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
I have several ancestors who performed service for the Union Army during the
Civil War. In several cases, I have found published references to their
service. I also have a few pages from their pension files, sent to me by
cousins. I recently requested from the National Archives copies of their
files and was told that they could not be found. Any suggestions? What
should I do next?
For the next 10 days Ancestry is offering a free database.
This is the Grant County 1901-1902 Directory. I have found
ancestors in this database. It gives their business/
township/post office town/acres.
You can find this database under http://www.ancestry.com.
This database is listed in the lower right hand corner under
New Databases. Click on Grant County 1901-2 & you'll
get directly into this database.
Happy ancestor hunting!
Julia Westerberg
In looking over the 1900 Grant County census, I see that there is a listing of men who lived at the "Marion Branch National Military House". It was in Center township. Most of the men listed are over age 50. Does anyone know, could this have been an early form of the V.A. Hospital? Would records be available? If these men are veterans, seems likely they would be Civil War vets.
Linda
Am searching for parents and siblings of Levi LOTRIDGE/LOTHERAGE
[perhaps any spelling which can be pronounced LOKRIG or LOTRIG]. Levi was illiterate. He was listed with Isaac LAU[GH]RIDGE in Sims Twp Grant Co in 1850; Levi, aged circa 22 years, married Harriet BURNS in the same locality in 1851. Harriet BURNS , b c 1832 the daughter of Rebecca TALBERT and James BURNS, had a brother Anthony who married Wrizzipi TYLER in 1851 in Grant Co and several sisters, one of whom {Agnes} married James W. TYLER. Agnes' husband appears to be a cousin, perhaps, of Anthony's wife. I know nothing of Levi's life before 1850 except that he MIGHT have been born in OH c. 1829.
Any help will be gratefully received. Thank you.
Marcie
Marcie Criner
malotcri(a)shianet.org
Hi to the List,
I found DESCENDANTS OF DAVID LEWIS online. I am including the "tail-end" of
the genealogy, as it appears that one of these descendants from Grant County,
Indiana, has compiled it. I would like to contact the person online who is
hopefully on the Grant Co listserver.
Descendants of David Lewis
274. Howard M.9 Lewis (John William8, James Oliver7, William G.6, David5,
David4, Nathan3, David2, Lewis1) was born March 04, 1926 in Fairmount Twp.,
Grant Co., Indiana. He married Ruth Esther Mittank November 01, 1946 in
Fairmount Twp., Grant Co., Indiana, daughter of Ralph Mittank and Lois
Hockett. She was born February 05, 1928 in Fairmount Twp., Grant Co.,
Indiana.
Children of Howard Lewis and Ruth Mittank are:
+ 298 i. Ralph James10 Lewis, born August 05, 1947.
299 ii. John W. Lewis, born September 19, 1948. He married (1) Nellie
Lind. He married (2) Maxine Knost.
+ 300 iii. David Lee Lewis, born May 16, 1952.
300. David Lee10 Lewis (Howard M.9, John William8, James Oliver7,
William G.6, David5, David4, Nathan3, David2, Lewis1) was born May 16, 1952.
He married Lucinda Dickenson Abt. 1972.
Children of David Lewis and Lucinda Dickenson are:
312 i. Jennifer11 Lewis, born Aft. 1972.
313 ii. Benjamin Lewis, born Aft. 1972.
304. Jerry Russell10 Brown (Mildred9 Compton, Fern Marie8 Payne, William
Zimri7, James Green6, Celia5 Lewis, David4, Nathan3, David2, Lewis1) He
married Mary Ann McKay February 14, 1953.
Child of Jerry Brown and Mary McKay is:
+ 314 i. Michael William11 Brown.
Generation No. 10
314. Michael William11 Brown (Jerry Russell10, Mildred9 Compton, Fern
Marie8 Payne, William Zimri7, James Green6, Celia5 Lewis, David4, Nathan3,
David2, Lewis1)
Child of Michael William Brown is:
315 i. Matthew Russell12 Brown.
My husband's line--From LEWIS FAMILY GATHERING :
Pennsylvania-Tennessee-Indiana, 1971, compiled by Juanita Lewis,
David Lewis d. 1754 BerksCoPA m. Elenor
Nathan Lewis d. 1801/2 SullivanCoTN m. Mary Webb
George Lewis b. 1769 d. DelawareCoIN m. Elizabeth Johnson
William Lewis d. 1874 BooneCoIN m. Sarah/Susannah Lawrence
George Lewis b. 1826 m. Grant Co IN, 9 July 1852, Rachel Montgomery
Children of George Lewis & Rachel Montgomery
1. William R. Lewis m. Molly Johnson dau of Rueben Johnson & Sarah Hastings
+2. James Montgomery Lewis m. Harriet Foster dau of Henry Foster & Maryann
Hazelbaker (Henry Foster m. (2) Sarah Jane Lewis, widow of Ransom Ice).
3. Dennis Lewis m. Mary J Ice & her sister, Elizabeth Ice, daus of Wm Ice &
Rebecca Slaughter
4. John Lewis d. 1867
5. Hannah Jenetta Lewis d. 1879
6. Emma Jane Lewis (minister) m. William L Payne (minister) son of Bailey S
Payne & Isabel Hollingsworth
7. Charles Andrew Lewis m. Daisy Dean dau of Job Dean & ?
Clyde Lewis (James M, George, William, George, Nathan, David) m. Grayce Fern
VanArsdall, dau of Wm Page VanArsdall & Isabel Harriet Stout
Thanks to anyone who can help me locate the compiler of Descendants of
David Lewis.
Lou in Indiana (GraveNews2(a)aol.com>
http://chicagotribune.com/news/metro/chicago/article/1,,ART-50418,00.html - Homes may be on horizon for historic city cemetery - By Robert L. Kaiser - Chicago Tribune Staff Writer - March 11, 2001 - The owner of Rosehill Cemetery, one of Chicago's most revered historic landmarks and the final resting place of four governors, is planning to sell more than 22 acres of cemetery land to developers, one of whom is interested in building homes on the property. Service Corporation International, the global leader in the cemetery business and the owner of Rosehill, has entered into sales agreements with two potential buyers, a spokesman said. The pending sale of non-burial portions of the 142-year-old cemetery is the latest perceived threat to the sanctity of Rosehill, which in the 1980s was tied up in what one lawyer called "apparently eternal" litigation brought by lot owners concerned over how parts of the 350-acre cemetery might be developed. Residents of the North Side don't we!
lcome development of Rosehill, which includes the graves of at least a dozen mayors and 350 Civil War veterans. Walled off from the bustling, noisy streets that surround it and filled with a breathtaking collection of crypts, obelisks and headstones, Rosehill was designed as a rural refuge from the city. The land had held farms and a tavern before Chicago's first mayor, William B. Ogden, decided to put a cemetery there, seven miles from downtown. But the city caught up. The pending sale of cemetery land provides a window on the sometimes speculative business of owning cemeteries and funeral homes, which big corporations have gobbled up only to turn around and sell for a profit or to reduce debt. "We grew very aggressively in the '90s; it was what was happening in the industry," said Greg Bolton, a spokesman for Houston-based SCI. Between 1993 and 1998, SCI went from owning 772 funeral homes to owning 3,100. The number of cemeteries it owned rose from 189 to 395. "That situat!
ion has changed," Bolton said. "All across the country, we're divestin
owner of funeral homes and cemeteries, announced on Jan. 5 that it planned to sell more than 400 funeral homes and 105 cemeteries nationally to help pay off its debt, which stood at more than $3.3 billion as of September, Bolton said. In the Chicago area, SCI owns eight cemeteries and about 40 funeral homes, Bolton said, but those numbers are dwindling and will continue to drop as the company makes plans to sell more of its holdings in the area. "We are evaluating all of our operations to determine which locations we will sell, either as businesses or for their real estate value," Bolton said. Concerning Rosehill, Bolton said SCI had entered into sales agreements with two potential buyers, one in November and one in March. Though Bolton would not name either, sources identified one as Concord Development Corp., a Palatine-based company that builds houses and condominiums. Rosehill, the final resting place of roughly 200,000 people, is not the first Chicago-area cemetery that!
SCI has shopped in pieces to developers. A few years after buying Skokie's Memorial Park in October 1996, SCI sold off 10 acres, and a shopping center sprang up across the street from Old Orchard. "I do not believe SCI is either in the funeral business or the cemetery business. They're really in the land business," said Helen Sclair, a retired schoolteacher who has taught about cemeteries at the Newberry Library and who wrote the book "Greater Chicagoland Cemeteries." "If they had their way," Ald. Patrick J. O'Connor (40th) said, "they'd sell everything that didn't have somebody buried underneath it." Not long after SCI bought Rosehill in 1991, the company began looking to sell parts of the cemetery, O'Connor said. There was just one problem: Though Rosehill is zoned for single-family residential development, a covenant that grew out of a 1986 chancery suit involving the cemetery's previous owner, Potter Palmer IV, restricted parts of Rosehill for use as a church, synagogue!
