-- Harriet White WASHBURN (1836-1876) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA > sp-Gordon Hall GODFREY (1832-1910) > 2-- Charles Frederick WASHBURN (1841-1905) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA > sp-Mary Ellen THOMPSON (1843-1872) East Bridgewater,Plymouth,MA,USA > sp-Ida Francis PARKIN (1854-1933) > 2-- Mary Ellen WASHBURN (1844-1872) <Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA> > 2-- John King WASHBURN (1850-1881) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA > >This information seems to differ from Brenton's information. > >I would appreciate hearing from anyone who is familiar with Brenton's book >and can explain the differences. > >Thanks.

I have been following the discussion by the Chuck Washburn's etc. about how far back the Washburn family can be legitimately traced. I recall mention about Brenton Washburn's book on the Washburn family. I was at the Middleborough, Massachusetts library today and found Brenton's book. My wife's great-great-grandfather was Philo WASHBURN of Benjamin and Alice (SHAW) WASHBURN. This appears on the page with entry A2E3 [email protected] in Brenton's book. I have problems with what Brenton has for Philo's family. I have the following information on Philo's family: DESCENDANCY CHART FOR PHILO WASHBURN =========================================================================== Name (Birth/Chr.-Death/Burial) Birth/Chr. Place ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- 1-- Philo WASHBURN (1799-1869) Middleborough,Plymouth,MA,USA sp-Harriet WHITE (1805-1865) Raynham,Bristol,MA,USA 2-- Philo Thompson WASHBURN (1827-1890) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA sp-Hannah SOUTHWORTH (1830-1892) Lakeville,,MA,USA 2-- Henry Stillman WASHBURN (1829-1889) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA sp-Emma DEAN (1830-1908) ,,MA,USA 2-- Otis WASHBURN (1831-1881) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA sp-Eliza WHITMORE (1829-1910) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA 2-- Charles WASHBURN (1834-1835) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA 2-- Harriet White WASHBURN (1836-1876) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA sp-Gordon Hall GODFREY (1832-1910) 2-- Charles Frederick WASHBURN (1841-1905) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA sp-Mary Ellen THOMPSON (1843-1872) East Bridgewater,Plymouth,MA,USA sp-Ida Francis PARKIN (1854-1933) 2-- Mary Ellen WASHBURN (1844-1872) <Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA> 2-- John King WASHBURN (1850-1881) Taunton,Bristol,MA,USA This information seems to differ from Brenton's information. I would appreciate hearing from anyone who is familiar with Brenton's book and can explain the differences. Thanks.

Hi Folks, I'm looking for info on Zenas Washburn, b. abt 1805, probably in Stafford, CT. He married (1) Phebe CUSHMAN and had children: Edwin, Susan, Ellen, Emmagene, Horatio, Mary, and Martin. He md (2) Candace Davis, dau of Pardon Davis and Candace Wood; prob no children from this marriage. Zenas may be the son of William Washburn and Lucretia Darling. Looking for his ancestry and especially info on descendants. Mark K. Davis mail: [email protected] home page: http://pierre.polymer.uakron.edu/mark.html genealogy: http://pierre.polymer.uakron.edu/Davisfam.html

The following is an excerpt from the Dictionary of Canadian Biographies, University of Toronto Press: WASHBURN, SIMON EBENEZER, militia officer, lawyer, and politician; b. probably 1794 in Fredericksburg Township, Upper Canada, son of Ebenezer Washburn and Sarah De Forest; m. 12 April 1821 Margaret FitzGibbon; d. 29 Sept. 1837 in Toronto. "He was a bencher of the Law Society of Upper Canada from 3 Nov. 1829 until his death." - Ruth McKenzie "..succeeded in 1837 in being elected alderman of St. David's Ward in Toronto." - R McK "..and in 1835 rose to Colonel of the 2nd regiment of West York." - R McK "Simon Washburn was a generous and public-spirited man. He had a zest for life, exemplified by his love of skating, and his considered slightly eccentric for wearing a monocle." - R McK Regards, BZ

I am looking for any information on the life of Aylesworth Bowen Perry (b.1860) who was Commissioner of the Canadian Mounted Police from 1900 until at least 1922. Mr. Perry lineage follows: 1. Capt. Robert Perry U.E. (1750-1837) and Jemima Gary Washburn (1754-1830) 2. Rev. Daniel Perry (1779-1844) and Jane Williams (1777-1845) of Ernestown Township, Lennox and Addington Co. 3. William Hawley Perry J.P. (1810-1897) and Eleanor Fraser (1818-1898) of Ernestown 4. Aylesworth Bowen Perry (b.1860) Regards, Brant (desc. of Robert and Jemima's dau. Hannah (1781-1866) and Bowen L. Aylesworth (1778-1863)

Re: William the Conqueror _______________________ Hello John and everyone, Wednesday 11 February 1998 First, John, I know we have disagreed on the William the Conqueror issue (early Washburn royalty) and I agree with you entirely...this is strictly a "friendly disagreement" and PLEASE excuse the negative tone that I may have relayed to you in the past concerning this subject. There were "no" personal references to be made...please accept my sincere appologies.... Yes, there are "two" sides to this story and thank you, John, for your kind comments of Canon James Davenport's research. My brother, William, is currently living in Malvern, England for the last two years. For those who are not aware, Malvern is about 20 or 30 miles from Wichenford (where the historical Washburn residence and parish church are located). He has met several of the "local" Washburn cousins. Being close to those people...living with them....one senses a "closeness" to historical accounts more than we do here in the U.S. (speaking for myself, of course). He was the one who was able to get a copy of Canon Davenport's Washburn family book for me. There are people there who (now quite elderly) knew Rev. Davenport and hold his research "quite highly" in accountability. He was able to gather many "detailed" family accounts of Habingdon (who was a family friend and a local province historian during that early period). There is more of a history about Habingdon that I could talk about here...but, I'll save that for another time. John, if you can get your hands on Habingdon's documents that were published by Nash, I am sure it would shed more light to this "colorful" and "fasinating" subject about the "royalty" of our family. Nash was another historian/researacher that Canon Davenport followed up with as a reference in his book in using Habingdon's research. Besides performing his own research. And because of the elapse of time and years, many of those "early" records are no longer available...but, stated in researched publications. John, when you say "by today's genealogical standards, he (Davenport) did not prove the connection." By what authority are you defining "today's genealogical standards?" As an example, the Mayflower Society utilizes many pubished author's publications for authoritive accuracy. Who is to say that Canon Davenport didn't have a "high" genealogical standard when he published his Washburn Family work??...because you say (implied) there is no current "documented" proof to rely on. Canon Davenport, I am convinced, had a scope of understanding of "proof" of what future family generations would hold to his work. As I reference below, you will see that he had a sense of thought of how to present an important and accurate written historical account of the Washburn Family. John, as I present to you many historical references for you to investigate below, also, as you will note towards the end of Canon Davenport's reference below, there was a land controversy going on between John Salwey (who inherited Standford) and the Washburn family. Below, I offer the "accurate" transcribed pages 6 thru 9 from Canon Davenport's "The Washburn Family" book: (As you read Canon Davenport's written account below, please note the thoroughness of his writing and his references. He goes on to say....with a 'clear' and 'accurate' genealogical statement he makes: "in Habingdon's own words, which the genealogical table already given makes clear: "Sir Roger de Washborn, sonne of Sir John de Washborn, had towe sonnes, bothe christened John.") ============================================================================== AS STATED BY CANON JAMES DAVENPORT (The Washburn Family): The two following extracts of interest as corroborating the testimony of Habingdon and of the 1280 roll as to the connection of the earliest Washbournes with Stanford and its neighbourhood:- i. "Calender of Close Rolls, 3 Ed. II., 1310, Mem. 3, Schedule. "April 29. (Woodstock) To the Justices of the Bench. Order not to put John de Wasseburne in default for not appearing in a suit before them by the king's writ between Robert Lestourmy, demandant, and the said John and Isabella his wife, tenants, of a messuage two acres of meadow, two acres of wood, 6s 8d of rent and two virgates of land, except one acre in Overton near Stanford, as he was engaged in the king's service on Wednesday the morrow of St. Martin so that he could not appear." ii. "Calendar of Close Rolls, 8 Ed. II., 1315, Mem. 10. "April 1. (Windsor) To Master John Waleweyn, escheator this side Trent. Order to deliver to said Matilda a knight's fee in Olreton in the county of Worcester which John de Wassheburn holds, of the yearly value of L4 assigned to her as above." Isabella presented to the living of Stanford, 9 Kal. September, 1316 (Nash), "Petrus de Wassebourn," and the fact that she did so, and not her husband, points to the probability that she acted in the exercise of her own right, though of course it is possible that her husband had recently died. A litter later, in 1322, she presented to Clyvelode, attached in later days to Madresfield, being described as "Isabella de Wassebourn domina ejusdem villae" (Nash). As Isabella de Wassebourn she appears in the Lay Subsidy Roll, 1327, along with Roger, among those assessed under Wassebourne and Standford, and in the 1332-3 roll under Standford she appears as "Isabella de Stanforde," again along with Roger, doubtless her son. SIR ROGER (3) Sir Roger, son of Sir John, married his wife Margaret as early as 1316. He "Roger Washborne Lord of Washborne, knight, did confirm to John his son in A.E. 3.9." (C.A.) Nash seems to imply in his list of incumbents that he presented three times to Stanford and was living in 1353. (Later presentations also are here given for the sake of reference.) "Patrons" "Incumbents" Isabella de Wasseboune. . . Petrus de Wasseborn 9Kal. Sept. 1316 Rogerus de Wasseborne. . . Thomas de Wasseborne Accol. . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 Maii 1349 Johannes Arches . . . . . . .16 Julii 1349 Will'us de Edynghull . . . . 2Julii 1353 Katherina de Stanford . . . .Johnannes Roggeres . . . . . 27 Apr. 1363 Katerina Musard . . . . . . . .Henricus Wodewarde cap . .26 Sept. 1398 Isolda Salwey . . . . . . . . . . Will'us Walker cap . . . . . . 16 Sept. 1423 Thomas Harwell et Isolda consors . . . . . . . . . . . . .Johannes Driver cap . . . . . .21 Jan. 1428 Thomas Combay cap. . . . . .22 Jun. 1433 Humfridus Salway, arm . . Ricardus Simkins cap . . . . 18 Jun. 1473 In the roll of 1327 he appears under Washbourne and Stanford; in the roll of 1332-3 under Stanford; in the "Nonarum Inquisitiones" (1340) he joins in the delaration as to the church of Overbury. His name is given as Robert in Weaver's "Visitation of Herefordshire" (1569), and in one of the two College of Arms pedigrees, a fact which points to his identity with the Robert de Wassebourne given in the 1327 roll under Aldington and Bretforton in the 1332-3 roll. In the rolls of 1346 and 1358 he is given as Roger de Washborne under Stanford Washborne and Washborne, paying in respect of land formerly held by John. The next three generations are best taken together. Of JOHN (4) married Isolde, daughter of Thomas Hanley, of Hanley-William, in 29 Ed. III. [Reference Note #1] Both the College of Arms pedigrees show this, but Habingdon, Nash, and Phillimore all give the father's name as John Hanley. "Peter Washborne and Isolde his wife did confirme in A.E.3.28." They had two sons, William the younger, not traced, and their heir JOHN(6) the husband of Joan Musard and Margaret Poher. But, now we come to the family complications of his time, best set forth in Habingdon's own words, which the genealogical table already given makes clear:- Sir Roger de Washborn, sonne of Sir John de Washborn, had towe sonnes, bothe christened John. John Washborn, the ealdest of theyse, maryed Katherin Thromwin, who, after her husbande's deathe, was the wyfe of Sir John Musard, Knight, by whome shee had one daughter, named Jane Musard, wedded to John Washborn, the sonne of Peter de Washborn, the sonne of John Washborn, the youngest sonne of Sir Roger de Washborn, before mentioned; and John de Washborne, the ealdest sonne of Sir Roger de Washborn, dyinge without isswe, thys John Washborn, his nephew's sonne, became hys heyre, and was Lord of Washborn and Stanford. . . . John Washborn had, by hys fyrst wyfe Jane Musard, hys onely daughter, named Isold Washborne, maryed to John Salwey, the sonne of John Salwey, of Canc, Co. Staff., by hys wyfe Elizabeth, daughter and heyre of Sir William Thromwine . . . John Washborn, after the deathe of hys fyrst wyfe, Jane Musard, tooke to wyfe Margery, daughter and coheyre of John Poher, commonly called Powre of Wicheneford, and had by her Norman Washborn, from whome decended the Washborns of Wicheneford. Nowe, weare it by covenantes at the maryage of John Salwey with Isold Washborn, or otherwise, I knowe not, but thys I knowe, John Salwey and his issewe have eaver synce inioyed Stanford, and, as I have heard, dyd lounge contest in lawe for Knighte's Washborn itsealfe; and in the end, as it is sayd, the controversy was so composed as the Washborns should hould Knigtes Washborn, and the Salweys only Stanford . . . (under Standford, pp. 379-81). and, again, (under Knight's Washborne,) John Washborne, taking wyfe Joane, daughter of Sir John Musard, a Knight who in the raygne of Edward the thyrd flourished in our shyre, and havinge by her one onely daughter named Isolda, and not lokinge into future eventes, maryed her to John Salwey of Kancke, a gentellman in Staffordshyre of an approved discent; and with them passed away Stanford Stormy, Washborne's lande . . . but John Washborne surviuinge thys wyfe and weddinge afterwards [Reference Note #2] Margaret, daughter and coheyre of John Poher, Lord of Winhenford, had by her Norman Washborne, who losynge thus a share of hys inheritance, and incombred with suytes of lawe against hys maternall lyne in Wichenford, wheare they remayned six discentes in good reputation.... REFERENCE NOTE: (1) "Hanley, of Hanley-William, in Eastham. Thomas de Hanley held lands in Hanley-William in the 13th of Edward I. 'Several branches,' says Nash, i. 365, 'proceeded from this stock of the Hanleys: the first was by a marriage between Peter de Washborne and Isold, daughter of John de Hanley, 29 Edward III.: from this marriage sprang the family of the Washbornes.'" (Grazebrook.) "This marriage took place 29 E. III. Peter de Washburne mar. Isold. d. of John de Hanley of Hanley William in the parish of Eastham, co. Worc. See Nash's Worcestershire, i. 365." (Note in Weaver's "Visitation of Herefordshire" under Washbourne.) "Thys family runninge to theyre peryod of tyme in this place, 29 Ed. 3 by the marriage of Isolde, the daughter of John Hanley to Peter Washborn. . . (Habingdon ii. 64.) REFERENCE NOTE: (2) In Mrs. J.C. Washburn's "Notes of Washburn Genealogy," on pp. 6, 9, the date of John's marriage with Margaret Poher is given as 1397, but the auhority is not given for that date, which is no doubt approximately correct. ========================================================================== John Maltby's reply of 10 February 1998: Yes, there are two sides to the story. You can certainly believe whatever you wish. Rev. James Davenport did a fine job digging through Worcester County records uncovering baptisms, marriages, wills, and etc. He may have even uncovered some uncited records that led him to believe that the Bengeworth Washburns were descended from those of Wichenford, but by today's genealogical standards, he did not prove the connection. .................(other paragraphs omitted here).................. I'm sorry if my skeptical attitude offends any of you, but my choice is not to believe it unless there is substantial and documented proof. Chuck Washburn and I have disagreed on this point for several months, and I hope we can keep this a "friendly disagreement" in the interests of better genealogy. John A. Maltby Redwood City, CA [email protected]

