I should have added that you will need to search that URL for "genealogy".
Good luck.
Paul
Genealogy without documentation is nothing.
Paul Drake JD
Genealogist & Author
<www.DrakesBooks.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Drake
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: [VA-ROOTS] VA-ROOTS Digest - 8 Apr 2006 to 9 Apr 2006 (#2006-61)
Their copy service is accessible here.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/
Genealogy without documentation is nothing.
Paul Drake JD
Genealogist & Author
<www.DrakesBooks.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: Trueman Farris
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 9:39 AM
Subject: Re: [VA-ROOTS] VA-ROOTS Digest - 8 Apr 2006 to 9 Apr 2006 (#2006-61)
Hi.
Will someone tell me how to obtain copies of material from the Library of
Congress?
Thanks, [log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Automatic digest processor" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "Recipients of VA-ROOTS digests" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 11:00 PM
Subject: VA-ROOTS Digest - 8 Apr 2006 to 9 Apr 2006 (#2006-61)
> There are 10 messages totalling 577 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. DNA (9)
> 2. Cemeteries and DNA
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 02:10:55 -0400
> From: Westview <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> As a professional archaeologist who has excavated many burials in the
> course
> of my career please let me chime in. Burial grounds are "owned" by the
> people buried in them and their descendants. I put "owned" in quotes
> because it is more in the sense of a private claim to the property as
> opposed to a deeded parcel (although some family plots are contained in
> deeds). They are supposed to be registered with the county Office of
> Revenue as a cemetery, at which point the parcel is permanently placed on
> the tax map and it becomes tax exempt. A cemetery has no assessed value
> and
> cannot be disturbed in any way without a lengthy court process -- even
> then,
> permission is usually denied unless there is a compelling reason.
>
> As Joanne noted, free access must be given to descendants or anyone with a
> "reasonable" interest, e.g. historians, genealogists. This does not mean
> that you can go traipsing into someone's yard unannounced. While
> technically you must always ask permission before entering someone's land,
> if the cemetery is in the middle of nowhere, and the land is not posted No
> Trespassing, it probably won't hurt to go look at it. But, if the land is
> posted or it is in the immediate vicinity of someone's home, you MUST ask
> permission or risk arrest for trespass. Most property owners will give
> you
> permission -- by law they MUST allow you reasonable access if you have a
> legitimate reason for asking it. If they refuse permission you can apply
> to
> the court for access.
>
> It is a violation of state and, in some cases, federal law to violate or
> disturb a burial in anyway. In Virginia (and I believe most states),
> disturbing a grave is a felony. Archaeologists and other professionals
> must apply for permits to excavate burials, and they must show very
> compelling reasons. Short of as part of a full-blown archaeological
> project, permission is rarely granted. In Maryland (where I excavated
> burials), permission is sought through the State's Attorney's office. In
> Virginia it is through the Department of Historic Resources and the court.
> While I can't say for sure, I doubt very much that you would get an
> exhumation order for DNA testing of this sort. Satisfying personal
> curiosity is not considered a compelling reason.
>
> For those interested in reading the laws regarding cemeteries, they may be
> found at the Code of Virginia on-line database
> http://leg1.state.va.us/000/src.htm --- a very useful site for many
> purposes. Search on "burials" or enter the reference number. Pertinent
> to
> this case are:
> 18.2-126 Violation of Sepulture. . .
> 57-27.1 Access to cemeteries located on private property. . .
>
> If it is any consolation, Jim, it is unlikely that anything remains of
> your
> ancestor. Occasionally archaeologists do uncover well-preserved skeletal
> remains, but after almost 25 years in the field I can tell you that that
> is
> the exception. In the overwhelming number of cases it is truly dust to
> dust, with sometimes nary a stain left. While in some cases it has been
> done, and the science is getting better all the time, retrieving DNA from
> even well-preserved skeletons is not as easy as they make it seem on CSI
> et
> al. I wish I could tell you differently, Jim, but you're going to have to
> find your proof another way.