, school, health-care facility or nursing home. The suit was an attemp
of Rosehill after Palmer had considered selling out to developers who wanted cemetery land for a Jewel grocery store and then thought about putting a funeral home on cemetery grounds. Bill George Stotis, an attorney who grew up in the neighborhood and was angered by the proposed grocery store, represented some of the lot owners pro bono. "When Potter Palmer bought the cemetery from shareholders in 1981 or '83, it was his goal and his dream to sell that property to various developers," Stotis said. "The issue was whether the cemetery, which had never paid real estate taxes on property since its inception in the 1850s, could turn around and take property that's never been on the tax rolls and sell if for commercial purposes, giving them an undue advantage over other commercial landowners." Stotis, who filed the first legal volley in the suit, contended that lot owners had been given improper notice of proposed development. Soon he was joined by attorneys for billionaire busine!
ssman Lester Crown and Arthur Rubloff, one of the best-known real estate moguls in Chicago. Rubloff died soon after joining the suit and was laid to rest in Rosehill not far from where development was proposed. "My position was, you want to develop the cemetery, fine. Pay property taxes back to 1859 and then develop it," Stotis said. Settlement of the suit in 1990 seemingly put an end to what Dan K. Webb, an attorney for Palmer, called "the apparently eternal [litigation] surrounding the cemetery." But not everyone was happy. On June 10, 1990, lot owner Albert J. Hatch typed a letter to Cook County Circuit Judge Albert Green in which Hatch referred to himself as one of the "future occupants" of Rosehill. Hatch opposed the settlement, saying it didn't go far enough. "We believe that we lot holders," he wrote, "are being taken for a mess of gold which will enrich outsiders and impoverish us." But the effect of the covenant was to discourage buyers for years afterward. This is !
the first time that SCI has had a sales contract on part of the cemete
cast a shadow on the deal, whose contingencies SCI would not disclose. "The potential buyers are trying to figure out whether it's worth it," O'Connor said. "They've got a lot to ponder." One tract under contract is restricted by the covenant, Bolton said. The other is not, because lot owners, assuming it always would remain cemetery land, didn't think restrictions were necessary. It's that tract that Concord wants to buy, O'Connor said. Concord officials could not be reached and did not return phone calls to the company's office in Palatine. The tracts are contiguous and neither has graves. They lie mostly south of the Bryn Mawr Avenue entrance along Western Avenue, Bolton said. SCI would not say how big either was, but Bolton said that both together were more than 22 acres-the size that Sclair said she had heard mentioned in connection with the sale. Though several of the plaintiffs in the 1986 suit have died and now occupy space at Rosehill, some of the lot owners who fil!
ed the 1986 case have vowed to fight SCI if it tries to develop the unrestricted land, O'Connor said. One of the litigants from 1986, Lester Crown, said he has been invited to meet with Concord officials in the next couple of weeks. "It has been a very friendly discussion," Crown said. Crown said he had given no thought to fighting Concord or SCI. But he added: "I hope they don't go ahead. I think it's important that it remains a cemetery. There's a lot of history behind it. I think it would be a shame to build anything on the east side of Western Avenue." Hatch's widow, Helen, agrees. "On Memorial Day, with all the flags flying out there, it's really something," she said. The Hatch family owns 10 lots in Rosehill. "We liked Rosehill," Helen Hatch said. "We thought it was very pretty, with all the trees and the lagoons." Now two of the lots have been used, the first by Helen's son, who died at age 18 in an automobile accident 10 years ago; and the second by her husband, Albe!
rt, who died six years ago and was buried in Section 16-well away from
cemetery he fought to preserve with letters like this, written in June 1990: "I implore the court: In the names of the thousands already interred at Rosehill, and more thousands to come, stop the desecration before the final irreversible step is taken. "Thank you."
Does anyone have any information on Lorenzo D. Bole, born Aug 1830 in Ohio, possibly Athens County, and died 3 Sep 1899, Grant County? Buried McKinney Cemetery. He was the son of William and Lorinda (Rood) Bole.
