Questions? See the HELP paragraph near the end of this newsletter.

Please note that this message was sent to: %%nameemail%% at %%emailaddr%%.


Eastman's Online Genealogy Newsletter

Plus Edition

A Weekly Summary of Events and Topics of Interest to Online Genealogists

Vol. 9 No. 6 – February 9, 2004

This newsletter relies solely upon "word of mouse" advertising. If you enjoy reading these articles, please tell others to go to

Some of the articles in this Plus Edition newsletter are restricted to your personal use.

Search previous issues of Standard Edition newsletters at:

Plus Edition subscribers may gain access to a reserved section of the Discussion Board. Details are available at

All opinions expressed in this document are those of Dick Eastman and his alone, unless otherwise attributed. None of his statements are to be interpreted as endorsements by his employer, by the other authors or by advertisers.

Copyright© 2004 by Richard W. Eastman. All rights reserved.


- The 1890 U.S. Census: Not Everything Was Destroyed
- Sears Black Family Reunion and Genealogy Resource Center
- Royal Ancestry of the Next U.S. President
- Planting Your Family Tree Online
- Scottish Genealogy Sources to Consolidate
- Fraud Trial Defendant Admits to Claiming a False Genealogy
- There Were Three Brothers And…
- Find Out the History Behind Your Name
- Who Was Saint Valentine?
- (+) Someone is Spying on You and Your PC
- (+) DNA Cover-Up... Uncovered
- Naming the Baby 2.0

Items marked with a Plus Sign (+) appear only in the Plus Edition newsletter.

Ink fades and paper deteriorates at a rate inversely proportional to the value of the data recorded.

- The 1890 U.S. Census: Not Everything Was Destroyed

Beginning U.S. genealogists soon learn that the 1890 census records were destroyed in a fire in the basement of the Commerce Building on January 10, 1921. Many people who would like to see these records just shrug their shoulders and move on.

A short search on the Web, however, soon reveals that not all of the records were destroyed. In fact, the morning after the fire, Census Director Sam Rogers reported the extensive damage to the 1890 schedules, estimating that only 25 percent of the records were destroyed, with 50 percent of the remainder damaged by water, smoke, and fire. Salvage of the water-soaked and charred documents might be possible, reported the bureau, but saving even a small part would take a month, and it would take two to three years to copy and save all the records damaged in the fire. The preliminary assessment of Census Bureau Clerk T. J. Fitzgerald was far more sobering. Fitzgerald told reporters that the priceless 1890 records were "certain to be absolutely ruined. There is no method of restoring the legibility of a water-soaked volume."

Had the fire occurred in the year 2004, many of the volumes could have been saved. Today, water-soaked documents can be freeze dried, removing the water without creating additional damage to the pages. Unfortunately, such technology was not available in 1921.

Speculation and rumors about the cause of the blaze varied widely. Many suspected that a carelessly discarded cigarette or a lighted match was the cause. Employees were questioned about their smoking habits. Others believed the fire started among shavings in the carpenter shop or resulted from spontaneous combustion. At least one woman from Ohio felt certain the fire was part of a conspiracy to defraud her family of their rightful estate by destroying every vestige of evidence proving heirship! However, the true cause of the fire was never proven.

At the end of January, 1921, the records damaged in the fire were moved for temporary storage. Over the next few months, rumors spread that salvage attempts would not be made and that Census Director Sam Rogers had recommended that Congress authorize destruction of the 1890 census. Prominent historians, attorneys, and genealogical organizations wrote in protest to Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, the Librarian of Congress, and other government officials. The National Genealogical Society and the Daughters of the American Revolution formally petitioned Hoover and Congress, and the editor of the NGS Quarterly warned that a nationwide movement would begin among state societies and the press if Congress seriously considered destruction. The National Archives quickly denied that the records would be destroyed.

By May of 1921, the records were still piled in a large warehouse without proper storage. The records were quickly deteriorating as summer heat approached in the non-air conditioned warehouse. Census Director William Steuart ordered that the damaged records be transferred back to the census building, to be bound where possible, but at least put in some order for reference.