>
> Kathy Liston
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 07:02:50 -0700
> From: qvarizona <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> Very interesting information, Kathy; thanks for sharing an archaeologist's
> knowledge. In addition to the website you listed, here's another that I
> found last night. (What ever did we do before Google?)
>
> http://www.dhr.virginia.gov/home.htm
>
> For those too busy to check the site out, The Code of Virginia (§
> 57-27.1) requires, among other things, that, "Owners of private property
> on which a cemetery or graves are located shall have a duty to allow
> ingress and egress to the cemetery or graves by (i) family members or
> descendants of deceased persons buried there; (ii) any cemetery plot
> owner; and (iii) any person engaging in genealogy research . . ." The Code
> does allow the property owner to designate "the frequency of access, hours
> and duration of the access and the access route if no traditional access
> route is obviously visible by a view of the property."
>
> Scroll down to Cemetery Preservation and FAQs for more.
>
> Joanne
>
>
> Westview <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> As a professional archaeologist who has excavated many burials in the
> course of my career please let me chime in. . . .
>
> . . . .For those interested in reading the laws regarding cemeteries, they
> may be found at the Code of Virginia on-line database
> http://leg1.state.va.us/000/src.htm --- a very useful site for many
> purposes. Search on "burials" or enter the reference number. Pertinent to
> this case are:18.2-126 Violation of Sepulture. . .57-27.1 Access to
> cemeteries located on private property. . .
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great
> rates starting at 1¢/min.
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 10:22:27 -0500
> From: Paul Drake <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> Kathy is correct, however in all matters where prohibitions are provided
> un=
> der certain circumstances by the law, the ultimate and bottom line
> question=
> (and the one I answered) is "OK, so the law says that, but the landowner
> s=
> ays that under no circumstances will he give me permission to come on the
> p=
> roperty. So what do I do=3F=3F=3F=3F"
>
> The REAL answer, no matter what the law says, is: Go to your lawyer,
> checkb=
> ook in hand, and tell him you want very much to enforce that portion of
> tha=
> t VA law that says the landowner must allow you ingress for a visit to
> that=
> cemetery. The lawyer will say to you, "OK, that is fine, but remember
> tha=
> t we must go to court and prove that what you want to do is 'reasonable'.
> H=
> e further will say, "I will require a retainer, and, of course, that case
> w=
> ill involve more money for me, for witnesses, for court costs and filing
> fe=
> es, several days away from work by you, and likely will take 6 weeks to 6
> y=
> ears before the court will hear your case and render a decision. Shall we
> g=
> o ahead, Mr. Client=3F=3F=3F" Then, you say what=3F=3F=3F=3F=3F=3F
>
> For the short while that I practiced law before opting for a business
> caree=
> r, I had a very good client named Bill. He called me on my car phone one
> m=
> orning and told me that a certain landowner - Mr. George Spradling - was
> si=
> tting atop some important equipment that Bill had left there when the
> lease=
> expired the day before, had locked the gate, and would not let Bill come
> o=
> n the property to recover that equipment. I said, "He has no right to
> keep=
> you out, Bill". He said "But Paul, what do I do about Mr. Spradling's
> sho=
> tgun=3F"
>
> The point is made; some rights are difficult and very costly to enforce.
>
>
> Genealogy without documentation is nothing.
> Paul Drake JD
> Genealogist & Author
> <www.DrakesBooks.com>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: qvarizona
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 9:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [VA-ROOTS] DNA
>
>
> Very interesting information, Kathy; thanks for sharing an
> archaeologist'=
> s knowledge. In addition to the website you listed, here's another that I
> =
> found last night. (What ever did we do before Google=3F)
>
> http://www.dhr.virginia.gov/home.htm
>
> For those too busy to check the site out, The Code of Virginia (=A7
> 57-27=
> .1) requires, among other things, that, "Owners of private property on
> whic=
> h a cemetery or graves are located shall have a duty to allow ingress and
> e=
> gress to the cemetery or graves by (i) family members or descendants of
> dec=
> eased persons buried there; (ii) any cemetery plot owner; and (iii) any
> per=
> son engaging in genealogy research . . ." The Code does allow the property
> =
> owner to designate "the frequency of access, hours and duration of the
> acce=
> ss and the access route if no traditional access route is obviously
> visible=
> by a view of the property."
