DUTTON-L Archives

Archiver > DUTTON > 2000-08 > 0967323401


From: "Doug Hall" <>
Subject: Re: Ancestry
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 16:56:41 -0400
References: <3.0.5.32.20000825180410.00805100@m2.sprynet.com>


Very good reply, Darrell!

Doni - please be very cautious in using anything from Dick Dutton's file!!!
I need to repeat here that you should take nothing in that file as FACT
until you can verify it from an original source or a well-respected
secondary source that cites an original source. Dick did a good job of
compiling a lot of stuff he found in hundreds of different places. But he
never claimed that what was in his file was fully accurate. I'm sure if he
were still alive, he would himself be issuing this warning!!

Doug



----- Original Message -----
From: Darrell A. Martin <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: Ancestry


> At 04:10 PM 08/25/2000 EDT, wrote:
> >Hi All:
> > Now that Doug has taken the lead in, and the enormous chore of,
providing
> >us with a copy of Dick Dutton's file, I thought it might be worth posting
> >what I understand is my line. Maybe I have some cousins on here. Might be
fun
> >to share and compare our particular ancestors.
>
> [snip]
>
> >Benjamin's father was
> >Joseph Dutton (1660/1661-1733-1734) m. Mary Cutler
> >Thomas Dutton (bet. 1619-1622 - 1686/1687) m. Susannah Palmer
> >John Dutton (1596-1693) m. Mary
> >
> > If anyone sees any errors, please let me know. Our line went from MA
to
> >New Haven, CT and on to Chautauqua County, NY.
>
> [snip]
>
> >Doni in CA
>
> Hi, Doni:
>
> Just a comment on two items that have been around for a LONG time but
which are either known to be correct or which have no foundation in evidence
that I have been able to find:
>
> 1. That Thomas DUTTON's wife's maiden name was PALMER is not known. It was
so reported for many years in the LDS CD's (in the line of Joseph Smith the
Prophet, yet). After a rather spirited cyber-battle between a persistent but
evidence-less lady and the LDS editors, the surname PALMER has been
retracted in favor of "unknown."
>
> 2. That Thomas DUTTON is the son of "Massachusetts John" DUTTON is
speculation, although in my opinion quite likely. I am descended in two
lines from this Thomas, and would dearly love to see evidence to connect him
to John (or for that matter any other ancestor! <grin>).
>
> 3. That "Massachusetts John" DUTTON had a wife named Mary is possible, but
only because we don't know her name at all and Mary is a common female name.
All of the assertions to the effect that this John's wife was named Mary
come from a confusion of "Massachusetts John" with "Pennsylvania John." That
"Pennsylvania John's" wife was named Mary is solidly documented.
>
> Sorry for the dousing with cold water, but there is nobody more interested
than I am in *proving* the Thomas-John connection and their antecedents; and
old fables and plain errors just confuse things. You aren't the first to
report this info, and I am resigned to the idea that you won't be the last.
Don't be embarrassed, or whatever; most of us (my hand is raised as high as
any) have "been there, thought that." Join us in the hunt!
>
> Darrell
>
>
> Darrell A. Martin
> a native of the Dutton District, Springfield, Vermont
> no longer proud to have been a Vermonter
> but still proud of my Vermont roots
> currently in exile in Addison, Illinois
>
>

This thread: