Big changes have come to Genealogy.com — all content is now read-only, and member subscriptions and the Shop have been discontinued.
 
Learn more


Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: VanSickle Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: Van Curen are we being flim flamd
Posted by: caesare7 Date: June 24, 2001 at 18:44:14
In Reply to: Re: Van Curen are we being flim flamd by Van of 1585

Response to post # 583

By Van Curen – “And also that everyone on the earlier discussion list of this lineage has a copy of Mr Gusman's text, and can provide a copy reflecting the same information. How do I know that? Where do you think I got it from?”

By Gusman - Van Curen Old Man – Have you so soon forgotten? - you got the letter from myself. Perhaps you also received a second copy from Mary. Myself, Mary and one to remain nameless holder of the original letter are the only people in the world who originally had the letter. I have since sent Scrapbooks to other people containing the letter. Is there supposed to be some clandestine secret about the single mention of the Sicklen name in the letter? News to me if there is.

No Van Curen you're not lying - just telling half-truths by quoting partial excerpts, which can be as deceiving as direct lies. As the cliché goes – you are placing the “em-pha-si-sis on the wrong sil-la-lable”. You continue to practice diversionary tactics in an effort to direct attention away from the only record of a marriage between Luther Eastling and Maria Van Siclen known to exist at this time. An established technique continually practiced by you.

I am going to include with this posting, excerpts from two letters and then point out a couple of things in each of the letters. There is nothing of value in either letter pertaining to the marriage of Maria Van Siclen and Luther Eastling. I post them with reluctance but do so to illustrate how Van Curen will nit pick a single word and ignore the remainder of the context of a commentary.

I tell you frankly, I am mystified as to why Van Curen thought it important enough to falsify a legal Certification and affidavits merely to link the Luther Eastling lineage to the Van Sicklen’s.

Following are excerpts from a letter written by Lewis Eastling in 1955. I included words in ( ) to clarify.

“I don't have any records on the widow Eastling but do find record of a Luther Calvin Eastling and wife Maria (Van Siclen) The family came by way of horse drawn covered wagon. MARIA EASTLING’S PARENTS, CORNELIUS VAN SICKLE JR. AND HIS WIFE KATHARINE CAME WITH THEM. BOTH CORNELIUS AND KATHARINE WERE OVER 90 YEARS OLD WHEN THEY DIED. THEY HAD BEEN LIVING WITH CALVIN AND MARIA IN THE TOWNSHIP OF ALMOND UNTIL THEIR DEATH.

Luther Calvin Eastling and wife Maria are my grandparents on my father's side. THEY had lived in Boston, Mass. and in Baltimore, Maryland before moving to Montreal Canada.”
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Now Van Curen, how much of the excerpt from the Lewis Eastling letter are you prepared to accept as factual. Put it this way – You are attempting to create an issue over the fact that Violetta used the name Van Sicklen one time in her 1924 letter. Reason – an attempt by your self to abrogate the validity of the Van Siclen name entered by Maria Van Siclen in the bible record of her marriage.

Are you equally prepared to accept as factual the Lewis Eastling statement that Cornelius Van Sickle Jr. and his wife Katharine, parents of Maria, came with the Luther family from Canada and that they were living with the Luther family until their death in the Town of Almond, WI.?

To Van Curen - You have a Hannah Lawson married to Cornelius Van Sicklen as the parents of Maria Van Sicklen. You have both of them living, dying and buried in Murray Township, Northumberland County, Ontario. Note where Lewis Eastling and Violetta have Cornelius and Katherine/Catherine Van Sickle, who we now know are in reality Van Siclen’s the parents of who we now know is Maria Van Siclen, living and dying. Explain the difference between your conclusions and the letters of Violetta and Lewis.