>
> Scroll down to Cemetery Preservation and FAQs for more.
>
> Joanne
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 1979 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 09:42:26 -0700
> From: qvarizona <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> Paul,
> Point taken.
> FYI: It was the shotgun that convinced me.
> --Joanne
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save
> big.
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:23:45 -0500
> From: Paul Drake <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> Hi, Bill Davidson. See my comments interlineated below.
>
> Paul,
>
> In these cases, is there much chance , if any, that the person who takes
> th=
> e
> land owner to court will be able to recover his/her expenses/attorney fees
> (assuming, of course, that this person "wins")=3F
>
> *** A plaintiff often can so recover, however that is not true in all
> Sta=
> tes (the attorney will know or learn before he informs the client of that
> p=
> ossibility). Unless there is a contract (or a lease with such terms)
> prov=
> iding for those costs, etc., it becomes the task of the legislatures and
> of=
> the Congress to write such recovery into the law. If they do not, only in
> =
> the very rare cases would a court do so without such legislative
> authority.
>
> It seems that when a property owners association sues a specific
> property=
> owner for violating the
> covenants in a subdivision (for example), then the association can
> typica=
> lly
> recover all of their expenses/fees, in addition to forcing the property
> owner to correct whatever was "wrong" (again, assuming that the
> associati=
> on
> "wins").
>
> **** You hit the target. Agreements, covenants and such as arbitration
> c=
> lauses all are in the nature of "private law"; that is, when there is a
> dif=
> ference between what the agreement says and what the otherwise established
> =
> law may be, the parties ahead of time have agreed to additional or to
> diffe=
> rent provisions that will control when the parties disagree. So, without
> a=
> n agreement - covenant - to that effect, the court will employ the
> principl=
> es of property law and, in a more general sense, will consider the law as
> a=
> whole.
>
> Ican't remember for sure, but I think that this is part of the
> Code of Virginia, and expenses can be recovered at least via a lien on
> th=
> e
> specific property owner's property (if not by some more direct means,
> lik=
> e a
> judge's order....but I am not sure if the "judge's order technique" is
> ev=
> er
> employed....or if it is even legal). I don't know if the "legal battle"
> =
> to
> gain access to a grave would be handled in a similar fashion or not,
> sinc=
> e I
> don't know that the state code covers that situation in a similar
> fashion=
> .
>
> **** Your questions require that we look to an ages-old notion in the
> la=
> w. Always, we have either surrendered our positions or settled our
> differe=
> nces by agreement, court decision, or by "might" - arm wrestling, duels,
> fi=
> st fights, shotguns, and eeny meeny miney moe. The threat of any of such
> s=
> ometimes works very well, as witnessed by Mr. Spradling's shotgun.
>
> So, we must provide remedies at law, and society strives to do so.
> Notice=
> what we did by processioning. It was but a very effective extension of
> the=
> law, and as such prevented decisions through either violence or court
> acti=
> on. By having neighbors and other responsible parishioners, along with the
> =
> owners, walk or ride the property lines, and as differences arose between
> o=
> wners about the location of a line, such were settled on the spot with
> nith=
> er courts nor violence. How=3F All knew that should this church based
> proce=
> dure not solve their differences, they had to surrender their position or
> l=
> eave the matter to courts. Then, as now, courts cost money..
