Roy,
I just looked again at what Homer had. First, I don't think he assigned numbers to
them, that seems
to be we, the current researchers assigning the numbers, but somehow it's starting to
get a bit
confusing (or is it just me?)
I "think" what Homer was trying to indicate is that he thought Peter Jr. b. 1722
ended up in Preston
Co., VA, or at least that descendants did. He kinda has the whole thing mangled, so
it's hard to
tell what he was trying to say.
The Peter Jr. who sold land to Peter Sr in 1764 has always tended to confuse me anyway. I
had listed
under Peter Sr. & Ann Gates a son b. bef. 1733. This was based on the Jun 1749 Charles
Co. court
record Phil Goff located which states "Peter Carrico on his petition to the Court
here has his son
set levy free." Presuming the son was at least 16, I came up with the 1733 date. As
well, we know
that Ann Gates was dead by 1734 when Peter petitioned to have Maidstone resurveyed.
It's hard to
tell from the petition when Peter married Ann. Peter's petition states that Ann
petitioned the court
to have Maidstone resurveyed in 1720 and it was resurveyed in Nov. 1721 and it was after
that when
she "intermarried" with Peter Carrico. It was certainly before 1730 when Peter
was leasing portions
of Maidstone to Abel Carrico & George Keeth. Homer could be right with the estimate of
1722, but I
also think it could have been as late as 1733 at which time Ann Gates would have been 43
years old.
I know the question has come up whether or not Ann Gates could have married before her
marriage to
Peter. I've often considered that locating her 1720 petition might tell us if she was
still single
or then a widow. I've not found it in any indexes, so it would mean paying Michael
Hiatt the hourly
fee to try to search for the record. I've added that to my "to do" list!
Anyway, today I changed my entry from "son Carrico" to Peter Carrico.The only
thing for certain is
that he was still living in 1769 when he was in Provincial Court with John Rogers &
Samuel Hanson
involving a Recovery Deed for Maidstone.
Also this morning I've been trying to get some of the information you've sent
regarding the Preston
Co. Carrico's online. To go with some of that info. I was just looking again at
ancestry's images
from "U.S. Army, Register of Enlistments, 1798-1914". There are 2 entires of
interest. I'm going to
try to get both online, but it may not be until later this afternoon. My son is on his way
here so
that we can drop his car off for an oil change & then we're picking up my
daughter so that we all
can go to lunch. I guess my treat :-) I haven't even dressed yet, so I better get
moving.
Meanwhile, I think brainstorming these Peter's might help sort the information out.
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy Lockhart" <royboy(a)wirefire.com>
To: <carrico(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [CARRICO] desc/o Peter CARRICO III?
Diana & Linda,
Peter Carrico Jr (III) was supposedly born about 1722 while Peter Carrico
(IV) of Preston Co WV (present day location) was still living in 1815 when
Peter Jr would have been about 93 years old.
Also, Peter (IV) of Preston fathered children during the 1770's-1790's
(apparently by two wives) when Peter Jr (III) would have been in his
50's-70's, possible but probably not likely. Is there any proof (other than
Homer Edwin Carrico's assumption) that Peter (IV) of Preston was the son of
Peter Jr (III)?
Roy Lockhart
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <DianaGM(a)dgmweb.net>
To: <carrico(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: [CARRICO] desc/o Peter CARRICO III?
> Linda,
>
> Homer is only one of the sources I cite,
>
http://dgmweb.net/genealogy/FGS/Car/CarricoPeterIII-_.shtml
>
> and I say in the citation itself that his work contains errors. I plainly
> disagree with him about Alexander being his son, and I grant only that
Joseph C.
> CARRICO is "said to be" his son. I obviously disagree with those who
assert
> that Peter III's wife was Elizabeth COLEMAN. About the only thing on the
page I
> accept is that Peter III is the son of Peter II. It is definitely not the
case
> that "what I have" is "what Homer Edwin Carrico published with
obvious
error's
> (sic)."
>
> In my opinion, if you don't *know* two records pertain to the same person,
you
> should not assume they do. Lumping two people into one is, to me, a
bigger
> error than not doing so because lumping them obscures the possible
existence of
> the other person. Surely the most frequent mistake in genealogy has to be
> assuming two people with the same name are the same person.
>
> In comparing Peter III with Peter "IV,"
>
http://dgmweb.net/genealogy/FGS/Car/CarricoPeterIV-_.shtml
> I find it *probable* that Peter III and IV are different men, based on
timing.
>
> If Peter III was born ca. 1722, as alleged, he would likely have married a
woman
> born ca. 1726, and they would likely have married ca. 1745. The average
maximum
> age for a woman birthing her last child is 43, so we wouldn't expect her
to bear
> any children after ca. 1769.
>
> The 1790 census shows Peter IV has just two sons, both born after 1774,
meaning
> his wife had a son at least as late as 1776 (unless you want to assert
twins,
> but we're talking here about what's most probable, not what's least
probable).
> The fact that they have *no* sons born before 1774 (no sons over the age
of 15)
> suggests that they were not married much before 1770, but even if we grant
that
> their three daughters were all born before the two sons, it only puts
their
> marriage back a decade, at most.
>
> The above timing scenario is not *proof* that they're different men
because not
> everyone is average and Peter III could have married again to a younger
women.
> Still, the extended time frame leans in the direction of two men, rather
than
> one, so I consider treating them as two men to be the conservative view.