Excerpts from the letter by Violetta Voorhees – dated 1924

Prolog - Violetta refers in her letter to the Van Sicklen name one time, and the Van Sickle name many times through out the following excerpts, even referencing books about Van Sickle, some of which I have not included in the excerpts of her letter. The name of Violetta’s Revolutionary Veteran was named Cornelius Van Sickle, on which her DAR application was based, a long time dead issue. If visitors to this forum actually read the following, you will be asking yourself – “why did Van Curen use the Van Sicklen name in the Van Sicklen genealogy and reject the Van Sickle name?” The Van Sickle name is the original name for Maria on the Eastling genealogy sent by Ed Gusman to Van Curen. The Van Sickle name was the name on Violetta’s DAR affidavit. The Van Sickle name is scattered though out the 1924 letter and appears in the 1955 Lewis Eastling letter. Well frankly all of you good readers, I haven’t the foggiest notion why Van Curen falsified the name of Luther Eastling’s wife from what originally had been Van Sickle and later corrected by Maria’s bible entry to become Van Siclen. It is a mystery indeed.

Editor - The words in ( ) have been inserted by the Editor to aid in clarification and do not appear in the original documents.

Uncle Fred informed you correctly in regard to my looking up the genealogy of the Eastling and Van Sickle families. At the time I joined the D.A.R. (1907) I did not know they would keep my papers and I made no copy. From memory I can give you a few (details) and tell you where you can find all else you would wish to know. The Eastling side is brief indeed. Your father (Cornelius Eastling) was the son of Luther Calvin Eastling and Maria Van Sickle Eastling. He, Luther Calvin Eastling was born at Boston, Mass. Fought at the battle of Bunker Hill, at the age of 16 (Not true Luther was born 1791 - Bunker hill fought 1775) . He was much older than his wife was (Editor, Luther born 1791 wife Maria born 1801 only 10 years difference). His mother died when he was quite young and he was not happy with his stepmother and left home. In the course of a few years he went to sea, followed this many years. It was his pride that he had sailed into every port on the globe and had rounded Cape Horn twice. It was on a trip entering New York harbor he met Maria Van Sickle or SICKLEN as it is sometimes spelled his future wife. This is all I could find out about him. I am adding this - mother Dorwin told us that uncle Lou died at Kalispell, Montana when he was past 90. (Editor that would have been 1881 or later)

The "blue blood" of the family tree is on the Van Sickle side. Your grandmother was a New York belle of the "400". Marie Van Sickle, was the daughter of Cornelius Van Sickle Jr. and grand daughter of Cornelius Van Sickle Sr., the famous Van Sickle. Both served in the Revolution. I cannot give you the dates of birth, marriages and deaths; these were in the papers kept by the D.A.R. I received them from the Eastling family Bible now in possession of Fred Eastling Jr., Uncle Fred's youngest son. Uncle Fred wrote him to let me take it for information. I paid express both ways. Agreeing not to keep it over four days. I had a Notary Public do the business for me.

I was four years old when Cornelius Jr. and his wife Katherine died. They made their home with your father's (Cornelius) father and mother (Luther Calvin and Maria Eastling) and lived to be near 100.

The next of my data I received from the State historical society in New capitol building, St. Paul, Minn. This is open every day but Sunday to the public and free of charge. And very courteous and obliging attendants. Should you chance to be in St. Paul you could spend an hour most delightfully in looking up the Van Sickle family. "The Van Sickle genealogy" is an interesting book.

"The Famous Families of New York" chapter "Van Sickle" by Hamin and published by C.P. Putnam's sons gives it all in a nutshell. This is book worth while to own. I shall sometime.

New York legislature archives of the Revolution of State of New York, vol. 1 page 256. New York rev. archives vol. 1 page 501.

"Marriage records" names of persons for whom marriage licenses were issued by the secretary of the Providence of New York previous to 1784 page 427.

Marriage bond vol. 17 page 110.

Violetta Voorhees.