Chuck, Norman, and others, Yes, there are two sides to the story. You can certainly believe whatever you wish. Rev. James Davenport did a fine job digging through Worcester County records uncovering baptisms, marriages, wills, and etc. He may have even uncovered some uncited records that led him to believe that the Bengeworth Washburns were descended from those of Wichenford, but by today's genealogical standards, he did not prove the connection. That is one of the reasons why I chose to undertake the difficult task of searching for myself through the 16th century records of Worcestershire in hopes of uncovering some evidence that has not yet been presented. I would love to be able to find the proof to link the two branches, and be able to say that we have a proven royal line, but so far I have barely scratched the surface of what is available, and up to this point the linking records have not been found. That is the reason why Frederick Lewis Weis eliminated this line from his "Ancestral Roots" in the fifth and later editions of his book, which Walter Lee Sheppard, another recognized scholar on English research, helped edit. Gary Boyd Roberts, with whom I briefly discussed the matter 2 years ago, chose not to include it in his 1993 "Royal Descents of 500 Immigrants to the American Colonies," because he considered it unproven. I'm sorry if my skeptical attitude offends any of you, but my choice is not to believe it unless there is substantial and documented proof. Chuck Washburn and I have disagreed on this point for several months, and I hope we can keep this a "friendly disagreement" in the interests of better genealogy. John A. Maltby Redwood City, CA [email protected]

Can anyone help Mark? Sue

Dear Washburn-LIST Subscribers, Tuesday 10 February 1998 I wish to acknowledge the message of Charles E. Washburn, Jr. I totally agree with him. John A. Maltby has done extensive research regarding the Washburn family and I DO CONGRATULATE him for that! I am only saying that their are "two" sides to the story about the Washburn family relationship with William the Conqueror. I hope to publish the "complete" publication of Canon James Davenport, M.A. and present it on the internet for everyone to see. Canon Davenport was very thorough in his Washburn family research. Believe me, I am not discounting John Maltby's research....but, there is "another" resource that has to be considered. I DO THANK you John for your "wonderful" documented accounts of the Washburn family in early England. And, I send to you my apologies that are necessary. You are a very detailed researcher as I have seen and I do appreciate your work! Sincerely, Cousin Chuck ============================================================================ >Dear Sue Apito and Other List Subscribers: > >With regard to the posting by the "other" Chuck Washburn of today to >this list, I wanted to state for the record that "this" Chuck Washburn >has nothing but the highest regard for the quality of John Maltby's >research. As anyone who has subscribed to this list for any period of >time already knows, John has done extensive research regarding the >Washburn family in primary sources, the results of which research he has >taken the time to share with all of us, and his work has been very >helpful to me and other Washburn family researchers. Thank you, John! > >Charles E. Washburn, Jr. >[email protected] >http://home.earthlink.net/~cwashburn/history.html ============================================================================= �

GREETINGS TO NEW "WASHBURN-L" Subscribers: Tuesday 10 Feb 98 I am a personal friend of Brenton Washburne of many years. Since his first publishing in 1983 he has just published a NEW edition of "The Washburn Family in America." And....Yes, he still has copies available. His new book is comes in 2 volumes, with each volume at least 2 to 3 inches thick. He had only 200 copies printed...He is down to about 100 copies left. He is asking $150.00 for the two volume set. His address is: Brenton Washbourne, 5412 Fox Hills Avenue, Buena Park, CA, 90621. This two volume set deals with ALL the Washburn generations in America. It includes William Washburn with his brother John and their decendents. I am sure you will find your family reference within this publication! Brenton is a very detailed and dedicated man...and I RESPECT his work and the exhaustive research he has accomplished in putting together this great task! By the way, THIS IS NOT a sandwitched list of names and phone numbers and this is also NOT a SPAMMED e-mail advertisement...to be sure!!.. There are many family members joining this list from time to time...and before Brenton runs out of books...I believe everyone deserves the opportunity to look into this wonderful work. This is a geneological reference source that you will continue to refer with. All the branches show their family link. It is a true labor of love he has done for our "entire" family! He has told me that the "third" Washburn grouping (that was in his first issue) were not linked to any particular branch identified... has now been completely revised and relocated to their approprate family branches that were not idenfified before....as well many NEW family links that have been added! Being his first book was published in 1983, it has been this long for this NEW revision. When contacting Brenton....I would appreciate it if you would please refer my name to him when you ask him about his book. This way he can keep track of his book inquires... FOR THE RECORD: I have NOT asked him for anything in return for helping him.....I am a Washburn, and all I want to achieve is to assist those who want to know their family history. Send him a note with any inquiry.......He will answer you..... REMEMBER...Please refer my name to Brenton when contacting him......I appreciate it much! ......Sincerely, Your Cousin, Chuck <[email protected]>

Hello Marilyn, :) Oh my *goodness*!!!!!!!!! I am sitting at my computer in *disbelief* of what I have just read!!!!!!! *Marilyn* you have *answered* my *prayers*!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :) I am shaking at the thought of *finally* connecting with *true*Washburn*kindred* as I have felt like I was shooting-an-arrow-into-the-dark working primarily off of my father's (*yes*, Harold Dean Saurer's) :) somewhat faded memories and the few document copies/info I have obtained!!!!! Off I was to bed, then the phone rang late tonight.....then something inside me said, "Hmmm....I *wonder* if there is any *interesting* E-mail awaiting for me?" Need I say, I am *ecstatic* to hear from you, Marilyn!!!!!!!!! :) Indeed I have been searching for leads to find a trace! :) *Dreams* truly *do* come true!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :) It is very interesting that you know of the Jay Washburn homestead! Just a couple of months ago my mother sent me a very *old* picture of it!!!!!!!! Just this passed Friday afternoon I made *several* lazer copy enlargements of this homestead which came out *incredible* (especially considering the faded condition of the original)!!!!!!!!! :) I would *love* to send one to you!!!!!!!! :) .....It looks like that ole "outhouse" I've heard about in the foreground!!!!! (Giggle!) My Grandma Bernice Saurer wrote on the back of the picture, "Grandma Washburn's homestead", meaning Bernice's Grandma!!!!! :) Do you know my father personally or "of" him???? I have posed *soooooo* many Washburn family questions to him, including what cousin's names are.......and he could remember only so much. (Giggle!!!) Guess he's just "getting old" beyond his years! (Tee-hee!!!!!) ;) One of the things that my father did share with me was about another Washburn house that was decorated with American Indian and other items in a "ballroom". He said that he could remember some of the decorations vividly! I am wondering if he was remembering your Grandfather's house and farm? :) My father *told* me about "a book" that was written about our leg of the Washburn family. It looks like you've beat-me-to-the-chase on that one!!!!!!! :) Wow!!!!!!!! :) What is the title, publisher, and citation info? Also, what is the year of publishing and publisher name, etc. for "The Van Benschoten Family in America" by W. H. Van Benschoten? I *definitely* want to connect with a "finder" of rare and old books to get a copy of *both* of those!!!! Boy, who could ask for a better E-mail? Not only have I found a bloodline cousin, but my cousin knows of *two*books* written about our direct family lines!!!!!!!!!!! Indeed someone upstairs must be smiling down on me!!!!!!!! :) What is the "SLC"? Is there one in San Diego, or could I borrow both books somewhere here (until I find a copies for sale)? How far back does Mildred's book trace our lineage? How about the Van Benschoten book? Before your E-mail tonight the farthest back I got was to Jay's name with census hints on his parents! :) In fact, I didn't even know what Etta's *real* name was until last fall!!!!!! I always thought that her name was "Mary".....close! Her *mother's* name was "Mary"!!!!!! Perhaps that's what I remembered from my (literally) *all*day*long* family history question-and-answer-sessions I would have with my grandparents, particularly with Grandpa Elmer Saurer, on my summer-and-winter-time visits with them before they died. Is Richard Flint of the Washburn clan or did he purchase the old homestead? My father spoke of a man who was about 19 yrs. old in the 1950's (he couldn't remember a name) who wanted to stay on the homestead and continue the family farming way of life. I have been wondering if the house was still in the bloodline or not. I can't begin to tell you how surprised and impressed I am to be writing to you at this very moment!!!!!! There are *sooooo* many things I want to ask about........so many things I want to catch-up on! :) I'm not sure how much you know about the lives of my parents, so I'll fill-in a few blanks for the time being......My father is an only child, raised in Wayne County, Ohio, who in the beginning of 1967 was sent off to Vietnam. In April of '67 he was in his second helicopter crash, which rendered him the *only* survivor of the nine men on board, and badly burned. Six months to the day after his accident, I was born. My father was hospitalized and operated on for *two*years* following this accident. After all related treatment, his body had a *very*low* tollerance for extreme temperature changes. Thus, on December 30 or 31, 1968, our family of three moved from Ohio to 'Oahu, Hawai'i, where I was raised and my sister Teresa was born and raised. To sum it all up, I had *very*little* exposure to my Grandparents, much less the families of my Great-Grandparents! I have asked my parents many questions about family and have found that time and distance took its toll. I am *sooooooo* happy to have found *you*, Marilyn!!!!!!!! :) Well, I think that our other cousins who have read this far are wondering when I am going to stop rambling on and E-mail you personally! (Giggle!) So I'm going to do just that!!!! Thank you everyone for your tollerance of two cousins becoming "connected"!!!!!!!!! :) Much love, Beth*.........a fellow Washburn descendant who at present cannot believe her eyes are perceiving such good fortune!!!!! *;) _________________________________________________________________ Subject: Re: Elain Olney's Washburn Family Book Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 20:50:20 -0800 (PST) Resent-From: [email protected] Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 22:59:49 -0600 From: "MARILYN W. POWELL" <[email protected]> To: "BETH SAURER" <[email protected]>, "Washburn Families" <[email protected]> Hello Cousin Beth, YOU"VE HIT PAYDIRT! And, Beth. I can do you better than Elaine's book! Mildred Smith Parkinson, my father's cousin published a small book in 1954. Your father, Harold Dean Sauer was b 10-19-1940! Elaine's book is wonderful and takes the ancestors back to old William the immigrant of Long Island. However, she takes off on James' brother, Joseph, Jr and OUR line is through James. Mildred's book is of the James' line. It can be found on the shelf of the SLC. I'm sure it's out of print by now. My Dad was born in Greenwich, I've visited there as a child and as a young woman. The farm that Jay lived on (so stated in Mildred's book) was "around the corner" from my grandfather's farm. Richard Flint is the owner of Jay's farm now-or was at the time we sold my grandfather's farm in 1980's. Any other questions? Father of your Jay and my g-grandfather (Daniel Smith W.) was HENRY G(riffin) Washburn m. to ANN MARIA VAN BENSCHOTEN. (Her ancestry can be found in "The Van Benschoten Family in America" by W. H. Van Benschoten). I am lucky enough to own a small bedside table belonging to her, also, a rocking chair that she was sitting in for a picture taken of the family at Daniel Smith W's home. Mildred, in her youth was so taken with the fact that her grandfather took time off from work to take Mr. W. H. Van Benschoten around (while W. H. was gathering material for his book) - that she decided to write family history ~ and the result was her book. So much I can tell you. I have letters from D.S. and also from Ann Maria in my posession. 'Nuf for now ~ Marilyn Washburn Powell Orange TX ---------- > From: BETH SAURER <[email protected]> > To: Washburn Families <[email protected]> > Subject: Elain Olney's Washburn Family Book > Date: Monday, February 09, 1998 9:44 PM > > Hello cousins! :) > > Tom Neel of the Ohio Genealogical Society was kind enough to refer > me to Elain Olney's (of Manhattan, Kansas) book on the Washburn family > in regards to research on our Huron County, Ohio WASHBURNs. Would any > of you happen to have this book? Tom mentioned that these Huron County > WASHBURNs lived in Greenwich (as did mine), Fitchville, and New London, > Ohio. I would *love* to have a look-up done on the below WASHBURNs to > see what kind, if any, info it has on them! :) > > Thank you cousins! > > Beth* Saurer......San Diego, California....... *;) > > ____________________________________________________________ > > > Mr. Washburn, b. ~1815-35, NY > + Mrs., b. ~1815-35, OH > Jay Washburn, b. 4/1852, OH, d. 5/9/1922, OH > + Mary, b. 2/1852, OH > (at least 3 children names are unknown to me) > Howard Washburn, b. 8/1879, OH > Etta May Washburn, b. 10/1895, OH, d. 2/16/1919, > OH at 23 yrs. > (Burried in Edwards Grove cemetery, > Ripley twp, OH) > + Archie Paul Bliss, b. 1890, OH, d. 1977, OH > (Burried in Maple Grove cemetery, New > Haven twp, OH > with subsequent wife, Lavella B. > Bliss 1900-1982) > Mary Bliss, b. ~1914-5, OH > + "Tub" Scott > 3 children, most likely still > living > Bernice May Bliss, b. 5/23/1916, OH, d. > 2/4/1985, OH > (Bernice was 2 when Etta passed > away) > + Elmer Ray Saurer, b. 10/2/1907, OH, d. > 12/7/1992, OH > One child, my father > ME! ;) > My younger sister

