Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/167
Message Board Post:
After the wild weekend, if anyone has any information to share with me. please send it to my private email. I lost control once or twice, will not share your names with anyone. sorry about that!
thanks,
Mary Lou Reed
While I think debate is a useful tool, to be polite should rule the day. We
can always agree to disagree and the Chronister line has certainly produced
any number of strong females.
I have enjoyed the exchange of information both proved and not but would
like to see a different tone when addressing each other.
Marilyn Thomas Hawley
Debra,
I enjoy a good debate ... there is a LOT of good info in these emails,
however I believe the personal slamming should have been done by private
email. This type of debate not only reflects on you, but also rootsweb. As
a list owner/moderator, I never allow emails such as the ones which have
been going through your site. I send an email of warning ... and afterward
I moderate their emails to approve or disapprove.
I don't really care what you do about it. To me, it is a moderator's
decision.
----- Original Message -----
From: <debrablackard(a)centurytel.net>
To: <CHRONISTER-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 09:14 PM
Subject: [CHRONISTER] The continuing William J. Chronister question.
> This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
>
> Classification: Query
>
> Message Board URL:
>
> http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/166
>
> Message Board Post:
>
> If listmembers are uncomfortable about this debate, email me and I will
have the whole thread taken off the board. Majority rules.
>
> Debra
>
>
> ==== CHRONISTER Mailing List ====
> All messages posted to the Chronister Ancestry Message Board are gatewayed
to the Chronister mailing list at Rootweb.
>
> ==============================
> Find your ancestors in the Birth, Marriage and Death Records.
> New content added every business day. Learn more:
> http://www.ancestry.com/s13964/rd.ashx
>
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/165.1
Message Board Post:
Whoever requested it to end--I thank you. Glad it's over, let's move on. As for the other question, whatever the majority wants is fine with me.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.2....
Message Board Post:
Mary Lou
Neither of us told you that there were court cases for "your" William J. at the Pope Courthouse. There's no way to know from the index which William J. it is unless you actually look at each case--and you were told that.
Debra explained the records that she used, told you where her research left off, and made good suggestions about other documents that you could look at that we hadn't already seen. She kindly gave you instructions about how to obtain the various kinds of records, without getting on a plane and going anywhere. Do you think anyone will want to be this helpful again, after what you did with Debra's work in your last posting directed at me?
I'm sure the list is as tired of this as we are. Mine and Debra's work is archived at rootsweb and genforum, and all of your disjointed rebuttal is, as well. So how about calling it quits? So far, you are the only person who isn't ready to leave this proof alone and move on, and you force us to defend ourselves when you malign our work and character every several months, making up things that aren't true, simply because our work doesn't agree with a family story.
Here is exactly what Debra told you and everyone else, cut and pasted in it's entirety from the genforum board, 28 July 2004:
-------------------------------------------------------
"Mary Lou, Thanks for allowing me to help solve a little bit of this puzzle. It was fun. Pope Co. is a wonderful county for research because the Historical Association has been so proactive in preserving their county records. Everything I checked for you was on microfilm, tax and loose probate files. There is a printed index to the Chancery, Civil and Criminal Court cases where I found several references to W. J./(var forms)Chronister. I did not investigate those because my primary objectives were to determine when W. J. Chronister went on the tax rolls and to check Azariah Chronister's probate file. You can probably order copies of these same microfilms for Pope Co. records at your local LDS Family History Center. Check the Pope Co. microfilm index the Pope County Genealogy Page. The address for the Pope Co. website is: <http://www.rootsweb.com/~arpope2/>
If you are interested in knowing more about the court cases to determine if some of them relate to your W. J. Chronister, you can order index pages with Chronister listings through interlibrary loan, if your local library participates. If so, the Russellville genealogy librarians will copy those pages in the index and send them to your library. OR you can mail a hard copy of your request to Katie Murdoch at the Pope Co. Public Library. They will copy them and bill you for copies and probably postage. If you should need copies of Pope Co. records which have not been microfilmed, Katie can give you the procedure for obtaining copies through the Historical Association.
I did not check deed records. These are also available on microfilm for years since the formation of the county through the early 1920s. You may want to track William Jackson Chronister's land to see if his children and grandchildren become owners later.
