Your last sentence really scares me. Here in Maine private cemeteries are owned by the survivors and cannot be denied access. Further the Laws of Maine require towns to place flags on the graves of any and all veterans. The towns must also keep the graves of such folks neat and cleared of brush. A further law prevents any construction within 25 feet of any cemetery plot regardless of the number of graves. I believe that young folks, my children's ages 35 - 42, are not teaching their children to respect not only the flag, church property, property of others; but, also the resting place of our citizens. In many communities cemeteries are the only "park like" atmosphere. Let us not disrespect our forefathers. Haven Andrews WASHBURN-D-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > Subject: > > WASHBURN-D Digest Volume 00 : Issue 98 > > Today's Topics: > #1 Re: Fw: WASHBURN NATIONAL REUNION [SUSANLB@aol.com] > #2 Re: Fw: [LINTNER] 3 July,2000 Ceme [FarleyA1@aol.com] > #3 Re: WASHBURN NATIONAL REUNION ["Valeria Reckert" <vreckert@indy.n] > #4 Benjamin Washburn [SUSANLB@aol.com] > #5 Re: Fw: [LINTNER] 3 July,2000 Ceme [SUSANLB@aol.com] > #6 Re: Fw: WASHBURN NATIONAL REUNION [MyPawprints@aol.com] > > Administrivia: > --- > To unsubscribe from the Digest version of the > Washburn Family Discussion list, send an email to > Washburn-D-request@rootsweb.com with the following command: > > unsubscribe > > (and nothing else) in the message area. > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: Fw: WASHBURN NATIONAL REUNION > Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 08:29:05 EDT > From: SUSANLB@aol.com > To: WASHBURN-L@rootsweb.com > > I like the thought of a Washburn family reunion, but the organization behind > putting one together is overwhelming to me. > > Someone has to plan at least my catered luncheon or better yet dinner that > everyone will attend. Even though each attendee pays his own way, someone > has to contact an establishment, or rent a hall and get a caterer and be > responsible for paying the bill. > > There should be at least one planned activity - visit to an historical site, > something just for the fun of getting together with family and interacting > (No visiting a cemetery or going to a research facility is no a planned > family activity!) > > The location where the reunion is held needs to have housing facilities equal > to the number of people coming, at a variety of prices so that all can afford > it. - Which leans things toward a metropolitan area. > > If you have a dinner, it would be nice to have a speaker for the dinner who > could give an entertaining, but information talk on some aspect of the > Washburn family. > > There needs to be some form of organization to get members of the same branch > together. Probably broken down by descendants of William, descendants of > Phillip and then a series of groups for descendants of each of the > children of John Washburn & Elizabeth Mitchell. > > The first reunion would probably be a simple "long Week-end" affair. > Perhaps, Get in on Friday, trip on Saturday, meals on your own, group > discussion in the evening. Luncheon with speaker on Sunday and go home. > > Since the roots of most Washburn's are in New England - I would suspect the > first meeting should be there. But for the most part any planning done this > year would be for an event in 2001 - most place are now booked with summer > vactioners in New England, and then in the fall with the leaf-peeping tours. > I wouldn't do it in the winter - I moved out of New England because i didn't > like the winters. > > Anyone belong to other one-name socieities that hold a reunion? What do > they do? > > Susan Bingler > Fairfax, VA > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: Fw: [LINTNER] 3 July,2000 Cemetery Preservation > Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 09:06:39 EDT > From: FarleyA1@aol.com > To: WASHBURN-L@rootsweb.com > > In a message dated 07/05/2000 9:02:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > jamaltby@creative.net writes: > > << There is no respect for the dead when the developers are trying to make > money. > >> > > Our very small community was fortunate to save our cemetery (established in > 1870) from an unscrupulous developer. While I would be one of the first to > sign a petition for county, state, or nation - wide protection it requires a > dedicated, no-holds barred determined LOCAL to see a project through. We won > ... got the Board of Supervisors to TAKE the property (which the developer > had gained illegally, but some yahoo in county government hadn't had the > nerve to oppose) through eminent domain proceedings. Durham Cemetery is now > a gorgeous (albeit small at 4.5 acres), oak tree canopied memorial to the > dead, and newly dedicated cemetery. > > Jurisdictions are different in all areas, and while a broadcast "rule" or > "law" may work well for a majority of cemetery preservation efforts, > developers -- and those who see dollar signs at the end of a contract -- > don't worry about disturbing "some old cemetery." When speaking before the > Butte County (California) Planning Commission I was asked why this potential > development would be of any concern to me as it had already been established > that I had no family buried there. My response was that developers are > required by California law to keep their gray water (sewage) on their own > properties, and that this area is prone to standing and high water during wet > years. The adjacent property is a golf course, and knowing golfers I felt > that they wouldn't want to take anything but a pristine little white ball out > of the 5th fairway. I said that I had a great aversion to a leach field > going "through somebody's grandmother's bones," and that was quoted in the > newspaper. > > The developer said that there were "just a few people buried there" ... and > in California at least as few as six interments determine a CEMETERY. We > were before a county judge who asked how we would prove that there were more > than just a few buried there. I asked the judge if he would allow a period > of time to do research, and suggested that an obituary or death certificate > might well be found for everyone thought to be buried there (you couldn't see > the markers for the weeds). An obit is the means by which we invite our > friends and neighbors to the services. While there are errors, the fact that > John Jones died yesterday and is being buried at a particular cemetery > tomorrow is rarely in error as it is our official notification. Death > certificates have been required for many years, and it too shows the place of > burial. He agreed with the argument (the developer was apoplectic) ... We > found 396. > > If you need to fight an intended development, work with all your might to get > the school kids, PTA members, ministers of ALL denominations, members of your > local planning commission, boards of supervisors, and local community members > and businessmen to stand behind you .... then get the press on board, and > you'd be surprised how well your efforts can end up. > > Adriana Farley > Durham, CA > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: WASHBURN NATIONAL REUNION > Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 09:33:31 -0500 > From: "Valeria Reckert" <vreckert@indy.net> > To: WASHBURN-L@rootsweb.com > > Hello, > > I don't know what I can do from here in Indy for the reunion but I would be > more than willing to help in whatever way I can. I would really love to meet > all my couins finally! > > Also, could some repost the site for signing the cemetery petition? > > Thanks, > > Valeria > vreckert@indy.net > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Benjamin Washburn > Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 16:02:46 EDT > From: SUSANLB@aol.com > To: WASHBURN-L@rootsweb.com > > Interesting Hampshire Co., MA [field in Springfield so in the Hampden Co., MA > records] > > vol. M p. 664-665 > To all People to whom These Presents Shall Come Greeting, Know ye that I > Benjamin Washborn of Bridgewater in the County of Plymouth in the Province of > the Massachusetts Bay in New England, Husbandman for an in consideration of > the Sum of Twenty Pounds in Bills of Credit to me in had before the Insealing > hereof, well and Truly Paid by Jeremiah Allen of Rehoboth Blacksmith & Joseph > Allen of Barrington, Husbandmen both in the County of Bristol in the Province > aforesd. The Receipt where of I Do hereby Acknowledge and my Self therewith > fully Satisfied Contented and Paid, and thereof and of Every part and parcell > are: of Do Exonerate Acquit and Discharge them the Said Jeremiah Allen and > Joseph Allen their heirs Executors and administrators forever by These > Presents: Have Given Granted bargained Sold Aliened Conveyed and Confirmed, > and by these Presents Do freely fully and Absolutely give Grant bargain Sell > Aliene Convey and Confirm Unto them the Said Jeremiah Allen and Joseph Allen > their heirs and Assigns forever A certain Share Proportion or Right of Land > Throughout the Narragansett Township No. 4, Lying & being at a Place called > Quabbin in the County of Hampshire with the One Hundred Acre Lott already > laid out & Drawn & the after Divisions That may be Drawn Upon the Right > hereby Conveyed is the Lott No 4 as Described in the Survey & plan Drawn by > Nathl Kellogg, with all the after Draughts & Divisions in sd township To have > and to hold the said Granted and bargained Premises with all the > appurtenances, Priviledges and Commodities to the Same belonging or in any > wise appertaining to them the said Jeremiah Allen & Joseph Allen their heirs > and assigns forever, to his and their only Proper Use Benefit and behoof > forever and the Said Benjamin Washborn for myself my heirs Executors and > administrators do Covenant Promise and Grant to and with the said Jeremiah > Allen & Joseph Allen their heirs and assigns, that at and before the > Ensealing hereof for the True Sole and Lawfull owner of the above bargained > Premises and am Lawfully Seized and Possessed of the same in my own Proper > Right as a Good Perfect and Absolute Estate of Inheritance In fee Simple: And > have in my self good Right full Power and Lawfull authority to grant bargain > sell convey and confirm Said bargained Premises in manner as above said and > that the said Jeremiah & Joseph Allen heirs and assigns Shall and may from > Time to time and at al Times forever hereafter by force and virtue of these > Presents Lawfully Peaceably and Quietly have hold use Occupie Possess and > Enjoy the said Demised and bargained Premises with the appurtenances free and > Clear and freely and Clearly acquitted Exonerated and Discharged of, from all > and all manner of former or other gifts grants, bargains, sales leases, > mortgages, wills Entails joyntures Dowries Judgements Executions or > Incumbrances of What name or nature soever that might in any measure or > Degree obstruct or make void this Present Deed Further more I the said > Benjamin Washborne for my self my heirs Executors and administrators Do > Covenant and Engage the Above Demised Premises to them the said Jeremiah & > Joseph Allen their heirs and assigns again at the lawfull Claims or Demands > of any person or persons whatsoever forever to warrant secure and Defend by > these Presents: In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal this > twenty fourth Day of May 1739 Signed, Sealed & Delivered In Presence of us > Samuel Childs > Comfort Carpenter > > signed > Benjain Washborne [his Mark & Seal] > > Bristol SS Rehoboth May the 24th 1739 Benjamin Washborn Subscriber to the > above written Instrument appeared Personally and acknowledged the same to be > his act and Deed Before me George Leonard Justice of Peace > > Received June 4th 1742 and Recorded from the Originall > > IAt present I think the individual who was being called Benjamin Washburn of > Bridgewater, Husbandman was Benjamin son Of Jonathan Washburn///Anyone have > thoughts on that? > > What interested me was A statement in Holland, Josiah History of Western > Massachusetts [1855] reprinted 1994 p. 212 in speaking of the town of > Greenwich which was established in 1754 > > "On the 30th of June 1732 the General Court granted seven townships of land, > six miles square each, to the descenants of the soldiers who destroyed the > Narraganset fort, on the 19th of December, 1675. The number of soldiers was > 840" It goes on to say the land was originally laid out in NH but that land > was thought to be unsuitable so they changed it to an are of Massachusetts > known as Quabbin in the Narragasett township No 4, this area became > Greenwich, MA It also said most of the original grantees of the area did > not take up residence there, in fact they often sold their land for little > more than the taxes due on it. > > Don't look on a map it isn't there in 1938 Greenwich ceased to be when it > was annexed to Hardwick, New Salem, Petersham & Ware. > > It would appear that Benjamin was a descendant of one of the soldiers... > > I wonder how many Washburns ended up in Western Mass. because of just such > grants - which of course don't show up in the land records til they pass out > of the family? > Any comments? > > Susan Bingler > Fairfax, VA > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: Fw: [LINTNER] 3 July,2000 Cemetery Preservation > Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 16:32:00 EDT > From: SUSANLB@aol.com > To: WASHBURN-L@rootsweb.com > > Cemetery Preservation is best done on a local level not at the Federal level. > There are small cemeteries on private land. My friends 30 acre farm has a > small (20 grave) cemetery on it. It is her land, and the government has no > business mandating how she lives on it, or what she has to do to maintain the > graves. Which are on a back area of the farm, which is wooded. They aren't > her ancestors. She won't destroy the graves, but she shouldn't have to > preserve them either. > > Susan Bingler > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: Fw: WASHBURN NATIONAL REUNION > Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 17:05:10 EDT > From: MyPawprints@aol.com > To: WASHBURN-L@rootsweb.com > > My VanZandt family has an annual reunion, each year in a different part of > the country to accommodate our far-flung cousins. Every five years they take > a trip back to the homeland (Netherlands) for a week. The last time I went > we took an extra week in England for sightseeing. > > At the reunion, we spend a couple days touring the area, have guest speakers > about family-related matters of interest, lovely dinner meetings, a time to > exchange family info. It's well-organized and always fun to meet new > cousins. Some are ALWAYS there and many new ones from new parts of the > country attend. > > A master file is kept on all the family lineage so newcomers and oldcomers > alike can access the information for free and update their own files. > > Could get details on how-to if anyone is really interested. > Lyn