I do know for certain that he was married first to Hannah (Rood) Evans, a widow with a son named Henry Evans. Lorenzo and Hannah are living with William Bole in 1850 Census.
Now, what I need cleared up is:
1, Was there only one Lorenzo Bole in Grant County, or could there have been two? If there was only one, my Lorenzo Bole, then he had to have been married 3 times. A Mary Ferguson that is also in my line, daughter of Drury Ferguson, married a Lorenzo Bole 18 Dec 1856 in Grant County, and she died 28 Feb 1886 and is buried with her parents at McKinley Cemetery. Lorenzo D. Bole is buried at McKinney(Lugar Creek) Cemetery, along with wife Martha J. , 1845-1903.
If there was only one Lorenzo Bole, then he first married Hannah, who died before 1856, then married Mary Ferguson who died in 1886, and then married Martha. I have not found a burial place for Hannah, wife number one, or her first husband, Henry Evans , Senior.
When I get my 1860 and 1870 census cd's that I ordered they may help clear this up, but I thought someone out there might be connected to Lorenzo and have more info.
I also believe he was nicknamed "Wren" and may have been a grocer at Boles & Ferguson Store in Arcana.
Linda
I have access to the 1900 Grant County Census online for another week or so if someone would like for me to do a lookup. Let me know if you can receive attachments in your email, and it will save time and typing if I can just send you the whole page with that person's name on it.
But please, no requests such as "all the Smiths in Grant County." :)
Linda Chan
I live south of Pittsburgh, PA and have heard that an LDS Family Center is
near me. However, I cannot find the address in the telephone book.
Does anyone on the list have an e-mail or webpage address for LDS that I can
inquire about the location of the Family Centers?
Thanks,
Larry Jones
----- Original Message -----
From: GraveNews2(a)aol.com
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 8:13 AM
To: INGRANT-L(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Federal Bill 602P 5-cents per E-mail sent.
Subject: B# 602P
VOTE NO ON Bill 602P!!!!
Guess the warnings were true. Federal Bill 602P 5-cents per E-mail sent. It
figures! No more free E-mail! We knew this was coming!!
Bill 602P will permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent charge on
every delivered E-mail. Please read the following carefully if you intend to
stay online and continue using E-mail. The last few months have revealed an
alarming trend in the Government of the United States attempting to quietly
push through legislation that will affect our use of the Internet. Under
proposed legislation, the US Postal Service will be attempting to bill E-mail
users o! ut of "alternative postage fees".
Bill 602P will permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent surcharge on
every E-Mail delivered, by billing Internet Service Providers at source. The
consumer would then be billed in turn by the ISP. Washington DC lawyer
Richard Stepp is working without pay to prevent this legislation from
becoming law. The US Postal Service is
claiming lost revenue, due to the proliferation of E-mail, is costing nearly
$230,000,000 in revenue per year. You may have noticed their recent ad
campaign
"There is nothing like a letter." Since the average person received about 10
pieces
of E-mail per day in 1998, the cost of the typical individual would be an
additional 50 cents a day - or over $180 per year - above and beyond their
regular Internet costs.
Note that this would be money paid directly to the US Postal Service for a
service they do not even provide. The whole point of the Internet is
democracy and non-interference. You are already paying an exorbitant price
for snail mail because of bureaucratic efficiency. It currently takes up to
6 days for a letter to be delivered from coast to coast. If the US Postal
Service is allowed to tinker with E-mail, it will mark the end of the "free"
Internet in the United States. A congressional representative, Tony Schnell
(R) has even suggested a "$20-$40 per month surcharge on all Internet
service" above and beyond the governments proposed E-mail charges. Note that
most of the major newspapers have ignored the story the only exception being
the
Washingtonian which called the idea of E-mail surcharge " a useful concept
who's time has come" (March 6th, 1999 Editorial).
Do not sit by and watch your freedom erode away!
Send this E-mail to EVERYONE on your list, and tell all your friends and
relatives to write their congressional representative and say " NO" to Bill
602P. It will only take a few moments of your time and could very well be
instrumental in killing a bill we do not want.
PLEASE FORWARD!
==============================
Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate
your heritage!
http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog<br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p>
This is an OLD (very old, very recurring)HOAX! Could the list administrator
please investigate and prevent this spreading throughout Rootsweb e-mail
lists. It always does, and it is always a major nuisance deleting all the
copies of copies of the original message. When in doubt, please don't post.