>
> **** So, all that said, no matter the nature of the differences or the
> st=
> atutes or private law in place, we always have had mechanisms to
> ultimately=
> settle our differences. The courts, as you suggested, have extensions of
> =
> their orders through Sheriff's enforcements their orders, liens,
> executions=
> of judgments, attachments, garnishments, the threat of jail, censure by
> th=
> e church (early), and all such like.
>
> How does this all apply to your questions=3F The principles named apply,
> n=
> o matter what a "law" may say, and where parties refuse to use the
> settleme=
> nt tools/methods provided ("obey the law", as we say), they should plan on
> =
> visiting a courtroom. The courts WILL settle the matter one way or
> another=
> .
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill Davidson
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 1979 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 15:13:41 -0400
> From: Bill Cross <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> Paul's point is well-taken.
>
> There is little way to make someone be reasonable. My father's mother's =
> people will not cooperate with me in any aspect of my genealogical =
> research. Whatever happened to alienate the families nearly 100 years =
> ago had not changed much 10 years ago when I tried to reach out to them =
> for some basic information. No sale. Nada. Niente.
>
> Bill Cross
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 15:05:00 -0500
> From: Paul Drake <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> Maybe some of us could approach those folks for you, Bill
> =3F=3F=3F=3F=3F=3F=3F=3F=3F
>
> Many of our ladies on this list are gentile to the extreme and very
> knowled=
> geable in questioning folks............. =3F=3F=3F
>
>
> Subject: Re: [VA-ROOTS] DNA
>
>
> Paul's point is well-taken.
>
> There is little way to make someone be reasonable. My father's mother's
> p=
> eople will not cooperate with me in any aspect of my genealogical
> research.=
> ....had not changed much 10 years ago when I tried to reach out to them
> fo=
> r some basic information. ....
> Bill Cross
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 1979 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:29:34 -0700
> From: Langdon Hagen-Long <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> If access to a private cemetery is denied by the owner, the genealogist
> has to go [after negotiating, I hope] to the Clerk of Circuit Court, very
> briefly explain the problem, ask to be put on the docket, fill out a form,
> which includes a request for reimbursement of expenses, and pay about $35.
> Depending on the court, the clerk will probably offer the genealogist
> several choices for a court date, and then set the date. The court takes
> care of sending subpoenas. The genealogist has to appear in court, and
> explain the denial of access to a judge. The burden of proving that the
> genealogist's request is unreasonable is on the cemetery owner. The owner
> would have to come up with a very good reason for denying access, such
> as: "he wanted to come at 3:00 AM with 50 people". The judge can do
> "what is fair", including ordering reimbursement for expenses, if it was
> requested. If he owner states that the genealogist was a real jerk when
> *demanding* access, and the judge
> believes him, the judge may not feel like ordering compensation, which is
> a matter of his discretion. [civility counts!]
>
> Law defines "reasonable" as what a reasonable man would consider
> normal behavior, such as entering a cemetery for the purpose of examining
> graves, recording dates, saying a prayer, leaving flowers, taking
> pictures, maintaining the cemetery, etc. But this law only requires that
> the *access* be reasonable, not the *reason* for visiting. Asking to
> bring 50 people at 3:00 AM, or even 6:00 AM may not be a reasonable
> access. Requesting a noon visit, for the purpose of research is
> reasonable. The law does not require a genealogist to explain his reasons
> for visiting to the cemetery owner, although it would certainly be
> advantageous and reasonable to do so. The law already states that
> anything falling under "visiting graves, maintaining the gravesite or
> cemetery, or conducting genealogy research" falls within the rights
> allowed. The genealogist only has to give, "reasonable notice", in
> advance. Again, "reasonable" is whatever an average person would consider
> right. [ie
> How much advance notice would you want?] Legally, 24 hours has been
> considered reasonable, even though courtesy required more. The landowner
> does not have to be reasonable. He can say, "Come back in 10 months, and
> I'll give you an hour", which is within his rights. If you plan to drive
> on a road on private property, you must have the owners *written
> permission*, since driving is excluded as a right. The landowner is immune
> from "slip and fall" suits, but is not immune from prosecution or law
> suits for misbehavior, which is explicitly explained in paragraph a.