The water-soaked records remained at the census building for nearly eleven years, apparently not well cared for. In December 1932, in accordance with federal records procedures at the time, the Chief Clerk of the Bureau of Census sent the Librarian of Congress a list of papers no longer necessary for current business and scheduled for destruction. He asked the Librarian to report back to him any documents that should be retained for their historical interest. Item 22 on the list for Bureau of the Census read "Schedules, Population . . . 1890, Original."

The Librarian identified no records as permanent; the list was sent forward, and Congress authorized destruction of the remaining 1890 census records on February 21, 1933. Despite assurance by census officials in 1921 that the damaged records would not be destroyed, government bureaucrats did exactly that in the 1930s. Even worse, damaged and undamaged pages alike were destroyed. The entire process was not well publicized, with only minor notes buried inside governmental reports. The date of the actual destruction of the 1890 census records was never recorded although it probably was in 1935.

It seems sad that Washington bureaucrats quietly destroyed these valuable records without public review and scrutiny. However, the story does not end there. The bureaucrats overlooked some records! In 1953, National Archives found an additional set of 1890 census record fragments. These sets of extant fragments are from Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas, and the District of Columbia. These surviving fragments were preserved and microfilmed. They are still available today, despite the "common knowledge" that the 1890 U.S. Census was destroyed in a fire.

Before you disregard this census, you should always verify that the schedules you seek did not survive. If you are looking for ancestors in 1890 in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas, or the District of Columbia, you might have a pleasant surprise. Be aware that the surviving records are only a tiny fraction of the total records, even for those states. Nonetheless, you won't know until you check.

You can view National Archives Microfilm Publication M407 (3 rolls) and a corresponding index, National Archives Microfilm Publication M496 (2 rolls). Both microfilm series can be viewed at the National Archives, at the regional archives, at the thousands of LDS Family History Centers around the world, and at several other repositories.

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- Sears Black Family Reunion and Genealogy Resource Center

As part of Black History month, Sears, Roebuck and Co. has announced that it will partner with to launch a new Web site to help African-American families plan reunions and learn more about their genealogy. The new site features advice from Donna Beasley, author of The Family Reunion Planner.

You can see the new site at:

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- Royal Ancestry of the Next U.S. President

I won't predict the winner of November's presidential elections, but Gary Boyd Roberts does predict that the winner will have royal ancestry. Actually, that is a rather safe prediction. The leading candidates at this time are the incumbent, George W. Bush, and challengers Howard (Brush) Dean, (III) and John Forbes Kerry. All three have royal ancestry as documented by Roberts.

The royal lines of descents for these three men and for many others are covered in Gary Boyd Roberts' new book, Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants to the American Colonies or the United States. In fact, Roberts also documents the royal descent of First Lady Laura Bush in the same book. I had a chance to read the book this week and found it contain an almost overwhelming amount of information.

I should point out that Gary Boyd Roberts is one of my co-workers at the New England Historic Genealogical Society.

The new edition of Roberts' book describes three of Howard Dean's lines of descent from royal ancestry: through colonial forebears Thomas Trowbridge of New Haven and Mrs. Agnes Harris Spencer Edwards of Hartford, and also through Dean's great-great-grandfather, James William Maitland (died 1860) of New York, who was descended three times over from James IV, King of Scotland (died 1513), grandfather of Mary Queen of Scots.

Senator John Kerry has always claimed to have Austrian ancestry (see my newsletter of February 10, 2003 at although some newspaper reporters thought he was Irish. In fact, Kerry's grandfather was born Fritz Kohn in Austria but later changed his name to Frederick Kerry after arriving in the U.S. Little is known about his ancestry.

In the new "Royal Descents" book, Roberts traces the ancestry of Kerry's mother, Rosemary Forbes, back to Reverend John Forbes (died 1783), a noted Anglican clergyman and magistrate in East Florida. Rev. Forbes' wife was Dorothy Murray, daughter of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's matrilineal immigrant ancestors, James Murray of North Carolina and Massachusetts and Barbara Bennet of North Carolina. (This shows the relationship between John Kerry and Franklin Delano Roosevelt: fourth cousins twice removed.) The Forbeses, Murrays and Bennets all have royal ancestry. John Kerry's maternal ancestry also includes several governors of Massachusetts.