There are so many good sources out there to help us piece together the lives of our ancestors. We have to be determined and keep looking. "New" sources are being made available every day.
Debra"
-------------------------------------------------------
Now read your last posting again and you can see how you just slammed Debra. You're putting her in a difficult spot as the list administrator. If it were any other list, you would have been removed long before now. But Debra doesn't want to do that, for obvious reasons. If you want to continue to attack me/us and the work we did together without showing any documentation, then how about giving all of the list members a break and flame Debra and I privately from now on? It's the right thing to do.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.2....
Message Board Post:
Girls, girls...let's be nice. I can't respond to either of these posts right now but will when I have records in front of me.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Surnames: mary
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.2....
Message Board Post:
Thanks again for another assault!!!!!! You don't know what I have been up to, you have not see my time line. I am the one who found James Adam Chronister in Jackson Co, AR and passed it to Debra, I am the one who found his death date in the Archives at the Library and gave her the idea to have a friend look in the courthouse. I am the one who gathered information about "The Napier Papers" and sent a copy to the Library at Russellville. I am the one who called the court house and found out that the William who you thought was William J. Chronister was actually William M. Chronisters son and that the court and civil cases were about them because they were Merchants, I am the one who pointed out to you that your #5 item in Genforum was incorrect, I am the one who pointed out that just because Jesse Sites lived in Pope county all his life it did not mean William J. did, I am the one that pointed out to you that your proof says that William J. Knew Jesse for 20 years!!!!!!. !
I am the know who knows that William M Chronister's excutor of his will was Adam Chronister, probably his brother. I am the one who has pointed out the birth states in the Census, which you always want to throw out, but you quote it in other instances. I am the one who has pointed out that both Williams were in Pope Co. in 1867, one moved there from Jackson Co, which one. You are a good genealogist to a point. Your bedside maner is terrible. Do you know that the new testament is oral history? Those men did not live at the time of Christ. How many people have your scared off the internet because they were just hoping to find some information. they do not have the time or money to hop on the phone or fly somewhere to find information. Once they find out that there is wrong information our there most of them try to find the right information the best way they can. I do not agree as yet with your proof, why do you not see the holes in it. Why do you think 20 years m!
eans all of his life? Like I said, I still don't know for positive wh
ich one is the son, but I do know there are all kinds of people in Russelliville who think it is William M. Chronister and they are more likely to be correct than you are with your proof that does not hold up. Is that a good enough time line for YOU?????????????
c
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.2....
Message Board Post:
Mary Lou,
You said earlier today that you did a timeline of your own. Now you say it is actually our work that you have added family stories to, and there may not be anything new. Why would you get in over your head by getting on the boards and publicly challenging our proof yet again when you have nothing new? I don't want to see "your" work if it is merely an edited version of the documented timeline that I made for you. What good would it do me? I have already seen my own work.
We told you two years ago what you could look at and where you could find additional documentation that we had not yet obtained. Debra told you that you could follow up on what happened to Azariah's land at the Pope courthouse--I would think you would have done so if you were really interested in finding anything out. Did you? What did you find?
You had the same opportunity as we did to pick up the phone and call the Jackson County courthouse and find out what was available and how to go about getting copies of the various records yourself.
I gave you all of the file numbers and other citations for the federal records that I looked at here in D.C., on that timeline that I made for you. You could have ordered those records if you were interested.
Mary Lou, I don't mind if you want to try to prove us wrong, in fact, that makes for good research. But you're not even trying to do that. To make any kind of credible case against our proof, you can't just complain about it, you have to actually do some documented work of your own, looking at the documents that the ancestors created. There are plenty of documents that we haven't had time to look at yet--many, many things! Why don't you get there first, instead of constantly bemoaning the fact that no descendants will tell you any new stories? If you are too married to the family stories, then be forewarned--what you find is the original records is going to contradict some of them, because it always does.