>
> A homeowner or cemetery does not have the authority to allow a
> genealogist or scientist to disturb a grave. Graves are under the
> authority of city, county, and state government. Only the government can
> issue a permit for something like probing for DNA. In fact, beware - a
> permit is usually needed for even repair, planting, or painting a fence,
> in a city or county cemetery. The cost of permits for this type of
> activity, is still about $25, I think, but does not cover digging or
> probing graves]. A congenial property owner might grant a genealogist
> permission to dig, not being aware that he doesn't have the right to grant
> that permission.
>
> I think most problems can be solved by the Common Sense Rule: Be
> *Reasonable* and then think about how you would want to be treated - which
> usually requires going beyond *reasonable* and what is required by law.
> Offering the owner a history of the land, or offering to rake the area
> will work better than demanding access.
>
> Langdon Hagen-Long
>
>
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 16:42:11 -0500
> From: Paul Drake <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: DNA
>
> All true, Langdon, but all should remember that in the last analysis, no
> ma=
> tter what a court says, landowners sometimes stand at the gate with a
> shotg=
> un, in which case, we often have to seek enforcement of the rulings by the
> =
> sheriff, bailiff, or other appropriate member of the government. Remember
> t=
> oo that those procedures vary from state to state, even though all end up
> i=
> n a courtroom when all else fails. As I mentioned, the Jack Daniels,
> candy,=
> and a Bible may avoid all of that.
>
> The law very often is not exercised the way the laws, regulations and
> rules=
> intended.
>
> Genealogy without documentation is nothing.
> Paul Drake JD
> Genealogist & Author
> <www.DrakesBooks.com>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Langdon Hagen-Long
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [VA-ROOTS] DNA
>
>
> If access to a private cemetery is denied by the owner, the genealogist
> h=
> as to go [after negotiating, I hope] to the Clerk of Circuit Court, very
> b=
> riefly explain the problem, ask to be put on the docket, fill out a form,
> w=
> hich includes a request for reimbursement of expenses, and pay about $35.
> =
> Depending on the court, the clerk will probably offer the genealogist
> sever=
> al choices for a court date, and then set the date. The court takes care
> of=
> sending subpoenas. The genealogist has to appear in court, and explain
> th=
> e denial of access to a judge. The burden of proving that the
> genealogist'=
> s request is unreasonable is on the cemetery owner. The owner would have
> t=
> o come up with a very good reason for denying access, such as: "he
> wanted=
> to come at 3:00 AM with 50 people". The judge can do "what is fair",
> incl=
> uding ordering reimbursement for expenses, if it was requested. If he
> owne=
> r states that the genealogist was a real jerk when *demanding* access, and
> =
> the judge
> believes him, the judge may not feel like ordering compensation, which
> i=
> s a matter of his discretion. [civility counts!]
>
> Law defines "reasonable" as what a reasonable man would consider
> nor=
> mal behavior, such as entering a cemetery for the purpose of examining
> grav=
> es, recording dates, saying a prayer, leaving flowers, taking pictures,
> mai=
> ntaining the cemetery, etc. But this law only requires that the *access*
> =
> be reasonable, not the *reason* for visiting. Asking to bring 50 people
> at=
> 3:00 AM, or even 6:00 AM may not be a reasonable access. Requesting a
> noo=
> n visit, for the purpose of research is reasonable. The law does not
> requi=
> re a genealogist to explain his reasons for visiting to the cemetery
> owner,=
> although it would certainly be advantageous and reasonable to do so. The
> =
> law already states that anything falling under "visiting graves,
> maintainin=
> g the gravesite or cemetery, or conducting genealogy research" falls
> within=
> the rights allowed. The genealogist only has to give, "reasonable
> notice"=
> , in advance. Again, "reasonable" is whatever an average person would
> cons=
> ider right. [ie
> How much advance notice would you want=3F] Legally, 24 hours has been
> cons=
> idered reasonable, even though courtesy required more. The landowner
> does=
> not have to be reasonable. He can say, "Come back in 10 months, and I'll
> =
> give you an hour", which is within his rights. If you plan to drive on a
> ro=
> ad on private property, you must have the owners *written permission*,
> sinc=
> e driving is excluded as a right. The landowner is immune from "slip and
> fa=
> ll" suits, but is not immune from prosecution or law suits for
> misbehavior,=
> which is explicitly explained in paragraph a.
