Doing some deeper checking in another file I believe this is now correct:
1871 Census:
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY JOHN 45 M (John
> McCullough)
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY JANE 37 M (Jane
> (Hazel) Welch)
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY TOAHAWAYS?? 16 MALE (Joshua
> Welch)
> 3887 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY AMOS 14 (Amos Isaac
> Welch)
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY ENGLEY? 12 MALE
> (Ainsley David Welch)
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY CLARANCE 8 (Florence
> Elenora Welch)
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY MILARD 6 (Willard
> Welch)
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY HENRY 4 (Henry
> David Welch)
3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY LAURRETTA 1
(Loretta Cora McCullough)
[Except for Loretta Cora McCullough, all the children listed are
step-children of John McCullough from Jane Hazel¹s m/1]
Dave
=================================================
On 13-09-02 5:42 PM, "David Winter" <davidwinter@...> wrote:
>
> Would it be safe to say sons, Toahaways?, Amos, and Engley? are children of
> John McCullough and his m/1, Mary Jane Kerr?
>
> Laurretta is actually Larvela Cora, d/o John and his m/2, widow, Jane
> (Hazel) Welch?
>
> Clarence, Millard and Henry are actually Florence Elenora Welch, Millard
> Welch and David Henry Welch from Jane's m/1 to David Henry Welch?
>
> Thanks in advance for any insights.
>
> Dave
> ====================
> 1871 Census:
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY JOHN 45 M
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY JANE 37 M
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY TOAHAWAYS?? 16 MALE
> 3887 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY AMOS 14
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY ENGLEY? 12 MALE
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY CLARANCE 8
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY MILARD 6
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY HENRY 4
> 3787 PARRSBORO SHORE 94 MCCULLY LAURRETTA 1
> ================================================
>
>
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]