Re: Cooley/Bearden

From: Michael Cooley <michael_at_newsummer.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 17:56:39 -0700

Good info on Daniel Cooley, Hardwick and Grundy here. No answers to your
questions but it's well-written.

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mitchvv/narratives/thomasha.html

> Good question, Jim. I wonder if anyone has considered that Joel's wife was
> a Grundy. Daniel, who might have gone to KY with WMC, married a Grundy as
> his second wife. It's worth pursuing.
>
> With William Grundy Cooley born in 1805, it's likely his father was born
> before 1790. I'm going to change that in my notes.
>
> -Michael
>
>> I'm not finding anything on Joel that you don't already have. He really
>> was quite young when he died. Seems he might have
>> been lucky enough just to get the one son off, but knowing the way the
>> other Cooleys went at it, you'd think there was a fair
>> amount of time between 1805 and 1812 for one or two more. The search
>> continues....
>>
>> Any thoughts on where the name "Grundy" might have originated?
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> On 9/26/2011 11:19 PM, Michael Cooley wrote:
>>> Jim,
>>>
>>> We may want to look closer at Joel (c1790-1812), s/o WMC. Only one son
>>> is
>>> attributed to him and he lived for awhile in MO:
>>>
>>> William Grundy Cooley (1805-1878) m1 Ann Eliza McDonald m2 Julia Ann
>>> Caldwell
>>>
>>> Perhaps Joel had another son.
>>>
>>> The William Grundy Cooley line would be a good one to test. His
>>> descendant, Grover Byrne Cooley Jr (1925-1987), has two living sons.
>>>
>>> --Michael
>>>
>>>> BTW, Jim, at this point I would consider the matched marker with Scott
>>>> -very- telling, while keeping in mind that the matched mutation could
>>>> have
>>>> been a coincidence. Undoubtedly, there's a lot more to be learned
>>>> about
>>>> WMC's family.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it would be great finding a descendant of E C's. (I never had
>>>> luck
>>>> tracking down Nancy Cooley and her son Robert. I'm guessing she
>>>> remarried.
>>>> Considering that she may have been Nancy Nippen might be a worthy
>>>> lead.)
>>>>
>>>> -Michael
>>>>
>>>>> Jim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Great point about Mary. I hadn't picked up in it!
>>>>>
>>>>> Also a great point about Nancy Nippen. You're on a roll! Nancy
>>>>> Cooley's
>>>>> son Robert was born c1858. Do the dates work out?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm certainly open to any discussion about how John may have come
>>>>> from
>>>>> WMC
>>>>> (another good one!) I've wondered if he might have really been a
>>>>> Jonathan,
>>>>> a name found among William's descendants. We really need to get a
>>>>> firmer
>>>>> idea on John's birth year, I think, to go further on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I meant to note that Polly/Mary, listed as 10 in the 1850 Dickson,
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> likely not yet born so I left her off.
>>>>>> Her being 18 in the 1860 adds weight to the idea. Still doesn't
>>>>>> explain
>>>>>> a number of other brain teasers,
>>>>>> though, like who in the world James of 1794 might be and why is he
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> Dickson Co?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it too reckless to suggest he could be an unaccounted for son of
>>>>>> WMC? I know, he's not mentioned
>>>>>> in his will (or anywhere else for that matter) but perhaps there was
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> falling out, which could explain his
>>>>>> exile from Stewart Co. Another "lone wolf"? Let's label it an
>>>>>> unsubstantiated hypothesis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It IS possible that Nancy of 1860 could be E.C.'s first wife of
>>>>>> 1855,
>>>>>> Nancy A. Nippen. I haven't pursued
>>>>>> this idea since Milo came into the picture. I think finding a
>>>>>> Y-heir
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> E.C. would yield more fruit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, now that my mutant gene may be sorting itself out, I'll be all
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> happier (and saner) when my mutant
>>>>>> genealogy does the same ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/25/2011 11:03 AM, Michael Cooley wrote:
>>>>>>> Very interesting. On the face of it Julia Ann Cooley looks like
>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> match. It's possible that she didn't change her name back to Cooley
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> next census but that the census-taker made a mistake, knowing they
>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>> mother and daughter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In your suggestions for 1840, you dropped Mary Ann.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And there's the issue with this woman, quoting from my notes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --quote--
>>>>>>> 1860> TENNESSEE> DICKSON> DANIELSVILLE P O
>>>>>>> Series: M653 Roll: 1247 Page: 241
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nancy Cooley with two young children. She living in the same town
>>>>>>> near
>>>>>>> EC
>>>>>>> and his presumed mother Martha.
