Actions
Begin New Search
Refine Last Search
Cemetery Lookup
Add Burial Records
Help with Find A Grave

Top Contributors
Success Stories
Community Forums
Find A Grave Store

Log In
Advertisement
The Ancestor Hunter (#46853198)
 member for 10 years, 7 months, 9 days
Next
Tim Gruber
Joseph Bane # 16820210
We're still waiting for a logical explanation for why you seem determined to hold onto our ancestor's memorial other than you selfishly just don't like transferring memorials to anyone else.

I just transferred two memorials in the very same cemetery to someone who is a direct descendent of the two persons (despite the fact that I'm distantly related to them). If they ask for more I'll probably transfer them as well.

I didn't make excuses. I didn't pretend it was somehow my job to manage the memorials forever, act as a censor or that I'm some kind of guardian. I didn't feel the need to include everyone's opinion on the memorials even when they've been proven quite wrong. I did the decent respectable thing. We wish we could say that about you.

Added by Tim Gruber on Feb 04, 2017 11:38 AM

Janet
RE: Thomas Barecock II
Thank you! I really appreciate you leaving me this message. I added flowers to his site tonight.

Added by Janet on Jan 22, 2017 7:22 PM

Shelly
RE: Evan Morgan ancestors
That's fantastic!!!! I'll check it out.

Merry Christmas!!!!

Shelly

You wrote:

Evan Morgan ancestors
Go to Find A Grave Memorial# 174201606
and click on the links back.

I have add his and his fathers. The links now go back to Dafydd Grufydd.

I've not built any of his descendants yet.

Added by Shelly on Dec 24, 2016 5:25 PM

Shelly
RE: Rhydderch
As for other names ... most likely Morgans and spouses, children, etc. I haven't gotten in to the search yet on Findagrave.com ... so I have no specifics ... I can always contact you for each one ... it's up to you.

Shelly

You wrote:

Rhydderch
How are you tied to the Rhyderrch name and what photos of other surnames will you be adding to your tree?

Added by Shelly on Dec 19, 2016 10:39 AM

Shelly
RE: Rhydderch
My husband is a Morgan descendant. His paternal grandmother was Justine Morgan.

Her father was John Wesley Morgan 1878-1966
John Harrison Morgan
John Harrison Morgan 1794-1875
Enos Morgan 1765-1835
Evan Morgan
Enoch Morgan
Abel Morgan 1673-1722
Morgan Rhydderch
Rhydderch Dafydd
Dafydd Grufydd


You wrote:

Rhydderch
How are you tied to the Rhyderrch name and what photos of other surnames will you be adding to your tree?

Added by Shelly on Dec 19, 2016 10:04 AM

Shelly
Rees Rhyddracks - Find A Grave Memorial# 9308341
Thank you for posting the photo of Rees Rhyddracks grave stone. I'm wondering if you would grant me permission to place the photo of his grave stone (and any other photos of ancestors you have posted) on my Ancestry.com file. I post credit on the description box for the photo giving credit to the photographer. I have no interest in the photo for anything other than genealogical purposes.

Thanks so much for your consideration.

Shelly

Added by Shelly on Dec 18, 2016 4:48 PM

LarryW
RE: Hanniman
Hi,
You may have already seen my other note by now, but I found a notice of J.B. Hanniman's death in the December 26, 1897 L.A. Herald, saying that he died at the home of his daughter, Ida Herzog. It didn't give the exact date of his death, but it was presumably within a couple of days of the notice.

My connection to the Hannimans is very distant, linked via Julius' mother-in-law Mary Blank through a few chains of marriage.

Regards,
Larry

Added by LarryW on Dec 15, 2016 12:40 PM

EatatJoes
Joseph Bane # 16820210
We are rather baffled as to why you seem to stubbornly insist in believing the claim that Sarah was married to Joseph has any validity. Tim contacted the cemetery association director personally and she refuted the claim that their records show they were married. Tim even offered to provide you with the directorís name and phone number should you want to find out for yourself. So it is not a matter of opinion or he said she said. This very much invalidates the one and only claim that Sarah was married Joseph. Wanting to keep this baseless claim alive is illogical and insulting especially to all of us with well over 100 years of combined experience in genealogy.

Frankly, we are getting to the point that we wonder just what your motive is in acting like an obstructionist and wanting to hold onto this particular memorial when you have no personal connection to Joseph.

This memorial is not your personal property. This is not your Facebook page. This is our ancestor. So please stop insulting our ancestor with your nonsense and what you have posted.