If you really want to find out more about William M., you could contact the Conway County courthouse and get the particulars about what they have available and how to obtain those various records. You might also try Yell County, since William M.'s "Chronister and Son" business letterhead had "Danville" preprinted on it, and one of the credit references they gave was the Yell County Bank in Danville. I haven't combed either of those courthouses yet for Chronister wills, probate, land, marriage/divorce, court, and other records, though I eventually will.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Surnames: mary
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.2.2.2
Message Board Post:
Debra, I am working on a spread sheet / timeline with all of the material you and Peggy have shared and what i have found.I don't know if there is anything new in it. I just happen to look at it differently. One item that I had mentioned a year or so ago in Peggy's original proof on Genforum is item 5. William J. Chronister did not live in Pope County all of his life. This will take me a little time. I am not the typist's that you and Peggy are. I am trying to be courteous too. When I take everything into consideration, the documentation does not prove or disprove that William J. Chronister is Azariah's son. Since you are from the area in question you know the people and their culture, and much of there history was learned orally , and much of that oral history is true. I know there can be mistakes made, I have them on my family history and in the census too. Especially with spelling of names. As you once said it took you a long time to change you mind, I persona!
lly don't care who Azariah's son is, I just want to be able to accept it myself. You and Peggy may not agree, but that is just the way it goes.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.2.2.1
Message Board Post:
How about it, Mary Lou? Let's see your timeline. I gave you my source-cited timeline already, but If you will post yours to the board, I'll post mine. Sounds like a good way for everyone to compare them.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.1.2
Message Board Post:
Mary Lou, Peggy did her research with federal land records. As far as I know, there has not been a search of Pope Co. land records other than the property tax lists up to 1870. These are usually available through interlibrary loan or from a local LDS Family History Center. I have these on my To Do List but if you can get copies and do this part, it could speed the research process on your identity problem. (I say "your" because it is not my direct line. But it sure has been fun to work on it.)
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.2.2
Message Board Post:
Mary Lou, Would you share your spreadsheet with the list/board? Maybe you have knowledge of something that we have not found. We do have a definite death date from the Jackson Co., AR probate records but I got that from the Jackson Co. genealogy website before we made a trip to East Arkansas. The date is: 22 Oct 1865. We did not find a marriage record for Nancy Caroline Chronister following James A.'s death. But again, our onsite search of marriage records simply confirmed online results. This supports the premise that she moved after the estate was probated to be near family in Pope Co.
I don't intend any of this to be a put down. I don't expect you to fold your tents without questioning my research conclusions. But when I give you conclusions and the rationale behind them I expect the same research courtesy. Believe me when I say that Peggy and I go at it roughly when we are debating a point. We require the same of each other that I am asking of you. I can't evaluate your information if I don't have it to look at.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1....
Message Board Post:
Peggy, I am not assaulting you. I am just not agreeing with you. There is a difference. I say you are right over and over in the fact that William J. Chronister lived next to Jesse Sites.from 1868 -1888, the one question that seems to make you assault me is why does that make him Azariah's son? I am sorry if I am dense as a gord, my thoughts, but this information tells us he lived in a certain place and knew someone for 20 years. Are we in agreement that both William J and William M were in Pope Co in 1867? When I said you should look at Azariah's will, I made a mistake, I meant to say the land records that you were talking about yesterday. I think you are a very capable and smart person who does not like to be questioned by someone. Does it say anywhere in the documentation that William J Chronister signed with his mark or name that Azariah is his father. If not what it comes ddown to proving is that he knew and lived next to Jesse Sites for 20 years. Is that a wr!
ong statement?
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1....
Message Board Post:
Mary Lou, when you say that we are wrong, and we are confused, etc...over and over again for years, yet you provide no primary documentation that refutes any of our conclusions, then yes, you are attacking us and our work, without cause. If our proof contradicts a lot of people, it is because a lot of people believed what they were told, just as you did, and spread it to others who also believed it without bothering to look at the records the ancestors actually made. You are seeing firsthand the problem with passing on information that is not documented.
Shouldn't you consider what the ancestors said about themselves before you consider what their descendants say about them? They are family, too! This is Memorial Day--these people should be remembered correctly by looked at the trail of documents that they left behind--things in their own words, not in someone else's words. They should not be assigned to wrong families based on what someone thinks would look nice in a book.
Cemetery books are secondary sources, subject to the errors of the author(s). Cemeteries do not keep pedigrees on the people who are interred there--someone has to do the research to put together a book with relationships. Again, who is the author, and what sources are given?
Why do you say we should look at the will of Azariah? Randy Duval once told us to do that, too. Again, you are repeating something that someone else has fed you, which you have no knowledge of. Have you and Randy looked at that will? I'm sure neither of you have, since Azariah died intestate--that means he didn't have a will. So which "will" are you referring to? Please show it to us.
Debra used the probate records in her proof. We didn't think we needed to explain what "probate" means.
If you can find a shoebox in someone's attic with some original document that contradicts anything in our proof, then by all means show it to us.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.1.1
Message Board Post:
Peggy , I am not mad I don't think anyone lied. I just think that William J. Cronister moved from Jackson Co. when his father died to be with family. He met and married his wife and lived next to Jesse Sites for 20 years. and the years that he lived next to Jesse were indeed 1868-1888 just like he said. James Adam died about 1865 did he not? Also William M. Chronister was in Pope Co at the same time for a while. He married M. Napier in 1867 in Pope Co. Now you think that William M. might be James Adam Chronister's son, if that is true, then he is the one who moved from Jackson Co after James Adam Chronister died. So they were both there in 1867, but it which one is Azariah's Son. Why do you think the man who lived next to Jesse Sites had to be Azariah's son? One of these boys came from Jackson Co in 1866 or 1867 if they were both there in 1867, which the tax record proves and the marriage proves. Which one was it? And yes William M. Chronister moved in the early 18!
70's to help out with his wifes family so he did not lie. What you are saying makes the cemetery books wrong and all kinds of other people wrong. And every single census. I agree the census can be wrong, but would it be wrong for every year? We just have a huge difference of opinion here. I am not attacking your reseach, if you really think you are right I think you should check on Azariah's Will. I myself felt I was the one being attacked. Now if this doesn't explain what I think, please feel free to ask again what I am saying. There are times when people do not understand what the other one is saying.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.3.2.1.1
Message Board Post:
Mary Lou, once again I find that it is unprofitable to argue about this. The Jackson Co. information is not likely to change your mind and as Peg says, it would be reporting conclusions before all the facts are collected.
To paraphrase the late Orval Faubus, former governor of Arkansas...just because someone says it doesn't make it true. This applies to all research, not just that which disagrees with my findings. Good luck in your quest to substantiate your beliefs.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.2.1
Message Board Post:
See, you always attack our work, without showing any documentation to contradict it, and then you get mad when we defend it. Why? It's a good proof, by any professional standards. How have either of us wronged you? We have given you nothing but excellent information for free. If the documents we cited contradict something that your friends or family have told you, well...no need to get mad at us.
Debra, please, one proof at a time, LOL! The fact is that we have not
gathered enough data to draw any conclusions about Jackson County James Adam
and his wives/children, unless you have found something new. If you want to
confuse this further by adding random data from our trip to Jackson County,
that's up to you, but I'm not posting Swampland or anything else to the
boards until I can prove something one way or another. No one hired me for
the work that we did in Jackson County, so I am not in debt to anyone. You
can do what you like, but my next proof will be documented as thoroughly as
the William J. proof before I put my name on it.
Enjoy decoration day! I hope your weather there is as beautiful as ours is
today.
Peg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Debra Blackard" <debrablackard(a)centurytel.net>
To: <CHRONISTER-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2006 2:42 PM
Subject: RE: [CHRONISTER] Re: William M. Chronister's father?
>I have decoration this afternoon so I hope things don't heat up while I am
> gone. I'm going to post the Jackson Co. info. Do you want me to add the
> Swamp Land info? No, I won't. You can come in with that in response.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peggy K. Reeves [mailto:peg@reevesweb.com]
> Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2006 12:29 PM
> To: CHRONISTER-L(a)rootsweb.com
> Subject: Re: [CHRONISTER] Re: William M. Chronister's father?