George W. Bush's royal ancestry has been well documented for years by Gary Boyd Roberts and others. Bush's multiple royal lines are also listed in the new Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants to the American Colonies or the United States.

The book is a monster at 912 pages with each page listing many names. I am not sure how many individuals are mentioned in this book. It must be tens of thousands of names, perhaps hundreds of thousands. The book has an extensive 200+ page (!) index that simplifies finding the information you seek. The lines of descent listed in this book also include extensive source citations, showing where the original information was found. Verifying any information in this reference book should be easy.

Author Gary Boyd Roberts has excellent genealogy credentials. He is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Yale and also a graduate of the University of Chicago. He is the author of six books (including The American Ancestors and Cousins of the Princess of Wales) and the editor of another twenty. He has worked at the New England Historic Genealogical Society (NEHGS) since 1974. Mr. Roberts also is a frequent genealogy consultant to the media.

Do you have royal ancestry? If you have traced your genealogy back to colonial times anywhere along the eastern seaboard of the U.S., you should check this book to find out. Start comparing your list of ancestors with the huge index in this book. You may be pleasantly – and royally – surprised.

Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants is available for $75.00 from its publisher, Genealogical Publishing Company, at You probably can also order it from any bookstore if you specify ISBN 0-8063-1745-0.

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- Planting Your Family Tree Online

Another new book appeared on my desk this week: Planting Your Family Tree Online. It is subtitled, "How to Create Your Own Family History Web Site" and was written by Cyndi Howells. Yes, that is the same Cyndi Howells who is also the creator and caretaker of Cyndi's List, a Web site with more than 200,000 links to various genealogy Web sites, sorted and categorized in a manner that makes it easier to find information that you seek. Cyndi obviously has seen a lot of genealogy Web sites, both good ones and bad. Who could be better qualified to give you recommendations about creating your genealogy Web site?

The book is the latest in a series of guides being produced by the U.S. National Genealogical Society. I noticed that Amy Johnson Crow of the NGS was listed as editor of Planting Your Family Tree Online.

Traditionally, genealogists worked for years on their family lines and then published on paper so that others could share the results of that labor of love. In the past decade, the World Wide Web has added a new dimension. Publishing first on the Web has numerous advantages:

Typically, the twenty-first century genealogist publishes a Web site first for a number of years, then publishes the results on paper at a later date. With the additional input from Web viewers, the final printed material can be more valuable and higher-quality than that produced by a lone genealogist working without assistance.

Planting Your Family Tree Online starts with the basics, explaining why you even want a genealogy Web site. Each new chapter builds upon the previous in a logical manner. The end result may not transform the reader into an expert, but he or she certainly will be far more knowledgeable as a result of reading this book.

The book's chapters are titled:

  1. Why You Need a Genealogy Web Site
  2. Find a Home for Your Web Site
  3. Plan Ahead for a Successful Genealogy Web Site
  4. Structure Your Genealogy Web Site
  5. Select the Contents for Your Genealogy Web Site
  6. Create the Basic Web Pages
  7. Personalize Your Web Site with Color and Style
  8. Customize Your Web Site
  9. Enhance Your Web Site with Extras
  10. Guarantee Success: Common Web Site Dos and Don'ts
  11. Check Your Work and Give Your Site a Trial Run
  12. Make It Official: Publicize Your New Web Site
  13. Keep Your Web Site Alive and Kicking: Give It a Checkup

The book ends with four appendixes concerning genealogy standards, a glossary of terms, and a full index.

Cyndi Howells writes in plain English, not in "geek double-talk." Of course, there is a smattering of technical terms in this book, as one might expect. However, Cyndi explains the terms in laymen's language. You do not need to be a computer expert to read and understand this book.

If you are thinking of starting a genealogy Web site, or if you have a site already and are looking for ways to improve it, this book is for you. The book is "geographically neutral;" that is, its words apply equally to those throughout the rest of the world as they do to those in the United States.

