Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
James Kinloch, of South Carolina
80 views
Skip to first unread message
Leo
Jan 28, 2013, 8:18:25 PM1/28/13
to GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com
James Kinloch 1683-1757 was married (1) Mrs Susannah Strode (2) Marie Esther Page
James Kinloch is a descendant of Charlemagne
source GBR 600 Immigrants, 2004 page 37
Does anyone know whether he had children and further descendants?
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
James Kinloch is a descendant of Charlemagne
source GBR 600 Immigrants, 2004 page 37
Does anyone know whether he had children and further descendants?
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
kelsey.jack...@googlemail.com
Jan 29, 2013, 6:33:08 AM1/29/13
to GEN-MED...@rootsweb.com, Leo
Dear Leo,
He did. A nice several generation pedigree can be reconstructed from the following items:
1) "We hear that on Friday was 7-night, Mr. Francis Kinloch, only son of the Hon. James Kinloch, Esq., was married to Miss Nancy Cleland, the only child of the Hon. John Cleland, Esq., a young lady of fine accomplishments with a large fortune. Monday, February 18, 1751 (A. S. Salley, Jr., _Marriage Notices in The South-Carolina Gazette and its Successors (1732-1801)_ (Albany, N.Y., 1902), p. 14).
2) Will of Francis Kinloch of the Province of South Carolina, made 2 January 1763. Names beloved wife Ann; daughter Mary Esther (under 21); Eldest sons Francis and Cleland; Son James (under 21); cousin David Kinloch of Gilmerton in Scotland and his children; nephew Charles Crokatt of London, merchant, and his children. Witnesses: Benjamin Young, William Shackleford, John Stewart. Proved 13 November 1767 (Charleston, South Carolina Will Book 11 [1767-1771], pp. 227-237).
There's a good account of this family by H. D. Bull, "Kinloch of South Carolina", _South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine_ 46 (1945): 63-69. According to Bull, the younger Francis, Cleland, and Mary Esther (who married Benjamin Huger), all left descendants in America.
For the record -- thinking back to the general questioning of American royal descents here a few days ago -- the link between James Kinloch and his Scottish ancestors would seem (per Bull) to derive not only from Francis' will, but also from a 1747 entail of the Gilmerton estate, so is apparently about as water-tight as these things can be.
All the best,
Kelsey
He did. A nice several generation pedigree can be reconstructed from the following items:
1) "We hear that on Friday was 7-night, Mr. Francis Kinloch, only son of the Hon. James Kinloch, Esq., was married to Miss Nancy Cleland, the only child of the Hon. John Cleland, Esq., a young lady of fine accomplishments with a large fortune. Monday, February 18, 1751 (A. S. Salley, Jr., _Marriage Notices in The South-Carolina Gazette and its Successors (1732-1801)_ (Albany, N.Y., 1902), p. 14).
2) Will of Francis Kinloch of the Province of South Carolina, made 2 January 1763. Names beloved wife Ann; daughter Mary Esther (under 21); Eldest sons Francis and Cleland; Son James (under 21); cousin David Kinloch of Gilmerton in Scotland and his children; nephew Charles Crokatt of London, merchant, and his children. Witnesses: Benjamin Young, William Shackleford, John Stewart. Proved 13 November 1767 (Charleston, South Carolina Will Book 11 [1767-1771], pp. 227-237).
There's a good account of this family by H. D. Bull, "Kinloch of South Carolina", _South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine_ 46 (1945): 63-69. According to Bull, the younger Francis, Cleland, and Mary Esther (who married Benjamin Huger), all left descendants in America.
For the record -- thinking back to the general questioning of American royal descents here a few days ago -- the link between James Kinloch and his Scottish ancestors would seem (per Bull) to derive not only from Francis' will, but also from a 1747 entail of the Gilmerton estate, so is apparently about as water-tight as these things can be.
All the best,
Kelsey
0 new messages