Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
-
In reply to:
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
John Thomas 2/28/06
You have in the lengthy message you so recently left stated TEN of the 12 facts listed below that all state quite emphatically that Pleasant Rogers is the son of Charles and Nannie Downing Rogers
[I added number 10 and number 12 as you didn’t seem inclined to include it in your treatise].
1.#16758--Margaret (PRATHER) PARKS,
2.#17420--Georgia Ella(PRATHER) ROBINSON,
3.#28817--Howard L. PRATHER, and
4.#14038--Thomas PRATHER.
5.#13693I also looked at the Miller Roll applicationof Martha (SEABOLT) BARK . She was a niece of Pleasant ROGERS as Martha's mother--Eliza (ROGERS)SEABOLT--was a sister of Pleasant ROGERS.
6.(#4014) looked at Edith Caroline (ROGERS) PRATHER's 1900 Dawes Roll application file, but information in the Dawes Roll records
7.Edith Caroline (ROGERS) PRATHER on the 1900 US census in the Cherokee Nation, Indian Territory (ne OK) with her husband, Robert PRATHER (age 74, born TN)
8.Emmet Starr, the noted Cherokee genealogist who lived in the late 1800s and early 1900s, gave the following information on Pleasant ROGERS' Cherokee ancestors (from Starr's book, "History of the Cherokee Indians"):
[1.] Ludovic GRANT (white) mar. Cherokee woman
(abt. 1725)
[2.] Mary GRANT m. William EMORY
[3.] Elizabeth EMORY m. 1) Robert DUE 2) John
ROGERS
[4.] Charles ROGERS m. 1) Nancy DOWNING 2) Rachel
HUGHES
[5.] Pleasant ROGERS
9.Emmet STARR lists only two children from the marriage of Charles ROGERS and Nancy DOWNING--Pleasant ROGERS and Eliza ROGERS (mar. John SEABOLT). The Martha (SEABOLT) BARK whose Miller Roll application I cited above was a daughter of this Eliza. STARR lists eight children from the second marriage of Charles ROGERS to Rachel HUGHES--Levi , Richard, Joseph, Charles, John, Elizabeth, Alzira, and Catherine. This just doesn't match the information you have for the children of William ROGERS and Cynthia JONES, so I think it extremely unlikely Pleasant's father was named William Charles or Charles William.
10.Emmett STARR also lists Pleasant Rogers on page 647 as being the father of EDITH [EDY] CAROLINE ROGERS who married ROBERT ALLEN PRATHER. This accounting does not include wives' names for Pleasant but does include some of his children.
11.One of John's children was Cynthia ROGERS who married 1) Joseph COKER and 2)John CRUMP. This almost certainly is the Cynthia CRUMP mentioned by Lucien BELL. Cynthia wasn't Pleasant ROGER's sister; she was his first cousin, so Lucien either erred in his testimony or the agent wrote Lucien's oral testimony down incorrectly. I looked in the book, "Cherokee Citizenship Commission Docket Books 1880-1884 & 1887-1889" and found the following information for Caroline PRATHER's readmittance to Cherokee Nation
citizenship when she moved to the west. She apparently was granted Cherokee Nation citizenship in 1870, but fraud in the case was later alleged.
When the case was reopened in 1887, it was stated that about all witnessesfrom the first case were dead, and the original testimony was nearly all lost. Apparently Cynthia CRUMP died between 1870 when the case was first heard and 1887 when it was reopened. It's too bad the testimony from the first case was lost as it should contain information on the family's ancestry, when they left the east, and where they had lived at various times.
12.Yes, I was sent a copy of a genealogical magazine article in which Mr. Thomas had published his information. Nowhere in the article did I see any attempt on the editor’s part to establish any of it as accurate. She seems to have just taken what he wrote verbatim and in several portions where I’d say “So What?!?!?”She doesn’t question BUT as a matter of fact NEITHER DOES SHE VERIFY his findings!!!!
In fact, in once instance of his ‘items’, it is stated that “one source seems to believe that Phoebe Hickman Rogers was blind”…..well, you know what?????I have a source that states this also:the 1850 census - Obion County, Tenn. States that she could not read or write and the 1860 census - Missouri, Stoddard county: states that she was blind.
I will state again, not in one document other than the above 12 [and I think an unequivocal denial isn’t enough] is a definite relationship stated between William and Pleasant.Pleasant had a brother, cousins, uncles and even a son whose names, either first or middle were ‘William’.
And I will ask AGAIN…
Can you tell me HOW Phoebe [who could not read or write and who was listed in the census records as ‘blind’] and her children learn enough of the family history of a DIFFERENT Pleasant Rogers to be able to get not only the government of the United States to believe them but members of this so-called ‘different’ Pleasant’s family to also LIE for them?
Cynthia Rogers Crump, Lucien B. Bell, among others?
In a time when there were no computers, telephones, few libraries, few newspapers…this little blind woman found out that ANOTHER Pleasant Rogers existed AND who his parents were AND who among his Cherokee relatives would be willing to lie about his wife and children????
All you keep saying is ‘they lied’. For a lie to be believed, there must be some element of truth…where’d they get it????
p.s.As long as I’m troubling myself to answer you AGAIN when you have YET to give any defining information [only circumstantial], I’d really appreciate it if you would refrain from trying to make me appear to be the villain of the piece!If you do not refrain, I’ll have to pull up the several notes and letters that I’ve received from you [and I could get more from other of our cousins who you’ve also written to] which will indeed show that you have not been the ‘gentleman’ in your treatment of me and others that you keep protesting that you are in these postings.
More Replies:
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
John Thomas 3/01/06
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
Joyce Atchley 3/01/06
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
John Thomas 3/01/06
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
Joyce Atchley 3/01/06
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
John Thomas 3/01/06
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
Lisa Groesbeck 3/02/06
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
John Thomas 3/01/06
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!
John Thomas 3/01/06
-
Re: documentation proving PLEASANT to CHARLES, not William ROGERS! visit my website!