Planting Your Family Tree Online retails for $19.99 although the publisher, Rutledge Hill Press, is selling it online for $15.99. You can find that at The NGS Bookstore sells it to members for $15.99 and to non-members for $19.99 at However, I also found the same book selling for $13.99 on at These prices do not include shipping or taxes. Any other bookstore should be able to obtain Planting Your Family Tree Online for you if you specify ISBN 1-4016-0022-0.

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- Scottish Genealogy Sources to Consolidate

It is estimated that 28 million people worldwide claim Scottish ancestry, many of whom make the trip to Scotland to see where their ancestors lived and to search the records available there. An estimated 260,000 tourists made the trip to Scotland in 2001 alone. This represents a major source of tourist income, a fact that the Scottish government has not overlooked.

The main records used to research Scottish ancestors are held by three separate institutions: the General Register Office for Scotland (GROS), National Archives of Scotland (NAS), and the Court of the Lord Lyon. They occupy two buildings at the east end of Princes Street in Edinburgh: General Register House and New Register House. The government recently unveiled plans for a new Scottish family history centre based in Edinburgh. The £1.6 million (nearly $3 million U.S. dollars) centre, which will be up and running in 2006, will create a "one-stop shop" for family history or genealogy research. It will bring together services currently provided separately by the GROS, NAS, and Court of the Lord Lyon.

The new Family History Centre will make records more easily accessible by providing one single point of access to the genealogical resources held by all three institutions. There will be a single entrance to the new centre. Online visitors will also find one seamless online point to all searchable databases of the three organizations.

The work on the new centre will begin in spring 2005 and is expected to take 12 months to complete.

For further information, look at the General Register Office for Scotland at and at the National Archives of Scotland at Another official source of genealogical data for Scotland is, while provides access to Scottish wills and testaments from 1500 to 1901.

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- Fraud Trial Defendant Admits to Claiming a False Genealogy

The lure of gambling casinos on Indian land within the U.S. has attracted many people. Ronald Roberts, also known as Sachem Golden Eagle, apparently was one of them. He claimed Indian ancestry and tried to obtain Federal recognition for his "tribe." The government found irregularities in his claim and prosecuted him for fraud. His defense crumbled on Friday when Roberts pleaded guilty to filing a false federal application for tribal recognition by faking his own genealogy, a grandfather's death certificate, and the 1845 state census.

The self-proclaimed leader of the Western Mohegan Tribe and Nation had been trying to establish the tribe's Native American dominion since 1997. Prosecutors said he thought it would be his way to break into the gaming industry. Roberts filed a New York land claim in 2003 in 10 counties – including Rensselaer and Albany – seeking millions in rent over 200 years on 900,000 acres of public land, including the Capitol.

He and his associates claimed to be descendants of Indians who remained in the Hudson Valley in the late 1700s, when most of the tribe migrated elsewhere.

You can read more about this story in the Albany, New York Times-Union Web site at

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- There Were Three Brothers And…

Genealogy newcomers often trip over the "three brothers" story. It has been repeated thousands of times. I have yet to see one instance in which it is accurate.

The story always starts with something like this:

There were three brothers who immigrated to America. One went north, one went south, and one headed west, never to be heard from again.

It is an interesting story, and you might almost believe it. After all, how else can you explain the fact that the same surname pops up in so many places?

What fascinates me is that there are always three brothers, never two or four or five or six. And didn’t they have any sisters? Why did they go in three different directions? Couldn't two of them go someplace together while the third struck out on his own? Why does each one take a different trip?

An examination of thousands of immigration and naturalization records shows that brothers usually remained close-knit and usually resided near each other after immigration. The "three brothers" myth apparently was invented and repeated by lazy genealogists who could not be bothered to find the truth. It is a poor excuse for why the same surname appears in multiple locations.

When searching for surnames in immigration records, you normally will find more than one immigrant of the name. In many cases, each immigrant did not know the others and moved to wherever he pleased. Later genealogists tried to justify the appearance of one surname in multiple locations and assumed something that is not documented in any records.

Be wary of the three brothers myth. You always want to confirm such claims to establish that indeed there were three brothers instead of three unrelated men with the same last name. Yes, someplace in history there probably were three brothers somewhere who split up and went separate ways. But 99.9% of the "three brothers" stories you will hear are fictitious.

Speaking of genealogy myths, in a future newsletter I will write about Cherokee princesses.

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- Find Out the History Behind Your Name

Until the thirteenth century, most people in England were known only by their first names. They did not have last names (surnames) at all. A few members of England's upper class of society started using an extra name, or surname, to identify the family members. Little by little, the practice of using surnames propagated downward though English society. By the end of the sixteenth century, almost everyone in England had adopted a surname. These surnames were passed down from father to sons and to daughters, indicating family members.

Many of the early surnames were based on a person's relationship with another, their trade, where they lived, or even their appearance or character. For example:

Johnson normally means "John's son."

Nottingham is the name given to many who lived in Nottingham, England.

Smith was applied to blacksmiths, tinsmiths or other tradesmen.

Ford would be a name given to someone who lived near a shallow river crossing.

Black might indicate someone with black hair or a swarthy complexion.

Indeed, it is quite possible that your name came from England of the late Middle Ages. To be sure, there have been tens of thousands of name changes since then. Your family may not be from England at all, even if you do now carry an English-sounding surname. Yet, it can be interesting to find the original meaning of your surname as it was originally used in England.

Family Chronicle Magazine has compiled a list of the more common surnames and their original meanings. Try one of the links below to discover the origin of your surname.

A-E Surnames

F-L Surnames

M-R Surnames

S-Z Surnames

Please note that there is no insinuation that this applies to your earliest ancestors. These surname meanings simply indicate that someone was given that surname for the reason listed. That "someone" may or may not be your ancestor. Indeed, the names mentioned above (Johnson, Nottingham, Ford and Black) are common and were given to many unrelated families. The same may be true of your surname.

How common is your surname in America? Smith, Johnson, Williams, Jones, and Brown are the most commonly occurring surnames in the United States today. Find out how common or unique your surname is at the PBS Web site at

If you have an interest in this topic, you might also enjoy these Web sites:

U.S. Census Bureau Distribution of Last Names:

American Surnames by Elsdon C. Smith:

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- Who Was Saint Valentine?

Valentine’s Day is the second most popular holiday to send a card. The Greeting Card Association claims that an estimated one billion cards are sent each year. Yet, most of the people who send the cards have no idea who Saint Valentine was. Even historians cannot agree.

According to some authorities, there were two Valentines. One was a priest and doctor who was martyred in the year 269, and the other was the bishop of Terni, who was brought to Rome to be tortured and executed in 273. Others say it was the same person. Both men (or the same man) have legends attributed to them concerning love and matrimony, legends that may or may not be true.

According to one rendition, Roman Emperor Claudius II issued an edict saying that his soldiers were not allowed to be married. Apparently, Claudius thought that married soldiers weren't as good as single soldiers. As you might imagine, this news was not well received among the military men. Valentine obviously disagreed with the edict and continued to marry young couples, even though Claudius forbade it. When Claudius found out, he ordered Valentine to be beheaded, and the sentence was soon carried out.

Whether the stories involve one man or two, Pope Gelasius declared February 14 as St. Valentine’s Day around 498 A.D.

Recognition of the holiday clearly had taken hold by the Middle Ages. At that time, it was believed that birds begin mating in the middle of February. Even Chaucer wrote in the fourteenth century, "For this was sent on Seynt Valentyne’s day, whan every foul cometh ther to choose his mate."

Nonetheless, this martyred saint probably is responsible for the fact that many of us are alive and walking the earth today. Without the excuse of Saint Valentine's Day, how many of our ancestors would never have courted and consequently never have married? How many of us would not have been born? Perhaps we all owe a debt of gratitude to Saint Valentine for our very existence.

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

- (+) Someone is Spying on You and on Your PC

The following is a "preview" of a Plus Edition-only article.

The World Wide Web is becoming an increasingly hostile world. It seems that we read daily about some new virus or Trojan Horse program designed to wreak havoc on your computer and on millions of other computers around the world. I have written several times about the need to use anti-virus software and also the need to make backups.