Check here: http://www.house.gov/dreier/internet_rumors.htm
Whenever you get a really outrageous message like this, use Google.com and
put in "internet + hoax (or rumor)" and see what you come up with. That's
how I found the disclaimer above. Here is an even BETTER way to see if the
story you have received is a KNOWN HOAX (It is a dictionary of known hoaxes;
always a good place to start.)
http://www.urbanlegends.about.com/science/urbanlegends/library/blhoax.htm
Thanks,
Linda
-----Original Message-----
From: GraveNews2(a)aol.com [mailto:GraveNews2@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 7:05 AM
To: INGRANT-L(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Federal Bill 602P 5-cents per E-mail sent.
Subject: B# 602P
VOTE NO ON Bill 602P!!!!
Guess the warnings were true. Federal Bill 602P 5-cents per E-mail sent.
It
figures! No more free E-mail! We knew this was coming!!
Bill 602P will permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent charge on
every delivered E-mail. Please read the following carefully if you intend
to
stay online and continue using E-mail. The last few months have revealed an
alarming trend in the Government of the United States attempting to quietly
push through legislation that will affect our use of the Internet. Under
proposed legislation, the US Postal Service will be attempting to bill
E-mail
users o! ut of "alternative postage fees".
Bill 602P will permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent surcharge on
every E-Mail delivered, by billing Internet Service Providers at source.
The
consumer would then be billed in turn by the ISP. Washington DC lawyer
Richard Stepp is working without pay to prevent this legislation from
becoming law. The US Postal Service is
claiming lost revenue, due to the proliferation of E-mail, is costing nearly
$230,000,000 in revenue per year. You may have noticed their recent ad
campaign
"There is nothing like a letter." Since the average person received about 10
pieces
of E-mail per day in 1998, the cost of the typical individual would be an
additional 50 cents a day - or over $180 per year - above and beyond their
regular Internet costs.
Note that this would be money paid directly to the US Postal Service for a
service they do not even provide. The whole point of the Internet is
democracy and non-interference. You are already paying an exorbitant price
for snail mail because of bureaucratic efficiency. It currently takes up to
6 days for a letter to be delivered from coast to coast. If the US Postal
Service is allowed to tinker with E-mail, it will mark the end of the "free"
Internet in the United States. A congressional representative, Tony Schnell
(R) has even suggested a "$20-$40 per month surcharge on all Internet
service" above and beyond the governments proposed E-mail charges. Note
that
most of the major newspapers have ignored the story the only exception being
the
Washingtonian which called the idea of E-mail surcharge " a useful concept
who's time has come" (March 6th, 1999 Editorial).
Do not sit by and watch your freedom erode away!
Send this E-mail to EVERYONE on your list, and tell all your friends and
relatives to write their congressional representative and say " NO" to Bill
602P. It will only take a few moments of your time and could very well be
instrumental in killing a bill we do not want.
PLEASE FORWARD!
==============================
Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate
your heritage!
http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog
Subject: B# 602P
VOTE NO ON Bill 602P!!!!
Guess the warnings were true. Federal Bill 602P 5-cents per E-mail sent. It
figures! No more free E-mail! We knew this was coming!!
Bill 602P will permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent charge on
every delivered E-mail. Please read the following carefully if you intend to
stay online and continue using E-mail. The last few months have revealed an
alarming trend in the Government of the United States attempting to quietly
push through legislation that will affect our use of the Internet. Under
proposed legislation, the US Postal Service will be attempting to bill E-mail
users o! ut of "alternative postage fees".
Bill 602P will permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent surcharge on
every E-Mail delivered, by billing Internet Service Providers at source. The
consumer would then be billed in turn by the ISP. Washington DC lawyer
Richard Stepp is working without pay to prevent this legislation from
becoming law. The US Postal Service is
claiming lost revenue, due to the proliferation of E-mail, is costing nearly
$230,000,000 in revenue per year. You may have noticed their recent ad
campaign
"There is nothing like a letter." Since the average person received about 10
pieces
of E-mail per day in 1998, the cost of the typical individual would be an
additional 50 cents a day - or over $180 per year - above and beyond their
regular Internet costs.