Dear Sue Apito and Other List Subscribers: With regard to the posting by the "other" Chuck Washburn of today to this list, I wanted to state for the record that "this" Chuck Washburn has nothing but the highest regard for the quality of John Maltby's research. As anyone who has subscribed to this list for any period of time already knows, John has done extensive research regarding the Washburn family in primary sources, the results of which research he has taken the time to share with all of us, and his work has been very helpful to me and other Washburn family researchers. Thank you, John! Charles E. Washburn, Jr. [email protected] http://home.earthlink.net/~cwashburn/history.html

Hello Cousin Beth, YOU"VE HIT PAYDIRT! And, Beth. I can do you better than Elaine's book! Mildred Smith Parkinson, my father's cousin published a small book in 1954. Your father, Harold Dean Sauer was b 10-19-1940! Elaine's book is wonderful and takes the ancestors back to old William the immigrant of Long Island. However, she takes off on James' brother, Joseph, Jr and OUR line is through James. Mildred's book is of the James' line. It can be found on the shelf of the SLC. I'm sure it's out of print by now. My Dad was born in Greenwich, I've visited there as a child and as a young woman. The farm that Jay lived on (so stated in Mildred's book) was "around the corner" from my grandfather's farm. Richard Flint is the owner of Jay's farm now-or was at the time we sold my grandfather's farm in 1980's. Any other questions? Father of your Jay and my g-grandfather (Daniel Smith W.) was HENRY G(riffin) Washburn m. to ANN MARIA VAN BENSCHOTEN. (Her ancestry can be found in "The Van Benschoten Family in America" by W. H. Van Benschoten). I am lucky enough to own a small bedside table belonging to her, also, a rocking chair that she was sitting in for a picture taken of the family at Daniel Smith W's home. Mildred, in her youth was so taken with the fact that her grandfather took time off from work to take Mr. W. H. Van Benschoten around (while W. H. was gathering material for his book) - that she decided to write family history ~ and the result was her book. So much I can tell you. I have letters from D.S. and also from Ann Maria in my posession. 'Nuf for now ~ Marilyn Washburn Powell Orange TX ---------- > From: BETH SAURER <[email protected]> > To: Washburn Families <[email protected]> > Subject: Elain Olney's Washburn Family Book > Date: Monday, February 09, 1998 9:44 PM > > Hello cousins! :) > > Tom Neel of the Ohio Genealogical Society was kind enough to refer > me to Elain Olney's (of Manhattan, Kansas) book on the Washburn family > in regards to research on our Huron County, Ohio WASHBURNs. Would any > of you happen to have this book? Tom mentioned that these Huron County > WASHBURNs lived in Greenwich (as did mine), Fitchville, and New London, > Ohio. I would *love* to have a look-up done on the below WASHBURNs to > see what kind, if any, info it has on them! :) > > Thank you cousins! > > Beth* Saurer......San Diego, California....... *;) > > ____________________________________________________________ > > > Mr. Washburn, b. ~1815-35, NY > + Mrs., b. ~1815-35, OH > Jay Washburn, b. 4/1852, OH, d. 5/9/1922, OH > + Mary, b. 2/1852, OH > (at least 3 children names are unknown to me) > Howard Washburn, b. 8/1879, OH > Etta May Washburn, b. 10/1895, OH, d. 2/16/1919, > OH at 23 yrs. > (Burried in Edwards Grove cemetery, > Ripley twp, OH) > + Archie Paul Bliss, b. 1890, OH, d. 1977, OH > (Burried in Maple Grove cemetery, New > Haven twp, OH > with subsequent wife, Lavella B. > Bliss 1900-1982) > Mary Bliss, b. ~1914-5, OH > + "Tub" Scott > 3 children, most likely still > living > Bernice May Bliss, b. 5/23/1916, OH, d. > 2/4/1985, OH > (Bernice was 2 when Etta passed > away) > + Elmer Ray Saurer, b. 10/2/1907, OH, d. > 12/7/1992, OH > One child, my father > ME! ;) > My younger sister >

