APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2004-12 > 1102318696


From: Langdon Hagen-Long <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Re: Courthouse Ledgers
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 23:38:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <88.1aee4b7a.2ee06fd8@aol.com>


June,

I hope no one abandons preponderance of evidence, as one standard of proof. Not only is it used in courts everyday, but I dont think it is possible to get to a conclusion of, beyond a reasonable doubt, .without reaching a conclusion of a lesser standard first at least once. [Conclusive evidence is rare] Preponderance of evidence should be used for evaluation, at every stage of research, from evaluating one piece of evidence, to building a case, on several issues, using a body of evidence. Evaluating every sentence, every phrase of each sentence, every mark on the page, and every error, creates some impression of the value of the evidence. It might tend to tip the scale to one side or another, and make us convinced of something. Usually, it doesnt. When there are several pieces of evidence, the whole body of evidence can be weighed, using each part of each item, until the evidence is convincing. If the scales tip more one way than another, the research is
directed accordingly. If it is more likely that John, not George, is the father of James, the focus of research can be on John. More evidence is collected, weighed by itself and with other parts, until a conclusion can be drawn.



When there is a logically sufficient reason to believe a conclusion, there is proof. Only when there is proof of something, is it possible to decide what level of proof exists. The evidence might lead to the belief that a conclusion is correct, but if it is possible to think of other scenarios that might also be true, based on the same evidence , more research is needed. If you come to believe that any reasonable person would come to the same conclusion, you have the quality of proof needed . Doubts are permissible but if you don't have have to go through contortions, jump through hoops, or make assumptions to get the pieces to fit in any other way, you have reached a conclusion beyond any *reasonable* doubt. It is not possible to get to the point of beyond a reasonable doubt, without first passing through several stages of evaluating the evidence and making judgments based on the preponderance of evidence.



In civil court, judges use the preponderance of evidence to render judgments. If a judge feels that no evidence outweighs any other evidence in a case, he/she is empowered to render a decision based on nothing more than impressions of the demeanor and believability of the parties. A judge must make a decision, but a genealogist doesnt. Sometimes there is simply not enough evidence available to reach a belief beyond a reasonable doubt. . I. wouldnt throw my files away. I would just call it what it is; insufficient evidence, or proof by a preponderance of evidence.



I didnt mean to imply that any record series is free from errors. All records, of any kind, are susceptible to errors, but that doesnt make them inherently bad records. Chancery records have errors, but Id rather have 3 inches of paper, with three conflicting lists of heirs to sort through, than not. I dont mind sorting through the conflicting evidence and trying to figure out why they dont agree. That is the joy of genealogy, for me.



In Virginia, the Chancery file is loose paper, consisting of notarized statements, affidavits, wills or deeds, [sometimes not recorded elsewhere], and the Commissioners reports. . The Commissioners reports explains what was collected, why certain documents were requested, [if the judge didnt order certain items], the Commissioners evaluation of the evidence, and his conclusions. Legal judgments have already been made, on the parts, and on the entire body of evidence presented. . A few months ago, I found a case lasting 2 years, which contained documents covering 40 years. It destroys many of the published accounts of the family. Last month I reviewed a summary of an 8 year Chancery Court case, which contained detailed information on four generations of one family, and cited other documents recorded in the clerks office. I verified the Chancery information, and the documents cited, which led me to two prior generations. My client wanted to find living heirs, !
and any
other information. I found the sole surviving child, [in her late 80s, articulate, astute, with a great memory] her children, a range of cousins, three prior generations., great leads on a fourth, and no conflicts in the evidence, yet. It just doesnt get any better than that! Well, it might, if I find the actual case file! I dont know of any other record group that has as much potential.



I know Ohio is different than Virginia, but in Virginia, if you are looking at a ledger, you have the summary of the Chancery case, and not the actual Chancery file. The summary is the filtered version of the Commissioners report. The report is the Commissioners version of the evidence, as presented to him, and is comparable to a genealogists report, except that it is all sworn testimony, screened, and previously accepted, or not, by the court.



Langdon


wrote:All courthouse ledgers and journals have to be considered as derivative. I
will give an example of why it is important to remember that they are.

In Franklin County, Ohio, the original slips of paper from the ministers
from the early 1800s were still in existence until the courthouse moved to a new
building some years back. The clerk told me, which may or may not be true,
that they were lost off a dump truck taking old paper to the new building.

So the original return and consent slips are not longer in existence. The
information was originally copied into marriage books in the courthouse.
However, the books contain serious errors as to names. They also did not include
any of the early consent slips.

Before the original slips were lost, the DAR carefully extracted all
information from them. The DAR published four volumes with compiled information
from the county marriage books, the county index to marriages, the consent
slips, the return slips and showed the differences between them. There are major
differences in the names in the records. I have had occasion to investigate
several instances where the DAR information shows the county marriage books to
be in error. In each of these cases, the county record was wrong on the
names and the DAR was right on the names.

Although most of the time the county marriage book is the best source we can
find, this is not necessarily true and shows the necessity of evaluating our
sources carefully.

June Byrne
_http://members.aol.com/junebyr/sites.html_
(http://members.aol.com/junebyr/sites.html)
or
Daytona Beach, FL


==== APG Mailing List ====
The Association of Professional Genealogists
http://www.apgen.org/publications/apg-l/index.html



This thread: