From: btrvetc-d-request@emcee.com Subject: btrvetc-d Digest V98 #4 X-Loop: btrvetc-d@emcee.com X-Mailing-List: archive/volume98/4 Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------" To: btrvetc-d@emcee.com Reply-To: btrvetc-l@genealogy.org ------------------------------ Content-Type: text/plain btrvetc-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 4 Today's Topics: Packwoods and Gearharts Verfication received Administrivia: for the Burnett/Turner/Ross/Via/Etc Mailing List (BTRVETC-L) We became automated 19 Jan 1998, with everyone that had been on Nyla Creed DePauk's list of subscribers being subscribed to the digest, which (kind) replaces the compilations. There is also a regular list, where you receive messages one at a time. If you wish that version, unsubscribe from the digest, and subscribe to the regular list (see below). Please do not send your emails to Nyla any longer; if you do, she will send them to the list. Please post your messages to: btrvetc-l@genealogy.org (that's a lowercase ell, not a number one.) To unsubscribe, email btrvetc-d-request@genealogy.org with the SUBJECT: UNSUBSCRIBE. To subscribe to the regular list, email btrvetc-l-request@genealogy.org with the SUBJECT: SUBSCRIBE ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 21:22:17 EST From: N4JED To: chrisdawson@HOTMAIL.COM, btrvetc-l@genealogy.org Subject: Packwoods and Gearharts Message-ID: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Chris, Can you look this up in your records for me? In Compilation #328 (Packwood 3) under the descendants of Exonia Packwood. There appears to be a mixup between the chilldren of Nancy Jefferson Gearhart and Nancy's brothers and sisters. Both groups have the same first name, same birthdates and same spouses (only their last name changes). Something must not be correct here. Your help would be appreciated. David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 21:41:00 -0500 From: "Eunice B. Kirkman" To: "Nyla's List" Subject: Verfication received Message-ID: <01bd2d28$cd1e51e0$LocalHost@ekirkman.swva.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following note accompanied the Caroline County, VA Order Book copies sent to me by Jeanette O'Boyle. My fervent thanks to her! Like David Jones, I concede that this truly is the correct lineage for Shadrach and "Old" James Turner of Bedford Co., VA It appears that they were indeed brother's and this lineage apparently originated in Cornwall, England. If anyone has evidence that disproves this, speak!!! My thanks to Nyla Creed, David Jones, and so many others who have contributed files. Thank You, Jeanette!, I'll have a letter out to you by US mail. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Enclosed are the copies of the Caroline County, Virginia, Order Book which I promised to send. A11 other county records were destroyed during the Civil War and the Order Book is all that remains. In the first record, dated 12 November 1736, old Richard is deeding land to his sons, Lewis, John, and James. These records are usually recorded in age order so Lewis would be the youngest and James the oldest. At this time in Virginia English law is in effect and only the oldest inherits when the father dies. All other children were given their inheritance by the father before his death. Since the order book does not include a copy of the will only the males and one daughter is mentioned. On 12 May 1738 Richard Turner acknowledges his son, Richard, Jr. On 8 October 1742 the last will of Richard Tumer, Sr., is presented to the court by his wife, Elizabeth. It is acknowledged that Richard, Jr., is the heir. It also states that as next oldest, James is eligible to be executor but he renounces so wife Elizabeth can be. On 11 March 1743, a new order on the will is presented. James Tumer is now named heir at law and Lewis Tumer and Margaret Turner are named executors. Both Elizabeth and Richard, Jr., must have died (Richard, Jr., leaving no heirs) so James is now named. The next oldest alive, Lewis, and sister Margaret are named executors. Son John would have been dead at this time or he would have been named an executor before Margaret. A male son would never have been passed over to name a daughter. Women under English law had very few rights. The next order of business listed in the Order Book dated 11 Jan 1745 was the naming of guardians for the children of John (so we think). Apparently their mother has just died and they have no parents or guardians. Shadrack was the oldest and apparently was sixteen or older and needed no guardian. Since Shadrack was not mentioned the question is raised is this the right family? While there are at least two Shadrack Tumers there are only one Meshack and one Abednego. For this reason I would say that this is the right Turner family. Now all the guardians would be relatives. James Turner's children and Lewis Turner's children both have used Meadows as a given name for their children so the guess would be that the mother of James and Lewis would be a Meadows. I have not run across the name of Pemberton in any of my Turner research so the assumption could be made that the mother of Shadrack, Meshack, and Abednego was related to the Pembertons, possibly her maiden name was Pemberton. There is no proof of this that I know of. Lastly, l am enclosing a copy of the King and Queen County, Virginia, 1704 substitute tax roll. This lists Richard Turner. Caroline County was cut from King and Queen County in the 1730s. Note, however, that there is another Tumer listed in King and Queen. However, since the oldest son was Richard, Jr., it can be assumed that Richard, Sr.? was the son of a Richard Turner, according to the English naming scheme that the Turners followed at this time -------------------------------- End of btrvetc-d Digest V98 Issue #4 ************************************