Proof of the maternity of Elizabeth (Dale) Rogers
binky
In Edward Dale's will made 24 Aug 1694, he left Elizabeth (Dale)
Rogers "twelve pence in full of all claimes whatsoever."
In 1694 Virginia, the only "claime" allowed by law of a child against
a parent was for a share in an intestate estate.
Elizabeth (Dale) Rogers was "feme covert" and didn't have a trust or
separate estate.
Edward Dale left a will. Therefore, the claim had to be against Diana
(Skipwith) Dale.
Therefore, Diana (Skipwith) Dale was the mother of Elizabeth (Dale)
Rogers.
[Ask an attorney. And be sure to post his thoughts here on this
thread. When I called Will's bluff, he did what Will always does--he
disappeared. You guys will disappear too.]
______________________________________________
Concocting evidence or quotes is a very serious breach of ethics.
Unfortunately, most of you don't belong to any professional
organizations for genealogists.
tish
YOU CAN INCLUDE THE DOUBLESPEAK TRASH TALKIN
WILL JOHNSON AND TAF TAFFY DAFFY DUCK IN THOSE
PRETENDERS TO THE THRONES OF GENEALOGISTS
TAF TAFFY DAFFY DUCK DUCKS SCIENCE
KNOCKS ASHES IN HIS PETRIE DISH OF ILLOGIC
WITH THE FOLLOWING NONSENSICAL SLIPS
FOR HIMSELF BUT DENIED FOR OTHER POSTERS
TAF TALK READS LIKE THE WAY GENEALOGY
SHOULD NOT BE WRITTEN ABOUT HE SEES IN
OTHERS BUT DOES NOT SEE IN HIS OWN RATIONALES
READ THE FOLLOWING TAF DOUBLESPEAK
There are certainly a lot of options.
I accidentally dropped a generation in my accounting
No. My scenario involved
who according to tradition
It's all myth, but there it is
.Likewise, there is debate that it was the same daughter
There are certainly a lot of options. Too bad so much is uncertain
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
There are certainly a lot of options.
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
I accidentally dropped a generation in my accounting
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
No. My scenario involved
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
Again, Olaf III was son of Eric the Victorious, who according to
tradition ejected his brother Olaf (II), the father of Styrbjorn.
It's all myth, but there it is
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
I accidentally dropped a generation in my accounting - this is 5&6 to
the married couple.
That's it. This account is a little distorted...Likewise, there is
debate that it was the same daughter
who was betrothed
On Sep 27, 5:50 pm, Jwc1...@aol.com wrote:
> Olaf III (Sweden), Styrbjorn, (said to be father) Thorkils
> Sprakkalaeg, Gytha married Godwin, Harald II (England)
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
There are certainly a lot of options. Too bad so much is uncertain
about Alfonso's other wives, or Sancho's wife whose name is obviously
extra-Iberian, for that matter, but still we get Aquitaine, the
Burgundies, Toulouse and Sicily between Alfonso and his daughters.
Given that Harold's brother-in-law was son of a Norman, we would have
another connection there. However, the connection I have in mind
(which I thought someone would have had by now), involves a very
small
number of steps.
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
I will give it aIf you allow one liberty, though, the closest link has
many fewer
steps. little while longer, then if no has gotten it I will
go ahead and give the one-word hint that will give it all away.
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
No. My scenario involved the two kings who took a disputed crown in
January and then were killed in October. It is, then, Sancho who
meets this description, taking Leon from Alfonso in January 1072, and
getting offed on 7 October. However, since his brother Alfonso is
the
only sibling with known issue or fully known spouse(s), any
relationship lateral or down ends up going through Alfonso anyhow.
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
Again, Olaf III was son of Eric the Victorious, who according to
tradition ejected his brother Olaf (II), the father of Styrbjorn.
It's all myth, but there it is - the two were first cousins, not
father and son.
On Sep 27, 10:09 pm, taf <t...@clearwire.net> wrote:
I accidentally dropped a generation in my accounting - this is 5&6 to
the married couple.
That's it. This account is a little distorted (Alfonso wasn't in a
position to demand anything of William the Conqueror). The original
source has two brothers competing for her hand, Alfonso being
successful. Likewise, there is debate that it was the same daughter
who was betrothed to Harold and Alfonso - some name Harold's as
Adelais, and the chronology is in question: it may have occurred
before he married Agnes in the 1060s. And finally some have suggested
that the entire Harold betrothal was simply a historical convention
and not authentic. None the less, these two betrothals create a
close
link between Iberia and England that would not again be seen for
another century.
taf
binky
injustice to the descendants of Elizabeth (Dale) Rogers by suggesting
that her maternity is doubtful. John Frederick Dorman first advanced
her royal descent in "The Farish Family Of Virginia And Its
Forebears" (1967), pp. 106-108.
In fact, that Elizabeth (Dale) Rogers was the daughter of Diana
(Skipwith) Dale is proved by the above argument. It also proves that
Mary (Dale) Harrison Jones and Katherine (Dale) Carter were not Diana
(Skipwith) Dale's daughters.
Although not relevant to this particular case, in Virginia both common
law and chancery cases were heard in the county courts, and the court
orders in Lancaster Co. for this period are complete.
The issue has been fiercely contended, and there have been breaches of
ethics in its discussion. Nat Taylor, Todd Farmerie, Douglas
Richardson, Brad Verity, Tony Hoskins, et. al. are not adequately
grounded in 17th century VA probate and property law to judge whether
this argument is sound.