>
> Mary Lou, the "Napier Information" that you speak of should be correctly
> cited. I believe it is the book: "Dr. Patrick Napier of Virginia and
> Related Families" by Vava Knepp. Is this right? I want to make sure we
> are
>
> talking about the same thing. That book is very well done, and the author
> should be credited with a fine piece of research work. The author used
> and
> cited many original documents, which all agree with the conclusions that
> Debra and I reached about William Jackson Chronister and William M.
> Chronister.
>
> I will answer the rest on the board with the other thread.
>
> Peggy Reeves
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mary Lou Reed" <mlreed8(a)socket.net>
> To: <CHRONISTER-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2006 9:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [CHRONISTER] Re: William M. Chronister's father?
>
>
>> Debra, Sorry for the error, I do remember you did the tax information
>> and
>
>> probate work. However, William and Margaret Chronister were also in
>> Pope
>
>> Co. at the time according to the Napier information. Where we don't
>> know. They were also married at an early age. I just have not been
>> able
>
>> to accept your conclusions and am still searching for more descendants
>> of
>
>> both families, hoping they might have an answer.
>>
>> On May 28, 2006, at 12:51 AM, debrablackard(a)centurytel.net wrote:
>>
>>> This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
>>>
>>> Surnames: Chronister Eaker Bowden
>>> Classification: Query
>>>
>>> Message Board URL:
>>>
>>> http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/an/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1
>>>
>>> Message Board Post:
>>>
>>> Mary Lou, Just a note. Peggy did not do the tax and probate work in the
>>> proof for William J. Chronister. I did that in Pope Co. The clincher
>>> for
>
>>> me in that proof was that W. J. Chronister and Adam, both minors, are
>>> listed in the Pope Co., AR personal property tax list at exactly the
>>> same time that Azariah's estate is taxed for his land. After Azariah's
>>> death, his elder sons did not live with their stepmother, Susannah
>>> Bowden Chronister, instead they went out on their own, marrying at a
>>> young age. W. J. Chronister has a separate household listing a cow as
>>> part of his property. This correlates with the later census reports
>>> from
>
>>> which William and Elizabeth's marriage date is estimated. If you like,
>>> I
>
>>> will go back and list for you the reasons I believe that William J. is
>>> the son of Azariah, instead of William M. as is commonly reported. I
>>> think I shared that with you off list so it will not be available in
>>> the
>
>>> archives. It is possible that you did not realize that Peg and I were!
>>> working independently on that proof and came to the same conclusion
>>> for different reasons based on documents created by the individuals
>>> themselves. I did not go into this with a preconceived idea that
>>> William
>
>>> J. was the son of Azariah and Nancy Eaker. In fact, I leaned toward the
>>> theory that William M. was the son of Azariah until I was convinced
>>> differently by the wealth of information found in the many original
>>> records and the dearth of data supporting other viewpoints. As I have
>>> mentioned before, every researcher has to evaluate each record and
>>> weigh
>
>>> the type of evidence found. It is rare within the cultural group we are
>>> all studying to find one single piece of evidence that proves a theory.
>>> Instead, one takes all the primary records, secondary soures,
>>> dirivative publications and oral history, compares, addresses the
>>> inconsistencies and draws conclusions. We each have to do the best with
>>> the sources we choose to use. It is not likely that everyone is going
>>> to
>
>>> agree on!
>>> every point. I believe that my proof, as well as Peg's will stand the
>>> test of "genealogical proof" but I'm not going to refuse to listen to
>>> other viewpoints, especially if there are additional records or
>>> information that comes to light.
>>>
>>>
>>> ==== CHRONISTER Mailing List ====
>>> Check the archived posts to the Chronister List at:http://
>>> archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index
>>>
>>> Enter <chronister> in the search box.
>>>
>>> ==============================
>>> Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the
>>> areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months.
>>> Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ==== CHRONISTER Mailing List ====
>> All messages posted to the Chronister Ancestry Message Board are
>> gatewayed
>
>> to the Chronister mailing list at Rootweb.
>>
>> ==============================
>> Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more.
>> Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more:
>> http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx
>>
>
>
>
> ==== CHRONISTER Mailing List ====
> Check the archived posts to the Chronister List
> at:http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index
>
> Enter <chronister> in the search box.