Hello cousins! :) Tom Neel of the Ohio Genealogical Society was kind enough to refer me to Elain Olney's (of Manhattan, Kansas) book on the Washburn family in regards to research on our Huron County, Ohio WASHBURNs. Would any of you happen to have this book? Tom mentioned that these Huron County WASHBURNs lived in Greenwich (as did mine), Fitchville, and New London, Ohio. I would *love* to have a look-up done on the below WASHBURNs to see what kind, if any, info it has on them! :) Thank you cousins! Beth* Saurer......San Diego, California....... *;) ____________________________________________________________ Mr. Washburn, b. ~1815-35, NY + Mrs., b. ~1815-35, OH Jay Washburn, b. 4/1852, OH, d. 5/9/1922, OH + Mary, b. 2/1852, OH (at least 3 children names are unknown to me) Howard Washburn, b. 8/1879, OH Etta May Washburn, b. 10/1895, OH, d. 2/16/1919, OH at 23 yrs. (Burried in Edwards Grove cemetery, Ripley twp, OH) + Archie Paul Bliss, b. 1890, OH, d. 1977, OH (Burried in Maple Grove cemetery, New Haven twp, OH with subsequent wife, Lavella B. Bliss 1900-1982) Mary Bliss, b. ~1914-5, OH + "Tub" Scott 3 children, most likely still living Bernice May Bliss, b. 5/23/1916, OH, d. 2/4/1985, OH (Bernice was 2 when Etta passed away) + Elmer Ray Saurer, b. 10/2/1907, OH, d. 12/7/1992, OH One child, my father ME! ;) My younger sister

Dear Sue, Monday 9 February 1998 First of all....I have to say that when someone places doubt whether or not William the Conqueror was part of the Washburn ancestry is something you "yourself" will have to believe. I disagree entirely in the approach of throwing doubt on an issue (expecially when it involves geneology) of whether or not there was a connection relating to the "esteemed English researcher E.A.B. Barnard in his "Some Notes on the Evesham Branch of the Washbourne Family," in 1914." Please note that Barnard's 1914 publication was only about 60 pages in length and there is another side of this important research that has to be recognized. Now....there is another "esteemed Engish researcher" (that some people forget exists..or don't want to acknowledge) by the name of Canon James Davenport, M.A. (England) He published a work titled" "The Washburn Family of Little Washbourne and Wichkenford" in 1910. His publication is over 200 pages. Unfortunately this publication no longer exists (as I do have a copy). Davenport, in his book, had utilized the valued resource of a man name Habingdon. Habingdon was a historical researcher and a personal friend of the Washburn's in England (intermarried in the early Washburn family) during this early period. Davenport took Habingdon's actual family notes and brought them into his pubication. Since then there was also another researcher named Nash (1800's) who brought these important notes into his published works. Davenport refer's to both Habingdon and Nash in his book. This is to tell you, Sue, there is "another" line of thought here as to going back to William the Conqueror "has not at all been proven" maybe correct. But, for someone to say: "his (Barnard's) arguement that John Washburn of Bengeworth was probably not a son of John Washburn of Wickenford, although the families may have been more distantly related" is "clearly" NOT the right approach in answering someone who is learning about their family ancestry! I know Brenton Washburne personally....and he does have Bernard's publication as well as Canon James Davenport's publication. So...you see, Sue, you have to have "both" sides of the story before you can make a "accurate" judgement. I wholeheartly disagree with people who base their opinion on one source and telling the world that their source is the "only" source available. Davenport's book is very thorough and detailed with family references. You have to remember, those early records that have been so carefully recorded, are not so easily found anymore. Those idividuals who had published those earlier works had those "orginal" documents in their hand showing the proof of family linage, now seems to be always challenged somehow...because those documents no longer exist...But...their publication's.. still do exist..i.e. "The Washburn Family" by Canon Danvenport. So, what I am saying to you Sue, keep your enthusiasum!! Stay in there with your convictions...For someone to abruptly tell you that a portion of "your" family history is "incorrect" ..to me is showing no respect to the individual! ..Brenton, I am sure, knows his resources "very" well. If John A. Maltby want's to know the basis for Brenton's Washburn historical account, then, John Maltby should contact Brenton personally and not "splash" his "personal" opinion to others on this Washburn-List to those who are just "beginning" to learn of their family hearitage. If John has a problem with Brenton's book...he should have one in his possession (that is if he does) and discuss his differences of opinion with Brenton Washburne. I have posted Brenton's address many times here on this Washburn-List so he knows how to contact him. I hope this is some help to you Sue. I appologize for any discomfort you have had and "stay excited" Sue...I am excited...it is wonderful...Don't take discuragement from anyone!! If you want to know more about Brenton Washburn's books...just reply..I'll give you the information. Take care.....Cousin Chuck ============================================================================== Sue Apito, et al At 11:26 PM 2/4/98 EST, you wrote: >In a message dated 98-02-04 18:42:11 EST, [email protected] writes: > >> I just received my 2 vol. set of Brenton's books. > >I am new to this mail list - I've already received a few VERY helpful >"forwarded" posts ( thanks "mw" - you know who you are! ) - but I'm also >wondering if there is a digest available of old mail. I have a few questions >I'm sure you "regulars" are probably very tired of hearing! I'd love info on >books - my library only has a fifth edition of Weis's Ancestral Roots - and >that's it! What are Brenton's books? ALL my other research is from online >geneaology sites and some notes a relative sent me made from Ada Haight's book >( and I can hardly read their handwriting! ) My name is Susan Sawhill Apito. >My "Washburn" is Helen Emily Washburn, daughter of Benjamin and Mary Ann >Secor. I haven't been able to verify them yet ( I started this whole project >as a "home school" project for my 11 year old.......got obsessed......now it's >MY project! ) I feel pretty proud of how far I've gotten in only about three >weeks though! ( My family thinks I'm nuts for being so excited we're related >to William the Conqueor - they ask me when my Tiara is coming in the mail!! ) > >Sue > Before you get too excited, the Washburn ancestry going back to William the Conqueror has not at all been proven. In fact, the purported ancestry shown in several Washburn lineages at the turn of this century through William Mytton, Esq., has been almost disproven by the esteemed English researcher E.A.B. Barnard in his "Some Notes on the Evesham Branch of the Washbourne Family," in 1914. If you'll note on p.71 of Weis' "Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists," Fifth Edition, he states: "There is no proof that John Washburn No. 37 was the son of John Washburn and Joan Mitton," giving reference to an article in "The American Genealogist," Vol. 36, p. 63, which in turn uses the work of Barnard as the basis for his arguement that John Washburn of Bengeworth was probably not a son of John Washburn of Wickenford, although the families may have been more distantly related. John A. Maltby Redwood City, CA [email protected] ============================================================================== @

I come from the line of Joseph Washburn, son of John Washburn and Elizabeth Mitchell. I am new to the list and have watched for a few days about William the Conqueror. I did not know that there was even a consideration that we were connected. Could you give me more info? Thanks, Lynn

Subject: GET LEGAL CASH IN MAIL W/ ONLY $5.00 READ THIS YOU WON'T BE SORRY, I WASN'T This will be the quickest way to get cash in the mail.If you follow these instructions carefully, you will be able to receive within two months nearly $50,000.00. The great part is is that $5.00 isn't really a whole lot and it could just be worth a try. I am currently 6 months pregnant and my husband and I are in debt. We both have really good professions but he has massive student loans and credit card bills (I was lucky and my father helped me through college). Needless to say, since we are married to one another I acquired his debt also. In any case, I followed these easy steps thinking that I really had nothing to lose and guess what? The first week I started getting money in the mail! I was shocked! I still figured it would end soon. The money just kept coming in. In my first week, I made about $20.00 to $30.00 dollars. By the end of the second week I had made a total of over $1,000.00!!!!!! In the third week I had over $10,000.00 and it's still growing. This is now my fourth week and I have made a total of just over $42,000.00 and it's still coming in ....... You send $1.00 to each of the 5 names and address stated in the article. You then place your own name and address in the bottom of the list at #5, and post the article in at least 200 newsgroups. (There are thousands) and that is all. Let me tell you how this works and most importantly, Why it works....also, make sure you print a copy of this article NOW, so you can get the information off of it as you need it. The process is very simple and consists of 3 easy steps: Like most of us, I was a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! Seriously, your story will sound like this one if you participate by doing the following: STEP 1: Get 5 separate pieces of paper and write your address on each piece of paper along with "PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR MAILING LIST." Now get 5 $1.00 bills and place ONE inside EACH of the 5 pieces of paper so th e bill will not be seen through the envelope to prevent thievery. Next, place one paper in each of the 5 envelopes and seal them. You should now have 5 sealed envelopes, each with a piece of paper stating the above phrase and a $1.00 bill. What you are doing is creating a service by this. THIS IS PERFECTLY LEGAL! Mail the 5 envelopes to the following addresses: #1 Corey McNear 233 Olive st. West Reading, PA 19611 #2 R. M. 66 Navesink Drive Monmouth Beach, NJ 07750 #3 Sam 27248 Grano Avenue Saugus, CA 91350 #4 Pat anderson 41 pilote st-ambroise Pq #5 Nick Austin 12318 Dollar Lk dr Fenton, MI 48430-9734 STEP 2: Now take the #1 name off the list that you see above, move the other names up (2 becomes 1, 3 becomes 2, etc...) and add YOUR Name as number 5 on the list. STEP 3: Change anything you need to, but try to keep this article as close to original as possible. Now, post your amended article to at least 200 newsgroups. (I think there is close to 18,000 groups) All you need is 200, but remember, the more you post, the more money you make! Don't know HOW to post in the newsgroups? Well do exactly the following: FOR NETSCAPE USERS: 1) Click on any newsgroup, like normal. Then click on "To News", which is in the top left corner of the newsgroup page. This will bring up a message box. 2) Fill in the SUBJECT with a flashy title, like the one I used, something to catch the eye!!! 3) Now go to the message part of the box and retype this letter exactly as it is here, with exception of your few changes. (remember to add your name to number 5 and move the rest up) 6 4) When your done typing in the WHOLE letter, click on 'FILE' above the send button. Then, 'SAVE AS..' DO NOT SEND YOUR ARTICLE UNTILL YOU SAVE IT. (so you don't have toype this 200 times :-) 5) Now that you have saved the letter, go ahead and send your first copy! (click the 'SEND' button in the top left corner) 6) This is where you post all 200! OK, go to ANY newsgroup article and click the 'TO NEWS' button again. Type in your flashy subject in the 'SUBJECT BOX', then go to the message and place your cursor here. Now click on 'ATTACHMENT' which is right below the 'SUBJECT BOX'. Click on attach file then find your letter wherever you saved it. Click once on your file then click 'OPEN' then click 'OK'. If you did this right , you should see your filename in the 'ATTACHMENT BOX' and it will be shaded. NOW POST AWAY! FOR INTERNET EXPLORER: It's just as easy, holding down the left mouse button, highlight this entire article, then press the 'CTRL' key and 'C' key at the same time to copy this article. Then print the article for your records to have the names of those you will be sending $1.00 to. Go to the newsgroups and press 'POST AN ARTICLE' type in your flashy subject and click the large window below. Press 'CTRL' and 'V' and the article will appear in the message window. **BE SURE TO MAKE YOUR ADDRESS CHANGES TO THE 5 NAMES.** Now re-highlight the article and re-copy it so you have the changes.... then all you have to do for each newsgroup is 'CTRL' and 'V' and press 'POST'. It's that easy!! THAT'S IT! All you have to do is jump to different newsgroups and post away, after you get the hang of it, it will take about 30 seconds for each newsgroup! **REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS YOU POST IN, THE MORE MONEY YOU WILL MAKE!! BUT YOU HAVE TO POST A MINIMUM OF 200** **If these instructions are too complex to follow, try Forte's "Free Agent." It is freeware for noncommercial use. To download it, simply use a search utility and type "Forte Free Agent". You should be able to find it.** That's it! You will begin receiving money from around the world within days! You may eventually want to rent a P.O. Box due to the large amount of mail you receive. If you wish to stay anonymous, you can invent a name to use, as long as the postman will deliver it. **JUST MAKE SURE ALL THE ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT.** Now the WHY part: This entire principle works because it is in a format of an upside down tree with thousands of branches. Everyone below you will see to it that the tree continues because they want to get money. Those below THEM will continue because THEY want to get the cash etc. Out of 200 postings, say I receive only 5 replies (a very low example). So then I made $5.00 with my name at #5 on the letter. Now, each of the 5 persons who just sent me $1.00 make the MINIMUM 200 postings, each with my name at #4 and only 5 persons respond to each of the original 5, that is another $25.00 for me, now those 25 each make 200 MINIMUM posts with my name at #3 and only 5 replies each, I will bring in an additional $125.00! Now, those 125 persons turn around and post the MINIMUM 200 with my name at #2 and only receive 5 replies each, I will make an additional $626.00! OK, now here is the fun part, each of those 625 persons post a MINIMUM of 200 letters with my name at #1 and they each only receive 5 replies, that just made me $3,125.00!!! With a original investment of only $5.00! AMAZING! And as I said 5 responses is actually VERY LOW! Average is probable 20 to 30! So lets put those figures at just 15 responses per person. Here is what you will make: at #5 $15.00 at #4 $225.00 at #3 $3,375.00 at #2 $50,625.00 at #1 $759,375.00 When your name is no longer on the list, you just take the latest posting in the newsgroups, and send out another $5.00 to names on the list, putting your name at number 5 and start posting again. The thing to remember is that thousands of people all over the world are joining the Internet and reading these articles everyday, JUST LIKE YOU are now!! And this will go on and on and on and on.... get the picture? Well, there's 5,000,000,000 people on the world and most of them will eventually end up being hooked into the internet. So there are virtually unlimited resources. Of course this will work the best at the very beginning so the faster you post, the better for YOU! People have said, "what if the plan is played out and no one sends you the money? So what! What are the chances of that happening when there are tons of new honest users and new honest people who are joining the Internet and newsgroups everyday and are willing to give it a try? Estimates are at 20,000 to 50,000 new users, every day, with thousands of those joining the actual Internet. Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will work. You just have to be honest. Make sure you print this article out RIGHT NOW, also. Try to keep a list of everyone that sends you money and always keep an eye on the newsgroups to make sure everyone is playing fairly. Remember, HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY. You don't need to cheat the basic idea to make the money!! GOOD LUCK to all and please play fairly and reap the huge rewards from this, which is tons of extra CASH. **By the way, if you try to deceive people by posting the messages with y name in the list and not sending the money to the rest of the people already onhe list, you will NOT get as much. Someone I talked to knew someone who did that and he only made about $150.00, and that's after seven or eight weeks! Then he sent the 5 $1.00 bills, people added him to their lists, and in 4-5 weeks he had over $10k. This ishe fairest and most honest way I have ever seen to share the wealth of the world without costing anything but our time!!! You also may want to buy mailing and e-mail lists for future dollars. Please remember to declare your extra income. Thanks once again...

Sue Apito, et al At 11:26 PM 2/4/98 EST, you wrote: >In a message dated 98-02-04 18:42:11 EST, [email protected] writes: > >> I just received my 2 vol. set of Brenton's books. > >I am new to this mail list - I've already received a few VERY helpful >"forwarded" posts ( thanks "mw" - you know who you are! ) - but I'm also >wondering if there is a digest available of old mail. I have a few questions >I'm sure you "regulars" are probably very tired of hearing! I'd love info on >books - my library only has a fifth edition of Weis's Ancestral Roots - and >that's it! What are Brenton's books? ALL my other research is from online >geneaology sites and some notes a relative sent me made from Ada Haight's book >( and I can hardly read their handwriting! ) My name is Susan Sawhill Apito. >My "Washburn" is Helen Emily Washburn, daughter of Benjamin and Mary Ann >Secor. I haven't been able to verify them yet ( I started this whole project >as a "home school" project for my 11 year old.......got obsessed......now it's >MY project! ) I feel pretty proud of how far I've gotten in only about three >weeks though! ( My family thinks I'm nuts for being so excited we're related >to William the Conqueor - they ask me when my Tiara is coming in the mail!! ) > >Sue > Before you get too excited, the Washburn ancestry going back to William the Conqueror has not at all been proven. In fact, the purported ancestry shown in several Washburn lineages at the turn of this century through William Mytton, Esq., has been almost disproven by the esteemed English researcher E.A.B. Barnard in his "Some Notes on the Evesham Branch of the Washbourne Family," in 1914. If you'll note on p.71 of Weis' "Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists," Fifth Edition, he states: "There is no proof that John Washburn No. 37 was the son of John Washburn and Joan Mitton," giving reference to an article in "The American Genealogist," Vol. 36, p. 63, which in turn uses the work of Barnard as the basis for his arguement that John Washburn of Bengeworth was probably not a son of John Washburn of Wickenford, although the families may have been more distantly related. John A. Maltby Redwood City, CA [email protected]