However, another form of unwanted software intrusion into your computer also is alive and propagating in the wild. While these parasites do not destroy anything, they do surreptitiously take over your computer and display unwanted advertising without your permission. Do you see unwanted advertisements on your PC? When you visit one company's site, does an ad for a competitor's site pop up or perhaps appear in the lower right corner of your screen? If so, your PC is infected with one of these intruders.

Some of these programs also collect information about you and your Web surfing habits, then stealthily send that information back to those who produce the unwanted software. The polite term for these unwanted programs is "context sensitive marketing." However, they are more commonly referred to as "adware" or "scumware."

Sadly, even online genealogists are subjected to this form of parasite advertising. If you have seen genealogy ads pop up at unexpected times on your PC, your system undoubtedly is infected with scumware. Similarly, pornography sites are also frequent users of scumware. If your PC frequently pops up ads that your children should not see, your system probably is infected.

To remove the parasites, you first need to know how they operate.

The preceding is a "preview" of a Plus Edition-only article. The full article is available only to Plus Edition subscribers. Click on Plus Edition for more information.

[Return to Table of Contents]

- (+)DNA Cover-Up... Uncovered

By Nancy Nix

The following is a "preview" of a Plus Edition-only article written by Nancy Nix:

For years I have been convinced there is a group out there against Average Joe/Jane. I call them the Conspiracy Group. I knew, but could not prove, that several groups had the same mission. That they would twist, turn, and just plain hide things from us in order to achieve their goal. They are willing to use any means at their disposal. Their motivation seems to be varied according to group, but they are ruthless. Their goal is to endeavor to make us think they are so very bright and what they know is on such a higher level of intelligence that we could never understand it.

Sound familiar? There are the ones who are motivated by power, Senators and Politicians. Then there are Lawyers and Advertisers and Auto Mechanics who do it for money. They convince themselves it’s all right because it’s their job. Next comes Artists and Mathematicians, who I admit, do not really mean to set out to deceive; they were just born with an extra something (flair?) that we don’t and never will have and could not possibly understand. They do it for recognition. Recently, I discovered another group. I didn’t want to believe it and took a long time in the research, hoping it wasn’t true. Sadly, I’ve found that it’s true. It’s the Doctors.

The preceding is a "preview" of a Plus Edition-only article. The full article is available only to Plus Edition subscribers. Click on Plus Edition for more information.

[Return to Table of Contents]

- Naming the Baby 2.0

It had to happen. Sooner or later, someone uses geek expressions when naming their baby.

Families in Western cultures have been naming children after the parents or other relatives for centuries. In modern day English-speaking countries, we normally append the phrase "Junior" or "the second" when a male child is named after the father. Additional generations typically are named "the third," "the fourth," and so on.

Now Jon Blake Cusack and his wife have named their new son Jon Blake Cusack 2.0. Yes, that's "two point oh" instead of "Junior."

Jon Blake Cusack 2.0 was born on Tuesday of this past week at the Holland (Michigan) Community Hospital. The boy's father is a self-described engineering geek. He said that he had the idea for the name for a few months. He spent the better part of that time convincing his wife, Jamie, to include 2.0 in their child's legal name. She finally conceded last week.

"We watched a movie called 'The Legend of 1900' and there was a baby in the movie who was abandoned by his mother on a ship," Jamie Cusack said. "Those who found him called him 1900 because of the year.

"I thought that if they could do it, why couldn't we? Besides, I had picked out the theme of the baby's room and done other things. I decided to let Jon have this."

When their son was born, Jon Cusack sent out an e-mail and wrote it as if he and his wife had created new software. "I wrote in the birth announcement e-mail stuff, like there's a lot of features from version 1.0 with additional features from Jamie," Jon Cusack said.

I guess we will have to wait another twenty years or so for version 3.0. Of course, the elder Jon Blake Cusack might upgrade to wife 2.0 in the meantime.

What Do You Think? Comments and discussion are available on this newsletter's Discussion Board at:

[Return to Table of Contents]

The PR Budget for this newsletter is $0.00. I rely upon "word of mouse" advertising in which you recommend this newsletter to your friends. This newsletter is a private project of mine, and I have a zero budget for a publicity campaign to get more readers.