Therefore, I invite members of this newsgroup to speak with an
attorney, and publish their comments in this thread.
binky
> taf- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
binky
inherit anything under a will, testators themselves had to create the
right to inherit. In other words, Edward Dale would have had to
create an inheritance for Elizabeth (Dale) Rogers in his will in order
for her to inherit under his will; and he did not. [see Blackstone,
Book II, Ch. 7 Sub 145 & Ch. 32 Sub 679.] The notion that someone who
isn't a devisee or legatee in a will could claim inheritance (in 1694)
under that will is false.
Strictly speaking, under common law those who received real property
under a will were "devisees," while those receiving personal property
under a will were "legatees." In VA wills and testaments weren't
separate documents, and as a result these terms soon became blurred.
wjho...@aol.com
I didn't disappear Jeff, I'm still here.? And your argument still fails.
I happen (I know it's hard to believe) to spend some time doing actual work.
My argument is this:
______________________________________________
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message
binky
Talk to a lawyer. He'll set you straight. Somebody on this newsgroup
knows a lawyer you could talk to for free. Any thoughts on who that
might be? Yeah, you know who I'm talking about. I don't think he'll
charge you anything--you're a pro, so it's professional courtesy--so
there's no excuse not to talk to him.
I'm calling your bluff. And be sure to post what he tells you right
here. I'll check back in a couple of days to see what he said.
mhol...@mac.com
I care to recount. I can tell you that if you could ask every member
of the Virginia Bar Association your question, none would have a
clue. A lawyer only cares what the law is not what it was. The only
experts on 17th century Virginian probate laws are genealogists and
the occasional historian. So even this line of argument falls flat.
If you want this line of reasoning to work, you need to present at
least one (better two) different examples where this is the provable
case.
binky
who the lawyer is--there's someone who can clue Will in gratis--it
won't take long):
"If that's what the law says, that's what the law says. The title
doesn't matter."
That's not what Will wants to hear. It's his own fault--Will painted
himself into a corner. When that happens, he first tries lying, and
if that doesn't work, he tries bravado. One day, if he's lucky, he
might figure out that trying to get over on the world is a sucker's
game--the world is a lot smarter than Will Johnson. It's a lot
smarter than all of us.
wjho...@aol.com
Yes all us pros do each other for free.? How naughty of you to spill our secret!
I told him what you said, he blanched, trembled and then fell to his knees and started crying like a baby.? He's in the hospital now, they mentioned something about psychic trauma and psychotropic drugs, but I don't really understand it all.? I did get one very nasty look and a "What did you say to him!" thrown at me.
-----Original Message-----
From: binky <bin...@gmail.com>
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
Will--
binky
law libraries have a copy of Hening's Statutes (I saw a set in Dekalb,
IL). I'm sure every member of the VA bar knows exactly what Hening's
Statutes is, and can answer Will's question easily. I think there's a
lawyer he can contact who will help Will in about 30 seconds for
nothing.
Would you like me to query the VA Bar Assoc. to see if anyone knows
about Hening's Statutes? That would show you're a liar--or Will could
be a man. It's probably easier to show you're a liar than for Will to
be a man, but I'm challenging him--it's an easy challenge. Will
constantly heckles everyone about his sources, so now Mommy has to
come in and rescue Will by telling a fib.
The question is:
"Does the subject of the title of a statute in Hening's Statutes limit
the application of the law to the subject of the title?"
Will says it does.
binky
Be a man. Yiu don't need Mommy to lie for you. It's a simple
challenge. I want you to do it, because if I do it, you'll claim not
to believe me.
Let me tell you how to do it for nothing. Go online to the VA bar
association, and get a referral to an attorney who specializes in
probate law. Mention "Hening's Statutes"--the lawyer will know
immediately what it is--in fact, most lawyers in the country know
exactly what it is. If you need a citation, it's Hening Vol. 2 pp.
92-94. Usually, the bar association will refer you to someone who'lll
answer simple questions for nothing. At most, it'll cost you a phone
call. But you're a pro--you can afford it.
"Does the subject of the title of a statute in Hening's Statutes limit
the application of the law to the subject of the title?"
And then report your findings here--OK? You can do it--you'll get
through this.
wjho...@aol.com
Why would I ask a question to which I already know the answer?
And why would you ask the same question fifteen times, when nobody cares about the answer?
Answer that one Jeffrey.
I never framed the question you're asking.? My point was an entirely different one.? You, after now, 25 posts on this sub-topic, still ... don't... get it.
-----Original Message-----
From: binky <bin...@gmail.com>
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
Will--
wjho...@aol.com
Do you think it's possible that Jeff actually has a reading comprehension problem?
Or does he just enjoy creating one strawman argument after another as a sort of dialectic device ?
Of course he knows I never said any such thing, but he continues to harp on it, as if somehow repeating it twenty nine times is going to finally convince anybody that I said it.
It's a little odd Jeff.? If you're trying to convince people of something, you should at least be able to follow a normal argument.? The fact that you cannot seem to comprehend what I said doesn't speak very well to your ability to comprehend what some dusty law book said.
-----Original Message-----
From: binky <bin...@gmail.com>
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com
The question is:
Will says it does.
binky
I'm not goimg to take the bait.
Here's the URL for the Virginia Bar Association:
Here's a toll free number for their Lawyer Referral Service:
The VBA will direct you to an attorney who will answer your question,
probably for free. Anyone else can do it, too.
You're not a coward, are you Will?