Please transfer management of this memorial to anyone of us so it can be PROPERLY cared for. Transferring one memorial will not kill you. I've transferred hundreds and even offered to transfer many more than that especially for memorials I have no personal connection to.

Harry Kramer

Added by EatatJoes on Dec 09, 2016 7:10 AM

Tim Gruber
Joseph Bane # 16820210
I have contacted the Buckingham Cemetery Association and spoken to the association director personally (if you doubt it I'll give you her name and number).

After carefully checking their records she said they have absolutely no record showing Sarah Bane married to Joseph Bane. So whoever told you that didn't know what they were talking about.

Joseph was married at age 20 in 1832 to Francis meaning that for your assumption that Sarah was possibly Joseph's first wife and died before he married Francis he would have had to marry her when he was a teenager.

Let's stop playing games and amateur genealogist. Joseph was only ever married to Francis. All the evidence states so and there is NO evidence (including in the cemetery records)he was ever married any Sarah.

Also please stop looking for excuses and just transfer his memorial to anyone one of us who is a descendent. He is not your ancestor and it is more than obvious you really don't care about him. We do obviously do.

Added by Tim Gruber on Dec 05, 2016 11:38 AM

Ann Thompson
Joseph Bane # 16820210
I have carefully reviewed all the messages and "opinions" regarding the allegation that Joseph L Bane was married to two women, namely Frances and Sarah. While I can respect an opinion that has some basis in fact, I have professionally always had to carefully weigh the evidence of fact that supports anything put forth as an opinion. The owner, in this instance, makes reference to, and relies, upon the opinion of an apparently local historian, without naming the individual or the facts underlying his/her opinion. The only obvious evidence of a marital relationship between Joseph and Sarah is the fact that their headstones are situated next to each other and they share the same surname. There is, based on census records, written evidence that a Sarah Bane was a niece to Joseph, being the daughter of his brother. This Sarah was born in 1837 and died a spinster in 1919 . That would explain how the surname Bane appeared on her headstone and also provides an explanation why she was buried next to him, given she had no parents at that time and would have needed a place to be buried with family, because she had no husband. To think that this Sarah somehow married Joseph during her lifetime is farfetched at best. She was his niece, and people sharing that relationship in the 19th century did not marry. Further, if she married, even at age 16, Joseph would have been a married man of 41 at the time. The much age difference usual occurred only when the husband's 1st wife died and he needed someone to care for his young children. In this case Joseph died in 1865, and Francis died as his widow in 1883, 50 years after her marriage to a 19-year-old Joseph, so Joseph could not have married Sarah before he married Francis. To accept the theory that Joseph had 2 wives, therefore labels him a bigamist and philanderer and we should have more respect for the dead than that. That is why not all opinions should be valued or weighed the same. It would be appreciated if the owner would relinquish the rights to this memorial, especially to a direct descendant, and there are lots out there, so that the reputations of those who have passed on can be protected and preserved properly. I always remain open to reviewing any additional evidence on this issue. Sincerely, Lew and Ann Thompson

Added by Ann Thompson on Nov 16, 2016 9:38 AM

EatatJoes
Joseph Bane # 16820210
Here's my edit. Remove everything in the Bio except:

"The 1850 census does show a J L Bane in Washington living with his wife Frances and children John, Arthur, F N, Catharine, Calvin and M L. Living next to the family was Sebastin (50)& Elizabeth Bane (61).

The 1860 Washington county census shows a Joseph L Bane (born abt 1812) a tax collector, with a wife Frances (b. abt 1816) and children Arthur, Cathrine, James C, Mary L & Charlotte. They were living next to Sebastain Bane age 60 a farmer."

The rest is Total Bull and an absolute insult to us who descend from this person. The other information is apparently the work of amateurs who have no connection to our Joseph. Imagine how you would feel if the manager of a memorial for one of your key ancestors posted everybody's opinion no matter how invalid. That's what you have done with our Joseph. This is not some Facebook page or website forum where everyone's opinion is just as valid as anyone else's.

Again please transfer this ONE memorial to any one of us (transferring one memorial won't kill you). We'll worry about any further edits which will be based on facts that any professional genealogist would stand by (at least any professional genealogist who wanted to keep their license). Again this is a reasonable request and there is no reason you absolutely must hold onto to this ONE memorial (no matter how much you may feel you have to control what is posted on a memorial you created).

Added by EatatJoes on Nov 13, 2016 6:24 PM

Tim Gruber
RE: Joseph Bane # 16820210
Frankly it sounds like your just making excuses. Harry laid a case showing they there is only one correct viewpoint and the others are patently incorrect. You want to act as if they are all still valid. Nonsense. I'll repeat the evidence Harry presented to you against the other two "viewpoints":

"You cite a Joseph Bane born 16 years after our You cite the 1860 census of Greene County, PA which lists a Joseph Bane born circa 1828 and married to Jane (and not Sarah). It turns out that Joseph was actually Jasper Bane # 72130372. I can state this as a fact because I tracked down each of the children listed in the 1860 and 1870 censuses and 4 of 5 children's death certificates list Jasper as their father (the remaining child died in 1897). Not one listed Sarah as their mother. Quite a few researchers on Ancestry and Familysearch back up my findings. So in no way is this the same Joseph and he certainly was never married to a Sarah."

So that claim is totally and absolutely wrong. Hereís the other claim about our Joseph allegedly being married to a Sarah:

"The Sarah Bane you claim is our Joseph Bane's wife is never listed in the census as married to any Joseph that comes close to being born in 1812. In fact I could not find any Sarah married to any Joseph or Lemon or J. L. Bane (or any similar spelling) in any census record before 1900 anywhere near the Washington County, PA area let alone before 1866. However, I did find a Sarah Bane born circa 1837, died Aug 23, 1919 and who is buried in Buckingham Cemetery according to her death certificate. She was the single daughter of Seth and Eleanor Bane and niece to our Joseph. Most likely it is her grave marker that is next to Joseph's tombstone. Someone probably assumed they were married, but simply being buried next to someone is never evidence of being married when they don't share the same grave marker and especially in an old cemetery where family plots were not the norm at the time."

So there is no evidence that our Joseph was married to any Sarah. There is plenty of evidence he was married to Francis Watt and ONLY Francis Watt, PERIOD, end of story.

Someone who doesnít know anything about our Joseph finds a Joseph mentioned somewhere and they assume itís the same one, repeat ASS-U-ME. Frankly itís very amateurish and any reputable genealogist would (and does) consider it laughable to suggest otherwise. So please stop trying to act like some kind of referee for over someone you donít have a connection to and apparently know nothing about. We are not trying to own every memorial of all our ancestors and relatives. We are making a very reasonable request for one memorial to be transferred to us as we are actual descendents of this Joseph. But Iíll tell you what let us know when you find a descendent of the other two alleged wives Jane and Sarah. But donít hold your breath waiting for them because THEY DO NOT EXIST AND NEVER HAVE because they were NEVER married to our Joseph. And you wonder why we want the memorial out of your hands?

Added by Tim Gruber on Nov 13, 2016 5:46 PM

Tim Gruber
Joseph Bane # 16820210
Harry (EatatJoes) is right, it isn't asking too much. Do you actually have a valid reason for wanting to hold onto this particular memorial other than just not wanting to transfer any memorial you created?

Please transfer this memorial to anyone of us that is a direct descendent. This person is vastly more important to us than he could ever be to you.

Added by Tim Gruber on Nov 13, 2016 7:36 AM

TurningHearts
RE: Ann Wayne Hayman
Thanks for the insight. I would go with the family record books.

Added by TurningHearts on Nov 12, 2016 5:02 PM

TurningHearts
Ann Wayne Hayman
A findagrave volunteer has reported that the office at Old Saint David Church Cemetery at Wayne, Pa. contends that the above is not on their records.
You have much information at the memorial.

Two others reported similar results for other graves the same cemetery????

Strange!
Judy

Added by TurningHearts on Nov 11, 2016 6:37 PM

EatatJoes
RE: Joseph Lemon Bane
Why are you so determined to "own" this memorial indefinitely? Are you simply unwilling to transfer management of this or any memorial you created and feel you have to control what is on it?

If you'll note on my find-a-grave profile page I posted long ago "If there are any memorials you would like transferred to you just ask."

If someone has a much greater interest in any memorial I've created I don't hesitate and haven't hesitated to transfer them (particularly if they're closely related to the person).

Is this really asking too much?

Added by EatatJoes on Nov 02, 2016 2:39 AM

Karen L (Gregory) Largent
RE: John Buckingham
Hi, I see that they are for two different people now. Thanks for showing me my error. And thanks for your great work!

Karen

Added by Karen L (Gregory) Large... on Nov 01, 2016 11:24 AM

EatatJoes
RE: Joseph Lemon Bane
Then why do you feel the need to "own" this memorial rather than allowing someone who is direct descendant manage it? Acting like a referee and holding onto this memorial simply because you created it first rather than because you are directly related to this person is unreasonable especially when the contrary facts you cite are totally bogus. And yes, I do know several of the other direct descendants who requested a transfer and we have agreed it should be in the hands of someone who cares about this person and wants the facts corrected.