In each issue, I try to offer you useful, interesting and sometimes amusing information to help you with your genealogy efforts. Can you take a minute to help me out in return? If you think this newsletter is a worthwhile read, please tell your friends. Better yet, suggest they can read the Standard Edition or subscribe to the Plus Edition at


Are you interested in the articles in this newsletter? Would you like to learn more or ask questions or make comments about these articles? Join this newsletter’s online Discussion Board at

You can also search past newsletters at:

If you would like to submit news, information or press releases for possible inclusion in future newsletters, send them to The author does reserve the right to accept or reject any articles submitted.

COPYRIGHTS and Other Legal Things:

The contents of this newsletter are copyright by Richard W. Eastman with the following exception:

Many of the articles published in these newsletters contain quotes or references from others, especially from other Web sites, software user’s manuals, press releases and other public announcements. Any words in this newsletter attributed to another person or organization remain the copyrighted materials of the original author(s).

This document is provided for informational purposes only. The information contained in this document represents the views of Richard W. Eastman with one exception: words written by other authors and republished herein are the views solely of those authors. All information provided in this document is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. The reader assumes the entire risk as to the accuracy and the use of this document.

You are hereby granted rights, unless otherwise specified, to re-distribute articles from this newsletter to other parties provided:

    1. You do so strictly for non-commercial purposes
    2. Articles marked with a Plus Sign (+) are not to be redistributed. Those articles are solely for the use of Plus Edition subscribers.
    3. You may not republish any articles containing words attributed to another person or organization until you obtain permission from that person or organization. While you do have permission to republish words written by Richard W. Eastman, you do not have automatic authority to republish words written by others, even if their words appear in this newsletter.

Also, please include the following statement with any articles you re-distribute:

The following article is from Eastman’s Online Genealogy Newsletter and is copyright 2004 by Richard W. Eastman. It is re-published here with the permission of the author. Information about the newsletter is available at

Anyone complying with the above does not need to ask permission in advance.

Permission to use the words in this document for commercial purposes usually is granted. However, commercial use requires advance authorization.

Thank you for your cooperation.


Be aware that the biggest problem faced when sending e-mail newsletters is spam filters in e-mail servers. Although the problem plagues many, many newsletters and other types of perfectly legitimate email, this newsletter seems to be particularly susceptible. It is quite long, and contains numerous examples of the kinds of things that spam blacklists, in their infinite wisdom, have deemed to be "spam like." Therefore, numerous email servers will delete this newsletter under the assumption that it is spam.

If you all of a sudden stop receiving your copy of the newsletter (and this happens more than you might think), don't just assume I skipped an issue or there's something wrong with the newsletter's distribution. I rarely skip an issue without noting that in advance. If you stop receiving the newsletter, chances are that it's not a problem with your subscription; it's a problem with your mail server or your spam filter. That is the number one cause of newsletter subscription problems.


Dick Eastman is employed by the New England Historic Genealogical Society, serving as Assistant Executive Director for Technology. He is a frequent presenter at major genealogy conferences. He has published articles in Genealogical Computing and Family Chronicle magazines and for a number of Web sites. He was an advisor to PBS' Ancestry series and appeared as a guest in one of the episodes. He is a past Director of GENTECH and of the New England Computer Genealogists. Dick is the author of YOUR ROOTS: Total Genealogy Planning On Your Computer published by Ziff-Davis Press. He can be reached at: Due to the volume of e-mail received, he is unable to answer every e-mail message received.

If you have questions or comments about the article in this newsletter, go to this newsletter's Discussion Board at Post your message there. You will receive then assistance from Dick Eastman or from a number of other people.


To obtain a subscription to Eastman’s Online Genealogy Newsletter – Plus Edition, go to

To receive a free e-mail notification whenever a new Standard Edition of the newsletter becomes available, go to

If you have any questions about your subscription, send a message to


Need to change your e-mail address? Receiving duplicate Issues? Need other assistance with your subscription? Want to access the private Plus Edition subscribers' section of the Discussion Board? Go to

AOL 9.0 users: If the hotlinks in this newsletter do not work for you, add the newsletter's e-mail address to your "Persons I Know" buddy list.

AOL members may want to read more about AOL's other e-mail problems at:

[Return to Table of Contents]