P.S. the Van Sickle family lived in Antwerp, Belgium before moving to Holland, and the family mansion was donated to the city for a museum. A cut of this building is in the "Famous Families of New York". Should you be in St. Paul this book would be on the whole the most worthwhile to spend time upon. V.V."
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
There is no merit in my posting the excerpts from the letters. I did so as vivid illustration of the lengths Van Curen will go to create an issue about the Van Sicklen name. If Violetta and Lewis were to be believed, it would be Luther Eastling and Maria Van Sickle whose names should have been in Maria’s bible entry marriage record and the Fanny/Ferdinand affidavits. Van Sicklen did not, does not and never will have a place in the Eastling lineage. Prior to Mary’s researcher discovering the Certified copy of Maria’s bible entry marriage record, I used the name Maria Van Sickle in the Eastling genealogy. It was not until after Maria’s Certified bible entry of her Van Siclen and father Van Siclen’s surname was discovered that I changed the Eastling genealogy to read Luther Calvin Eastling & Maria Van Siclen married July 22 1814. I must have had Maria Van Sickle as the wife of Luther from about 1989 to year 2000.

There it is Van Curen. You have admitted in your post #575 that you do not have a record of the marriage of Luther Eastling and Maria Van Sicklen and have not been able to discover their marriage record.
Fortunate are we that we have the marriage record of Luther Eastling and Maria Van Siclen entered by Maria into her bible.

Maria Van Siclen’s 1814 bible entry of her marriage to Luther Eastling glistens, shimmers and sparkles like a diamond Tiara on the pinnacle of a Pharaoh’s obelisk in the rising sun of a beautiful day. Maria Van Siclen’s marriage record crushes all semblance of creditability for Van Curen’s link between the Eastling and Van Sicklen lineage’s.

About Van Curen’s comment in his post # 575 – “But then...Mr. Gusman doesn't have the marriage record either. He has a Notary's certification of a Bible entry. I have that too, and it does NOT, repeat NOT establish a Van Siclen/Eastling marriage”.

Because Van Curen has been forced to admit in his Post #575 that no record of a marriage of Luther to Maria Van Sicklen has been discovered, Van Curen now depreciates Maria’s Certified bible entry of her marriage to Luther Eastling in 1814. He has now relegated Maria Van Siclens’s bible entry about her marriage to Luther Eastling to the status of - “a Notary’s certification of a Bible entry”. Van Curen then immediately self destructs his own veracity and creditability by stating that it “….does NOT, repeat NOT establish a Van Siclen/Eastling marriage”.

Get serious Van Curen – In front of the Internet world on a world wide public genealogy forum you expect readers around the world to believe that the words written by Maria Van Siclen 186 years ago – “LUTHER & MARIA VAN SICLIN EASTLING WAS MARRIED JULY 22ND 1814” are not the words describing a marriage between Luther & Maria Van Siclin Eastling. Your desperation over the destruction of your alleged marriage of Luther Eastling/Maria Van Sicklen in your Van Sicklen genealogy, by the Certified Bible entry of the marriage of Maria Van Siclen to Luther Eastling, is nothing short of a panic attack.

Ed Gusman’s Post # 542 – Excerpt lest you forget:

“…..that the first entry in the family records of said bible is as follows:

“Luther C. Eastling born May 30th 1791” and “Maria Eastling was born Sept 15th 1801”, that subsequent entries among many others in said family bible are the following “Luther & Maria Van Siclin Eastling was married July 22nd 1814”, Fanny Hill Eastling born November the 20th 1837”, Francis Irons was married to Fanny Eastling April the 22 1854 in her 17 year”, “father Van Siclen died March the ?? in 1850”, that the entry of the birth of “Fanny Hill Eastling“ is the tenth-entry of births of children of Luther and Maria Eastling, that the day of the month in the record of the death of “father Van Siclen” is too indistinct to read. That the mother of applicant is the Fanny Hill Eastling whose birth and marriage are recorded in said bible as above set forth.”

………………………………………………………………………………………………………

“Pretty” good explanation that I made! Isn’t it Van Curen! I can't help but wonder if you will eventually develop the skills needed to competently analyze documents. I am hoping that some day you will be able to move from cherry picking to a higher skilled profession.


Followups:

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

http://genforum.genealogy.com/vansickle/messages/585.html
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Agreement of Use
Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network