Nothing I have claimed is based on wishful thinking.I deal in facts, and everything I claim is based upon valid research and REAL records.Eddy, on the other hand, clings to family folklore that cannot be substantiated with records of any kind.Eddy has not found one single record to support the "allegations" made in the affadavits.He claims that because family made the statements, they are automatically true. That is wishful thinking.Despite Eddy's ramblings, the evidence is genuine and very conclusive.Any intelligent person considering the body of evidence will agree.
In the records of Dutchess County, in and around Fishkill, NY, records are found for Cornelius Van Sicklen married to 1. Annetje Lassen, 2. Annetje Lassing, 3. Annetje Lawson, 4. Hannah Lasson, 5. Hannah Lossing, and 6. Hannah Lawson.In Eddy's twisted logic, this constitutes 6 entirely different couples, because the spouse names, even though they sound alike, aren't spelled exactly the same.Intelligent people readily recognize this as normal spelling variations commonly found in old records.Eddy doesn't recognize this, because he doesn't research and he doesn't have a clue as to what life was like 200 years ago.Foreign concept to him.He continually attempts to apply 20th century spelling standards to 18th century people.
To expand on the "Cornelius" concept, there were only 3 Cornelius Van Sicklens in all of Dutchess County in the late 1700s.Cornelius Sr, b. 1726 and married to Catharine Johnson(remember who Eddy thinks Maria's mother was), Cornelius Jr b. 1773(s.o. Cornelius & Catharine) and married to Sarah Van Wyck, and Cornelius Sr's Grandson Cornelius, b. 1775(s.o. Ferdinand) and married to Annetje Lawson.The fact that there is only 1 Cornelius in all of Dutchess County who could be married to all 6(Eddy's claim) women named above, it is clear that they are not 6 women, but only one.More importantly, the Fishkill Church, The Dutchess County Historical Society, and the Ductchess County Genealogical Society will all confirm that Lossing, Lawson, Lasson, Lassing, and Latson are all commonly used spelling variations used by the descendants of Pieter Pieterse Lassen...and that any one individual from that family will commonly be found recorded under two or more of the spelling variations.Anyone interested may refer to recent posts in the Van Sickle Forum for numerous examples taken from Church records.The Fishkill Church has the records and can verify that Annetje Lawson Married to Cornelius Van Sicklen, Hannah Lawson married to Cornelius Van Sicklen, and Hannah Lossing married to Cornelius Van Sicklen are all the same woman.Of course, intelligent people wouldn't need to have that proven to them, considering how obvious is.As to Eddy's claim that I have no evidence, I can provide legitimate references to baptism and marriage records for 1. Cornelius Sr and his children, 2. Cornelius Jr, and Cornelius married to Hannah Lawson and their children.Using baptism records, and known spelling variations for Cornelius' wife(including the spelling "Hannah Lossing"), I have baptism records for children Sally, Ferdinand, Maria, Elizabeth, and Katy, in that order of birth.On the plaque in front of the Van Sicklen Cemetery In Brighton is a list of children for Cornalius and Hannah, naming the same children, in the same order as the baptism records show.Dates from the stone marked "Cornelius Van Siclen" at Brighton match the birth date recorded at the Poughkeepsie DRC for "Cornelius Van Sicklen", son of Ferdinand and Elizabeth Brower...who married Annetje Lawson at Fishkill on Jul 8, 1795.Buried at Brighton next to Cornelius is wife Hannah.There is no question that Annetje Lawson, Hannah Lawson, and Hannah Lossing are the same woman, despite Eddy's exact spelling nonsense.
The most critical point is the date, "Sep 15, 1801".It is the birth date recorded for Maria VS, wife of Luther Eastling, in the Eastling Family Bible.I am confident that any knowledgeable person would conclude that within the Van Sicklen family, under any/all spelling variations including "Van Siclen", there would be only one Maria born to a father named Cornelius on EXACTLY Sep 15, 1801.Maria, d.o. Cornelius Van Sicklen and Hannah Lawson(spelled "Lossing" in the record) was recorded at the Fishkill Dutch Reformed Church as having been born on EXACTLY Sep 15, 1801.If this were the only record I had in my possision, it would still be enough to cast doubt on the affadavits.Laws of probability say that the odds of 2 Marias, both daughters of a Cornelius, being born on exactly Sep 15, 1801, is essentially zero.But that is not all.The Eastling Bible also gives the date of death for Cornelius, Maria's father....March, 1850.Cornelius of Brighton died exactly March 19, 1850.Luther and Maria owned a plot of land at Brighton, Murray Township, Ontario, Lot C26.Cornelius Van Siclen(name on tombstone) and wife Hannah owned lot B29, same plat.Luther and Maria named a son Ferdinand.Cornelius and Hannah of Brighton had a son named Ferdinand, named after Maria's grandfather.All of the pieces together make it absolutely 100% certain, that Maria VS Eastling was the daughter of Cornelius Van SIcklen and his wife Hannah, baptised at Fishkill, NY.Now Eddy...lets see a list of all the evidence you have that the affadait claim that Catharine Johnson was Maria's mother is acurate.You can't provide any, because Catharine wasn't her mother.I don't care what name appears in the affadavits.People include false information on affadavits all the time.That is why we have courts.Duh
"Eddy says: Both Doug and Richard have been so voluble about the helter skelter inaccurate 16th century spelling of names and have constantly emphasized how foolish I was to insist on exact spelling for affidavit Van Siclen that I am surprised that Doug and Richard now have the audacity to allege that affidavit Van Siclen must appear with his exactly spelled Van Siclen name and cannot appear in the records of Revolutionary service with a variant 16th century spelling."
Eddy...your exact spelling nonsense is just that.Noone has claimed that the Rev War record must be spelled exactly, with the exception of when we were poking fun at your exact spelling nonsense.Everyone recognized the sarcasm.The point is:valid research has accounted for all of the Cornelius VS who served, regardless of how the name was spelled, and none of them could be Maria's father.Her father did not serve, because he was too young.Her grandfather and great grandfather did serve.Her great grandfather, also a Cornelius, was the one who married Catharine Johnson in 1771.Cornelius and Catharine are buried in Rumbout New York, not Quebec Canada.Talk about an obvious mistake....but for some reason, Eddy can't see it.
I have never waffled on anything, and I never stand on exact spelling of surnames in records for people who lived 200 years ago.Again, any reference to exact spelling made by me can be clearly seen to be sarcasm, poking fun at Eddy's humorous insistence on same.Note in the last line of his post, another idiotic reference to exact spelling, as if that alone proves something.Eddy...everyone is smarter than that.
I make no allegations....I state simple facts, clearly proven by records and honest research.Eddy doesn't believe in research.He has no records, and clearly has no knowledge of early American/Canadian recordkeeping.To him, only tall tales related by family members count as records.Catharine Johnson was not Maria VS Eastling's mother, and that has been proven.