>
> As for Peter of Preston Co., WV, his first appearance in the record could
be the
> one in WV; and because it could be, I've never made an assumption that
he's any
> of the Peter CARRICOs appearing in the records of Maryland. It's entirely
> possible that, if no paper documentation is ever found, we may never know
is he
> is. The one thing we do know for certain is that DNA test results at
least
> prove he's a member of this CARRICO family.
>
> As for the potential project member, his line led to the Joseph who
married
> Susan and moved to Washington Co., KY, so he's out of the running. In
fact, I'm
> wondering, now...
>
> If we don't have any children firmly attached to Peter III, how can we
make a
> solid paper trail to him a criterion for being given the free test? I get
the
> dodo award here for allowing our donor to make the offer before realizing
its
> conditions could not be met. On the other hand, maybe the offer will give
> someone the incentive to work on Peter III and make the connection to get
the
> free test!
>
> Diana
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: carrico-bounces(a)rootsweb.com
> > [mailto:carrico-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Linda Boorom
> > Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 2:23 PM
> > To: carrico(a)rootsweb.com
> > Subject: Re: [CARRICO] desc/o Peter CARRICO III?
> >
> > Diana,
> >
> > I think what you have for Peter III is what Homer Edwin
> > Carrico published with obvious error's. I
> > think Homer was attempting to refer to the Peter JR who sold
> > Maidstone to Peter SR in 1764, as such,
> > making Peter JR a son of the marriage of Peter II to Ann
> > Gates who later settled in Preston Co., WV.
> > He gives Peter 2 sons, Joseph b. 1744 & Alexander b. 1750 who
> > d. 1840 in IN.
> >
> > For son Joseph, (per Homer), he's got some obv. error's in
> > dates, but he seems to be referring to
> > the Preston Co. branch of Carrico's.
> >
> > Alexander is another story, Homer's info. was obtained from
> > Maude Carrico Russell's info. who had
> > the Alexander of Mass. & Alexander who married Mary Sedgwick
> > as the same man. It has been proven
> > that they are 2 different Alexander's. As to why Homer listed
> > him as son of this Peter presumably
> > was because Peter had resided in Montgomery Co., in 1790 &
> > that is where Alexander married Mary
> > Sedgwick in 1800. Since there is no 1800 census for VA(WV),
> > Homer was not aware that Peter was by
> > that time in Monongalia VA. I think Homer just didn't know
> > what to do with Alexander(s)!
> >
> > Besides Peter in Preston WV, you also have listed a Peter IV
> > in Montgomery Co., MD in 1790. So, you
> > have 3 Peter's, where Homer has them combined into 1. I don't
> > think we're talking 3 different men
> > here as you show, but remain uncertain if Peter of Preston
> > WV is the same Peter prob. s/o of Ann
> > Gates & Peter Carrico II.
> >
> > I'd be curious to know how the potential descendant claims to
> > descend from Peter? Is it via the
> > Preston Co. line?
> >
> > BTW, regarding the Preston Co., line, Roy Lockhart sent me a
> > nice big package of documents recently
> > which I keep hoping to find time to scan & get online. These
> > documents pretty much indicate that
> > Peter of Preston had 3 sons, besides Joseph b. ca 1792 (or
> > earlier), also John Conley Carrico &
> > James Carrico. AND, another interesting tidbit:
> >
> > Ancestry has "U.S. Army, Register of Enlistments, 1798-1914 "
> > where it shows that Joseph Carico
> > enlisted May 9 1814 in Morgantown VA (county seat of current
> > Monongalia WV, he was then age 30
> > (raising questions as the ca 1792 birthdate) and states that
> > he was born in CHARLES CO. MD!!!!
> > Although this document raises some additional questions, it
> > does seem to confirm that the Preston
> > Co. branch had ties to Charles Co., MD.
> >
> > I've some running I need to do this afternoon, but will see
> > if I can get to those scans later today
> > or tomorrow.
> >
> > Linda
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <DianaGM(a)dgmweb.net>
> > To: <CARRICO(a)rootsweb.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 8:33 PM
> > Subject: [CARRICO] desc/o Peter CARRICO III?
> >
> >
> > > Now that I've broadcast this donor's offer to fund a
> > patrilineal descendant of
> > > Peter CARRICO III, I just realized that what I have on the
> > genealogy of his
> > > descendants is a mess -- just contradictory information
> > from secondary sources.
> > > I haven't done any original research on him, except for
> > gathering census records
> > > of his alleged descendants further down the line.
> > >
> > > Someone with a potential connection to Peter III has
> > already responded to the
> > > testing offer, and I realize I don't have what I need to
> > verify it. I'm
> > > somewhere between embarrassed and panicked. This is what I
> > have right now on
> > > Peter (and, yes, it's pathetic):
> > >
http://dgmweb.net/genealogy/FGS/Car/CarricoPeterIII-_.shtml
> > >
> > > Any help appreciated. We may have at our fingertips a
> > chance to test this line,
> > > so it's well worth contributing what you have (or can
> > find). Please. I can't
> > > ask a donor to fund a line without a verified paper trail.
> > >
> > > Diana
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> > CARRICO-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word
> > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the
> > body of the message
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> > CARRICO-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe'
> > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
> >
> >
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
CARRICO-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to CARRICO-request(a)rootsweb.com with
the word
'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message