And facts are facts rather than "opinion". The fact is Joseph only had one wife and she was Francis, period. We and others have researched this person quite a bit. The person who gave you this so called evidence of Joseph married to Sarah rather than Francis doesn't know much about Joseph and is absolutely quite misinformed. And we very seriously doubt they are a direct descendant.

You cite the 1860 census of Greene County, PA which lists a Joseph Bane born circa 1828 and married to Jane (and not Sarah). It turns out that Joseph was actually Jasper Bane # 72130372. I can state this as a fact because I tracked down each of the children listed in the 1860 and 1870 censuses and 4 of 5 children's death certificates list Jasper as their father (the remaining child died in 1897). Not one listed Sarah as their mother. Quite a few researchers on Ancestry and Familysearch back up my findings. So in no way is this the same Joseph and he certainly was never married to a Sarah.

The Sarah Bane you claim is our Joseph Bane's wife is never listed in the census as married to any Joseph that comes close to being born in 1812. In fact I could not find any Sarah married to any Joseph or Lemon or J. L. Bane (or any similar spelling) in any census record before 1900 anywhere near the Washington County, PA area let alone before 1866. However, I did find a Sarah Bane born circa 1837, died Aug 23, 1919 and who is buried in Buckingham Cemetery according to her death certificate. She was the single daughter of Seth and Eleanor Bane and niece to our Joseph. Most likely it is her grave marker that is next to Joseph's tombstone. Someone probably assumed they were married, but simply being buried next to someone is never evidence of being married when they don't share the same grave marker and especially in an old cemetery where family plots were not the norm at the time.

If you have any actual evidence that Sarah was married to our Joseph other than "they are buried next to each other" and a Joseph listed in the census in the next county born 16 years after our Joseph (and married to Jane rather than a Sarah) we would love to hear it. Otherwise please be so kind as to transfer the management of Joseph's memorial to any one of us.

Added by EatatJoes on Nov 01, 2016 6:04 AM

EatatJoes
Joseph Bane # 16820210
Is there any particular reason you seem to be unwilling to transfer management of this memorial to someone who is directly related to Joseph Bane?

You didn't reply to my request through the memorial itself. And yes I am a direct descendant.

Added by EatatJoes on Oct 31, 2016 6:48 AM

fay Hall
Mary Mattox Peak, 6-6-1876 - 1910
Mary is my maternal grandmother and I have search and search all the cemeteries in Fairfield and Kershaw Counties, South Carolina and cannot find any information concerning her grave.
She had a twin sister, Martha Mattox Peak and I have found her grave and also Mary's husband, Henry Tally Peak, 3-Dec 1873 - 1949, Fairfield County. If you could help me find her grave site, it would be appreciated and I am also willing to pay a fee for the information. I need this for DAR application.

Thanks Fay Hall. My email address is fayhall5@gmail.com

Added by fay Hall on Oct 05, 2016 1:41 PM

Jen Drake
RE: wafler email
thank you

Added by Jen Drake on Sep 23, 2016 10:59 AM

Diane
Christopher Brahmstadt duplicate
true. you could message the person who posted the picture and ask them to post it on the other site before taking it down.
Thanks

Added by Diane on Aug 22, 2016 12:53 PM

Little Lady
RE: Elizabeth Swagler Buckingham
Well, the information can be found on familysearch.org. That is where I found the information for both sons. Thanks! :)

Added by Little Lady on Jul 17, 2016 3:41 PM

Gerald Heston
Morgan Jones #56133464
Morgan Jones #56133464 was my 4th great grandfather. I have the Bible of his daughter Elizabeth who married Benjamin Standiford.

The Bible says Morgan Jones was born 15 July 1774 and died 23 Mar 1853.

His wife was Ruth Jackson who died 1 Mar 1829, age 45 years/5 months/9 days (makes her birth date about 20 Sep 1783). Family lore says she was from the same family as General "Stonewall" Jackson.

Where did you get all this great information for the Jones family?

Thanks,
Gerald Heston

Added by Gerald Heston on Jul 02, 2016 2:59 PM

Wylie Raab
Memorial #15589606 Alexander McCullough
This memorial indicates his birth in County Donegal, Ireland. Do you by chance have a source for that info? Thank you! Wylie Gibson Raab wylie.raab@gmail.com

Added by Wylie Raab on Jun 25, 2016 3:55 PM

Next
 
 

Privacy Statement and Terms of Service