>>>>>>> --endquote--
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Finally, Willow. Since the spelling of Milo's name was always so
>>>>>>> fluid,
>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>> had considered that they could be the same person, especially since
>>>>>>> Milo
>>>>>>> is not found in 1850.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1850> TENNESSEE> DICKSON> MIDDLE DIST
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Series: M432 Roll: 876 Page: 142
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> James Cooley 56 m NC
>>>>>>> Martha Cooley 49 f VA
>>>>>>> Willows Cooley 13 m MO
>>>>>>> Polly Cooley 10 f MO
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course, the above is really weird. Is it Milo, not Willows? Is
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> John,
>>>>>>> not James? Is Polly the future Mary Ann Story? Was Martha born in
>>>>>>> GA,
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> VA?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This once curious reading, as you know, has been sorted out. We now
>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> for a fact that Milo C Cooley had sons William and Robert:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1860> TENNESSEE> DICKSON> DANIELSVILLE P O
>>>>>>> Series: M653 Roll: 1247 Page: 203
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oat Storey 24 m TN farm hand
>>>>>>> Mary A Storey 18 f MO
>>>>>>> Martha Cooley 53 f GA domestic lady
>>>>>>> M C Cooley 21 m MO farm hand
>>>>>>> Wm E Cooley 2 m TN
>>>>>>> R W Cooley 9/12 TN
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm still unable to find the Storeys anywhere.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But, back to my earler question, can we be sure that the 1840
>>>>>>> Randolph
>>>>>>> co
>>>>>>> census is for your John or could it be another one? I haven't found
>>>>>>> another close match to it, but I could be missing someone. Do any
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> have that entry attributed to someone else? We could be barking up
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> wrong tree.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your, Jim, is about the most distorted Cooley line I've seen! :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The 1835 marriage is problematic. Though E.C.'s death record
>>>>>>>> states
>>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>>> birth as 4 Oct 1834
>>>>>>>> his 1900 census record states Oct 1835, and most of his other
>>>>>>>> census
>>>>>>>> records state his age
>>>>>>>> more consistently for an 1835 birth. Which is still over a month
>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>> the marriage. But there
>>>>>>>> could have been a shotgun or two in attendance. With Elizabeth
>>>>>>>> born
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> 1833 that gets a bit
>>>>>>>> more dicey.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Something else I recently came across:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1870 Hamby, Christian Co. KY Census July 18th
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 47 Julian Ann Martin 55 VA
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 48 William A. Martin 32 KY
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 49 Irvin (E.C.) Cooley 34 MO
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and towards the end of the census
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 253 Melor (Milo) Cooley 30 TN
>>>>>>>> Polly (Martha) 65 TN
>>>>>>>> Robert 10 TN
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The above is nothing new, but compare to:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1880 Hamby, Christian Co. Census June 11th
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 142 WJ Martin 42 KY
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 143 Martha Cooley 75 GA
>>>>>>>> Julia Ann 59 VA
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The implication is that with E.C. and family now in Muhlenberg Co.
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> Milo and 2nd wife not found,
>>>>>>>> Martha is now in E.C.'s old neighborhood, living next to William
>>>>>>>> Martin, the presumed son of Julia
>>>>>>>> Ann, who is not found as Julia Ann Martin: Is Julia Ann really
>>>>>>>> Martha's
>>>>>>>> daughter, as stated, or are
>>>>>>>> these just two widows living in E.C.'s former home?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With that in mind, I suggest the following for the 1840 Randolph
>>>>>>>> Co.
>>>>>>>> Census:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2 males under 5 (Milo& Willow)
>>>>>>>> 1 male 5-9 (E.C.)
>>>>>>>> 1 male 30-39 (John)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1 female 5-9 (Elizabeth)
>>>>>>>> 1 female 15-19 (Julia Ann?)
