From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Thu Mar 30 08:58:08 2006
Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34])
	by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k2UFw8jb012031;
	Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:58:08 -0700
Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l.rootsweb.com [66.43.16.22])
	by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2UFw6TB005201
	for <roots-approved@rootsweb.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:58:06 -0700
Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l [127.0.0.1])
	by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k2UDQmFI028924
	for <roots-approved@rootsweb.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:26:48 -0500
Received: (from roots-in@localhost)
	by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k2UDQmeJ028923
	for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:26:48 -0500
Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [66.43.27.41])
	by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id k2UCJsFI028753
	for <roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:19:54 -0500
Received: (from slist@localhost)
	by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k2UEp177003107
	for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:51:01 -0700
X-Envelope-From: Kith-n-Kin@cox.net Thu Mar 30 07:51:01 2006
Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34])
	by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k2UEp1jb003098
	for <ROOTS-M@lists5.rootsweb.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:51:01 -0700
Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (fed1rmmtao06.cox.net [68.230.241.33])
	by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2UEp13p000482
	for <ROOTS-M@rootsweb.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:51:01 -0700
Received: from TOWER ([68.0.155.47]) by fed1rmmtao06.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP
          id <20060330145102.MFMC20050.fed1rmmtao06.cox.net@TOWER>;
          Thu, 30 Mar 2006 09:51:02 -0500
From: "Kith-n-Kin" <Kith-n-Kin@cox.net>
To: <BStamail@aol.com>, <ROOTS-M@rootsweb.com>
Subject: RE: [ROOTS-L] Re: ROOTS-L Digest V06 #145
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:51:03 -0700
Message-ID: <003c01c65409$611a24e0$6601a8c0@TOWER>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <35f.ebd53e.315ca9ef@aol.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34
Sender: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com

|Either the son is a stepson, or he is adopted.  As I read the 
|census  and 
|social notes in the newspaper, changing the surname of the 
|adoptee seems to  be a 
|20th century invention.
| 
|Betty Stacey
|
|

Betty 

Respectfully disagree. I have several different sets of children who were known by the step-father's name
in the mid 1800s in Missouri, Texas, Kentucky.
Sometimes, in one census they will have the step-father's name, and in the next the father's name. 

Remembering, also, that the "adoption" that we know today -- in courts and all, probably didn't happen. 

Pat (in Tucson)