Note that this would be money paid directly to the US Postal Service for a
service they do not even provide. The whole point of the Internet is
democracy and non-interference. You are already paying an exorbitant price
for snail mail because of bureaucratic efficiency. It currently takes up to
6 days for a letter to be delivered from coast to coast. If the US Postal
Service is allowed to tinker with E-mail, it will mark the end of the "free"
Internet in the United States. A congressional representative, Tony Schnell
(R) has even suggested a "$20-$40 per month surcharge on all Internet
service" above and beyond the governments proposed E-mail charges. Note that
most of the major newspapers have ignored the story the only exception being
the
Washingtonian which called the idea of E-mail surcharge " a useful concept
who's time has come" (March 6th, 1999 Editorial).
Do not sit by and watch your freedom erode away!
Send this E-mail to EVERYONE on your list, and tell all your friends and
relatives to write their congressional representative and say " NO" to Bill
602P. It will only take a few moments of your time and could very well be
instrumental in killing a bill we do not want.
PLEASE FORWARD!
Well, at least maybe it would deter the spammers......
----- Original Message -----
From: <GraveNews2(a)aol.com>
To: <INGRANT-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 5:04 AM
Subject: Federal Bill 602P 5-cents per E-mail sent.
>
> Subject: B# 602P
> VOTE NO ON Bill 602P!!!!
> Guess the warnings were true. Federal Bill 602P 5-cents per E-mail sent.
It
> figures! No more free E-mail! We knew this was coming!!
> Bill 602P will permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent charge on
> every delivered E-mail. Please read the following carefully if you intend
to
> stay online and continue using E-mail. The last few months have revealed
an
> alarming trend in the Government of the United States attempting to
quietly
> push through legislation that will affect our use of the Internet. Under
> proposed legislation, the US Postal Service will be attempting to bill
E-mail
> users o! ut of "alternative postage fees".
> Bill 602P will permit the Federal Government to charge a 5-cent surcharge
on
> every E-Mail delivered, by billing Internet Service Providers at source.
The
> consumer would then be billed in turn by the ISP. Washington DC lawyer
> Richard Stepp is working without pay to prevent this legislation from
> becoming law. The US Postal Service is
> claiming lost revenue, due to the proliferation of E-mail, is costing
nearly
> $230,000,000 in revenue per year. You may have noticed their recent ad
> campaign
> "There is nothing like a letter." Since the average person received about
10
> pieces
> of E-mail per day in 1998, the cost of the typical individual would be an
> additional 50 cents a day - or over $180 per year - above and beyond their
> regular Internet costs.
> Note that this would be money paid directly to the US Postal Service for a
> service they do not even provide. The whole point of the Internet is
> democracy and non-interference. You are already paying an exorbitant
price
> for snail mail because of bureaucratic efficiency. It currently takes up
to
> 6 days for a letter to be delivered from coast to coast. If the US
Postal
> Service is allowed to tinker with E-mail, it will mark the end of the
"free"
> Internet in the United States. A congressional representative, Tony
Schnell
> (R) has even suggested a "$20-$40 per month surcharge on all Internet
> service" above and beyond the governments proposed E-mail charges. Note
that
> most of the major newspapers have ignored the story the only exception
being
> the
> Washingtonian which called the idea of E-mail surcharge " a useful concept
> who's time has come" (March 6th, 1999 Editorial).
> Do not sit by and watch your freedom erode away!
> Send this E-mail to EVERYONE on your list, and tell all your friends and
> relatives to write their congressional representative and say " NO" to
Bill
> 602P. It will only take a few moments of your time and could very well be
> instrumental in killing a bill we do not want.
>
>
> PLEASE FORWARD!
>
>
>
>
> ==============================
> Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate
> your heritage!
> http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog
>
Lysle Lewis, 80
SHIRLEY - Lysle Lewis, 80, of near Mechanicsburg, died Wednesday in St.
John's Health System, Anderson, after a long illness. He was born in
Fairmount on Dec. 9, 1920. He graduated from Muncie Central High School in
1939. Mr. Lewis retired in 1983 as a senior process engineer from Muncie
Chevrolet Division of General Motors after 42 years. He attended Meadowbrook
Baptist Church, Anderson. He served on the Ticonderoga in the U.S. Navy
during World War II and was a signal flag instructor at Chicago Naval Air
Station, 2nd class engine mechanic and propeller specialist. He enjoyed
woodworking and designed many houses in Anderson for Peterson Lumber Co.
Survivors include his wife of 58 years, Frances E. Anderson Lewis; six
children, Dennis (wife: Shirley), Daleville, Jefferey (wife: Mary Jo),
Pendleton, Bryce (husband: Marla), Greenfield, Rosalyn Fricke (husband:
Karl), Pendleton, Byron (Rex) (wife: Carrie), Anderson, and Frank Lewis
(wife: Annie); 20 grandchildren, Todd, Mark, Daron, Troy, Cory, Kyle and
Kraig, Logan and Chandler Lewis; Kristen Badger, Kimberly Shirley, Brandi
Helvie, Kim Bova, Clay Lysle Helvie, Brandi, Molly and Adam Fricke, Toby
VanBuskirk, Michael Sample and Eston Hines; 13 great-grandchildren; several
nieces and nephews, including special niece Tony Wimmer Kemerly, and three
sisters-in-law, Mary Lewis, Juanita Lewis, Muncie, and Florence Anderson.
He was preceded in death by his parents, Clyde Edward and Grayce VanArsdall
Lewis, and three brothers, Page, Royce and infant Bryce Lewis.
Services will at 11:30 a.m. Monday in Robert D. Loose Funeral Home. Burial,
with military rites by VFW Post 266, will be in Anderson Memorial Park
Cemetery.
Calling will be 2-6 p.m. Sunday at the funeral home.
Hello List,
I am seeking the parents and siblings of GEORGE W. BURNETT,
born in Indiana, November 15, 1862.
I have no idea the county. That was all I could find on census, death
certificate, etc.
On a tape, made when she was very old, his wife Mary, related this story told
to her by GEORGE.
George's mother was killed in an accident or died suddenly, when he was an
infant.
There were other children, don't know ages or how many. George was adopted by
Shoemaker/Shumaker?Shoebaker???
He lived with them until the courthouse burned. It destroyed the adoption
records. I don't know his age at the time this occurred. He was in Sumner
County, Kansas on April 14, 1900. On that day he married Mary M. Bell.
George said he couldn't have left if the records were still available for his
adoption. Reason unknown. When he left Indiana, he took back his birth name
BURNETT, and continued to use it until his death.
This is a brick wall. I would really appreciate any help or advise you could
provide.
If you have any information, you may Email me at JANETSQUAW(a)aol.com
Thank you in advance for your help.
Respectfully yours,
Jan
While we are on the subject of cemeteries and records for them, does anyone know who holds the burial records for Jefferson Cemetery in Jefferson township, Grant County?
I have ancestors, William and Lorinda Bole, that I cannot find where they are buried in Grant County. I have scoured every book the Marion Library has on cemeteries, have been all through Sheila Watson's listings online, and a couple of years ago, physically visited many cemeteries in Grant County where I thought they might be buried. Something that makes me suspect that they are buried at Jefferson is this: According to a biography of their daughter, Lorinda Parks, William and Lorinda Bole lived with Lorinda Parks at the time of their deaths. Lorinda and husband Eli Parks are buried at Jefferson Cemetery. Also, according to an old plat book for Grant County, Eli and Lorinda's home was less than a mile from Jefferson Cemetery. Now, the interesting thing is, when I visited Jefferson Cemetery, next to Eli and Lorinda Parks is a piece of ground that appears to be large enough for two graves, yet there are no tombstones or markers there. This is a large crowded cemeter!
y, so it seems odd that there would be empty space. My wild theory is that William and Lorinda could possibly be buried there, and for whatever reason, they never had markers or the markers have long been destroyed. The only way to find out is to check the actual burial records, since the abstracts that are online and in Marion Library are simply accountings of what people saw when they walked through recording the info on the stones.
Linda Chan
Does anyone know who has the original burial records for Thrailkill
Cemetery? I see on Sheila Watson's cemetery page that "the township
provides the trustee with the funds to keep up the maintenance and care
of this cemetery". How would I contact the trustee?
I'm looking for the death dates of my 2nd great grandparents (John H.
Carmichael and Sally S. Duckett) who are buried there. There is only a
year for my grandfather's birth and death (1819-1878) and only a birth
year (1828) for my grandmother.
Thanks in advance for any info.
Sandy Taylor
Looking for the surname Simon C. Maxwell and Mary E. Newcomb. I am
looking for any info on this familly whom lived in Grant Co., Ind. I
have found marrieage and cencus report of them in this county. I am at a
brick wall on this family.
Thank You:
Peggy Maxwell
pegmaxwell(a)wworld.com