>>>>>>>> 1 female 30-39 (Martha)
>>>>>>>> 1 female 50-59 (? ? ? )
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Elizabeth and Julia Ann COULD have been the product of an earlier
>>>>>>>> marriage for Martha. I will
>>>>>>>> continue to search for such an event. And I will hope to find a
>>>>>>>> male
>>>>>>>> descendant of E.C. to take
>>>>>>>> the test. Once he is in the clan for sure, some of these loose
>>>>>>>> ends
>>>>>>>> should tighten up.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/24/2011 7:41 PM, Michael Cooley wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I don't know. If this is, in fact, a census reading for John
>>>>>>>>> Cooley
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> Martha Bearden she doesn't -appear- to be enumerated. But there
>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> several problems with this. First, this may not be the correct
>>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>> Cooley, or the census taker might well have made an error.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The first question is, I think, is this John and Martha? But we
>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>> a problem with dates because the couple married in 1835. If
>>>>>>>>> Elizabeth
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> E C were their children, they were born before the marriage.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Michael - where does Elizabeth fit into all of this - she was
>>>>>>>>>> born
>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>> 1833 in MO, and we believe that she is EC's and Mary Polly's
>>>>>>>>>> sister.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> From: Michael Cooley<michael_at_newsummer.com>
>>>>>>>>>> To: John Cooley Mailing
>>>>>>>>>> List<undisclosed.recipients_at_johncooley.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 3:42 PM
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Cooley/Bearden
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jim, Here are some of my musings in my notes at
>>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/Notes/index.cgi?1276662005+/ahnentafel/256/lineages/Cooley-Bearden-desc.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone concur that this could be John and Martha?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --quote--
>>>>>>>>>> 1840 census
>>>>>>>>>> John Cooley 210001 01100101 (Randolph county p283)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I had assumed that this John was the John who shows in Macon co
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> 1850
>>>>>>>>>> and 1860 but no children are attributed to him. It now seems
>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>> likely
>>>>>>>>>> that this is John and Martha. Considering that possibility:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2 males under 5 (EC and Marlo?)
>>>>>>>>>> 1 male 5-9 (husband of Nancy in Decatur TN 1860?)
>>>>>>>>>> 1 male 30-39 (John)
>>>>>>>>>> 1 female 5-9 (Mary Ann Storey)
>>>>>>>>>> 1 female 15-19 (Julia Ann?)
>>>>>>>>>> 1 female 30-39 (Martha)
>>>>>>>>>> 1 female 50-59 ( !!!! )
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Then who was the older woman? John's mother? Martha's mother?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And if they married in 1835, how are the older children
>>>>>>>>>> explained?
>>>>>>>>>> Was
>>>>>>>>>> John married twice? Is he the John who married Eliza Locke? Was
>>>>>>>>>> EC
>>>>>>>>>> born
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> 1834 or 1835? There could be one or more
>>>>>>>>>> half-siblings....perhaps
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> earlier marriage of Martha's? If that's Julia Ann, she was born
>>>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>>>> before John and Eliza married. And if that's true, then Martha
>>>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> been -Mrs- Martha Bearden.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --endquote--
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Of course, at this writing we did not know that Jim would find a
>>>>>>>>>> 37/37
>>>>>>>>>> match with a descendant of the Stewart county Cooleys.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Though there are a number of stars that need to align in this
>>>>>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>>>>>> constellation, I'm still
>>>>>>>>>>> clinging to the following Big Bang theory: *E.C. Cooley's death
>>>>>>>>>>> record
>>>>>>>>>>> states his parents as
>>>>>>>>>>> John Cooley of Missouri and Martha Bearden of Virginia **John
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> Martha
>>>>>>>>>>> are married in
>>>>>>>>>>> Monroe Co. MO 23Nov1835***Elizabeth and E.C. are both born in
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> mid
>>>>>>>>>>> 1830s in MO****
>>>>>>>>>>> Elizabeth is married to John Calvin Bailey in Dickson Co. in
>>>>>>>>>>> 1850*****
>>>>>>>>>>> E.C. is married in
>>>>>>>>>>> Dickson Co. with John's brother, Matthew Patrick Henry Bailey,
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>> bondsman******E.C.&
>>>>>>>>>>> Elizabeth are living with their respective families in 1860
>>>>>>>>>>> Dickson
>>>>>>>>>>> Co.