>
> ==============================
> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the
> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more:
> http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx
>
>
>
>
>
> ==== CHRONISTER Mailing List ====
> All messages posted to the Chronister Ancestry Message Board are gatewayed
> to the Chronister mailing list at Rootweb.
>
> ==============================
> Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more.
> Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more:
> http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx
>
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1.1
Message Board Post:
Mary Lou, I have answered every question that you have asked me, here and in every other message, multiple times and in multiple ways. You, on the other hand, haven't answered any of my direct questions about what you have looked at in the way of original documents, and how you come to the conclusion that all of those notarized affidavits that we found are somehow wrong. You believe the words of other people, folks who certainly weren't alive at the time Azariah was, before you believe the records made by the actual ancestors that you claim to be researching. How do you explain that?
If you want to say that William Jackson Chronister and William M. Chronister and M. E. Napier all lied in front of the notaries about where they were, what the date was at the time they signed, who they were, where they lived, what the coordinates of their lands were, and how old they were, etc... believing census instead, how is that the least bit logical?
These descendants that you spoke to...how do they explain the many notarized affidavits and other original records that we found? Did you even order the documents that we used to see them for yourself? What research do you offer for Debra and I to scrutinize?
You continue to assault this proof without bringing any documentary evidence against it, nor do you even clarify any statements that you have made by answering any of our specific questions to you. You have been doing this for two years. Tell us what you have done in the way of research during the past two years. All I have seen from you is complaints about this proof of ours, and pleas for people to tell you something different. You ask the same repetitive questions, and always end by getting angry. What are you angry about? We did all of this work for free. How can you be angry about that?!
Why should I share anything from my work in Jackson County when you can't accept the proof that we posted two years ago, which was applauded as excellent by many serious researchers who wrote to me privately?
I am going to be a good sport and answer your last message line by line, one more time:
Mary Lou: Peggy on your number 2 statement. William J. Chronister was the one living next to Jesse Sites.
Peg: Correct.
Mary Lou: Why could he not have come back to Pope Co after his father died, married Elizabeth and lived next to Jesse Sites for 20 years. Why?
Peg: Because the affidavit where William J. said he lived next to Jesse for the past 20 years was DATED 1888. You can't pick and choose ANY 20 years, you have to go by what the notarized document tells you. It was the 20 years counting back from the date that the affidavit was made. There is only one William in Pope for that whole time living near Jesse Sides, from 1868 to 1888, and that is Azariah's son. There just isn't any other William who was there that whole time. If you're going to refute it, show me another William who can fit that entire time frame in Pope. Azariah's William is the only one who can fit that statement, and since the statement was made by William Jackson Chronister, he has to be the son of Azariah. It really is that simple.
Mary Lou: Your and Debra statements on documents are not any more preponderance of evidence than mine are.
Peg: Any certified genealogist or genealogy textbook or professor would disagree with you. Census and family lore are secondary sources. We used primary sources. There is a huge difference.
Mary Lou: Why would these two men continue to say they were born somewhere they weren't.
Peg: Are you talking about census? Who gave the census information? We don't know who gave the census information, or if the census taker even visited! Look at any family over all of the census years and see how many have inconsistencies in birth states and/or ages over the decades. Debra and I have both addressed the census issue many times, including earlier today, and you always ignore it. In this case, William J. was born around the time of Azariah's move, so he could have been born in either place.
Mary Lou: Did their fathers lie about where they were born? Even people of that era knew where they were born. It was important to them and still is.
Peg: Yes, it is important, and that's why I am adamant about recording the history of our ancestors correctly. The census takers didn't care about these people, because it wasn't their family. If we care about recording our own families correctly, we will seek out the records that they made and not be so quick to believe stories that have passed through many different people over many years' time. The original written documents that we looked at are exactly the same 150 years after the fact, but that is not the case for oral family tradition that changes slightly every time it is retold. Not that people intend to to make mistakes, but it is unavoidable with oral history. No one is going to repeat something exactly as it was told to them.
Peg: The only further questions I am willing to answer are ones that I have not already answered multiple times.
This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.
Classification: Query
Message Board URL:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/an/FhI.2ACEB/148.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.3.2.1
Message Board Post:
Who are the confused ones here. The descendants of these two men who celebrate their ancestors or someone else.