>
> A homeowner or cemetery does not have the authority to allow a
> genealog=
> ist or scientist to disturb a grave. Graves are under the authority of
> cit=
> y, county, and state government. Only the government can issue a permit
> fo=
> r something like probing for DNA. In fact, beware - a permit is usually
> ne=
> eded for even repair, planting, or painting a fence, in a city or county
> ce=
> metery. The cost of permits for this type of activity, is still about
> $25,=
> I think, but does not cover digging or probing graves]. A congenial
> prope=
> rty owner might grant a genealogist permission to dig, not being aware
> that=
> he doesn't have the right to grant that permission.
>
> I think most problems can be solved by the Common Sense Rule: Be
> *Reas=
> onable* and then think about how you would want to be treated - which
> usual=
> ly requires going beyond *reasonable* and what is required by law.
> Offering=
> the owner a history of the land, or offering to rake the area will work
> be=
> tter than demanding access.
>
> Langdon Hagen-Long
>
>
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> =
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/305 - Release Date: 4/8/2006
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 1979 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 20:42:13 -0500
> From: Paul Drake <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Cemeteries and DNA
>
> The several comments and questions I have received this evening pursuant
> to
> the DNA conversations cause me to think that a general rule for
> genealogists
> relating to the application of the law is appropriate.
>
> Many have been the great thinkers, philosophers, judges and lawyers who
> have
> believed and written that the law is a measure of the desires.needs of our
> society, and is equally a reflection of our vision of how we are and
> should
> be.
>
> The result is that across the centuries there have been but precious few,
> if
> any, commands or prohibitions of our law, no matter the source, that have
> not been debated, violated, amended, confirmed or overturned. As the
> views
> of our people have changed, so too has the law been adjusted.
>
> Thus it is that, as Langdon has noted, the VA Legislature (and most other
> States, as well) has rather recently set forth procedures by which we may
> move to and fro cemeteries located on private land. Doubtless there are
> but
> few variations in those procedures that have YET occurred, but we may be
> sure that as our attitudes in such matters change, so too will those
> rules.
>
> As researchers we must always assume that what we think was the conduct
> and
> the prevailing law of the deep past likely was often violated and then
> confirmed, amended or simply abandoned.
>
> No better example may be found, I suspect, but that of the laws of VA of
> the
> middle half of the 17th Century that required attendance at church every
> Sunday, the punishment for violation of which often being harsh fines and
> even jail time.
>
> But, notice how few courts' orders or other records reveal prosecutions
> for
> violations of those edicts. Considering that there were likely something
> in
> excess of 300,000 folks in the VA Colony in the period 1665-1685, the
> absence of such reports can only reveal that many were the violations that
> went unnoticed or ignored.
>
> In short, without specific proof, do not presume that the conduct of your
> ancestors was in accordance with "the letter of the law". It often was,
> but
> surely always was NOT always.
>
> Genealogy without documentation is nothing.
> Paul Drake JD
> Professional Genealogist & Author
> <www.DrakesBooks.com>
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 1979 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of VA-ROOTS Digest - 8 Apr 2006 to 9 Apr 2006 (#2006-61)
> ************************************************************
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
> This message scanned for viruses by CoreComm
>
>
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/306 - Release Date: 4/9/2006
--
----------------------------------------
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1995 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/306 - Release Date: 4/9/2006
--
----------------------------------------
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 1995 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
|