>>>>>>>>>>> where potential brother
>>>>>>>>>>> Milo Cooley, who, along with his young sons, is living with his
>>>>>>>>>>> mother,
>>>>>>>>>>> Martha, and presumed
>>>>>>>>>>> sister, Mary, under the roof of Mary's new husband, Oat Story.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I realize it's all star gazing, but if you stare long enough
>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> something there, faint as it
>>>>>>>>>>> may be. And now with WMC's line in neighboring Stewart Co. I
>>>>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>>>> those stars just got a
>>>>>>>>>>> bit brighter.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/23/2011 10:31 AM, Michael Cooley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Gloria,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As you know, Jim and I thought that your Elizabeth could have
>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>> sister of E C Cooley. I'd be interested in his thoughts but it
>>>>>>>>>>>> seems
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>>>> that we may have been heading down the wrong road.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a number of loose hanging Cooleys in MO. Jim's John
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>>>> one, although DNA appears to be sorting it out. Mathias Cooley
>>>>>>>>>>>> (Cornelius,
>>>>>>>>>>>> James, John) is said to have had two or three brothers who,
>>>>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathias,
>>>>>>>>>>>> were adopted out or lived with relatives. They've never been
>>>>>>>>>>>> identified.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Isaac N Cooley (James, John) died young. I've only recently
>>>>>>>>>>>> learned
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> he had children. Two sons are likely ID'd but we don't know
>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>>> others.
>>>>>>>>>>>> John's son. Perrin, had a large family. We can only guess as
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>>>>>>> sons were. And a DNA tester who as a Stokes county match to
>>>>>>>>>>>> Perrin
>>>>>>>>>>>> C
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cooley is hanging out on a limb. We're guessing Perrin C
>>>>>>>>>>>> grandfather
>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>> Perrin, but we have no strong evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There's still a lot of work to do.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gloria, email the list what you know about Elizabeth. Perhaps
>>>>>>>>>>>> someone
>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>> some additional thoughts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anyone made any progress in finding out the parents of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Elizabeth
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cooley of Missouri who married John Calvin Bailey?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Michael Cooley<michael_at_newsummer.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: John Cooley Mailing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> List<undisclosed.recipients_at_johncooley.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 5:17 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: DNA for William Matthews Cooley
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just spent an hour and an half writing an email. Just
>>>>>>>>>>>>> moments
>>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sending it, I caused it to disappear! This one is going to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> short
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the point!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Jeanette Pollard, Scott Cooley, as descendant of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> William
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthews Cooley, has tested and is a match to the Stokes
>>>>>>>>>>>>> county
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cooleys!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> He matches 37/37 markers with Jim Cooley of Las Vegas. The
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ramifications
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the match are fascinating--but not cut and dry. (I talked
>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> length
>>>>>>>>>>>>> about it in my lost email!)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here are some links that will bring you up to date:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The archive for this resurrected John Cooley Mailing List:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Timeline showing the paper trail of William Cooley from
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stokes
>>>>>>>>>>>>> county
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NC
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to Steward county TN:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/StewartCoTN.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> DNA results:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/ydna.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim Cooley's lineage:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/lineages/Cooley-Bearden-desc.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since we now know that William was of the clan, I've merged
>>>>>>>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>>>>>>>> line
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> John's. However, as good as it appears, we can't yet be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> certain
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> he
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was John's son:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/lineages/johncooley-desc.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> John Cooley page:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/256/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you don't want to be part of these mailings, respond and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> replace
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject with UNSUBSCRIBE -- spell it correctly, else it will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> go
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> list!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's talk! Do you think William was John's son? Any ideas on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> line
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and how he might fit? Any good information about Abraham
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cooley
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Surry
>>>>>>>>>>>>> co NC? Any new research that the list should be aware of?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just
>>>>>>>>>>>>> respond
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this posting or send a new email to list_at_johncooley.net .
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>> post
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> about this and other subjects over the next couple of days.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for
>>>>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for
>>>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for
>>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>>>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
>>> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
>>> information.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> <a href="http://newsummer.com/distlist">distlist 0.9</a>
> See http://ancestraldata.com/listarchive/johncooleylist/ for list
> information.
>
Received on Sun Oct 02 2011 - 18:56:39 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Oct 02 2011 - 18:56:39 MDT