|
SEARCH MY WASHINGTON COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA WEBSITES
History of and Other Families (o_f) from
The City and County of Washington Pennsylvania
Enhance your genealogy research about families in Little Washington, Washington County PA
using newspaper articles, birth, death, marriage, notices, obituaries (often with cemeteries
named), probates, deeds, surname finds, family trees, family histories, reunions and other information.
Site Search or Page Search (Ctl Key+F) easily finds items of interest.
Washington County Pennsylvania History and Families
Genealogy_101 Controversial Life Events
Ethics Concerning Public Records and Crimes
I mention my grandmother a lot when writing about genealogy research subjects. Born 1912, she followed a strict moral compass, believed in the preservation of the family, and maintained a respect and honor toward all persons within families, whether "ours" or members of other families. She pointedly realized the effect genealogy research might have on individuals. Uncovering family "secrets", bad acts, or potentially embarrassing situations could hurt someone, something she never wanted to do.
I carefully listened when she cautioned me about hurting others' feelings. Sometimes, she gave me "the true story" or dates, but only with my promise to not publish them. In some circumstances, I wondered why it mattered; often, her concern seemed silly. For example, in her generation, a baby without marriage was scandalous, but is ever-more accepted since the 1980s. And other times, her concerns seemed----well--- contradictory to her other stated beliefs about collecting "family history." For example, she also quite
explicitly told me that whatever is in "public records" is public information. These two beliefs don't always square with each other in doing family research. What may be "public", the individuals (or descendants) may still wish to keep private or wish they could make private again.
For example, one of my first "be cautious" lessons concerned our Harry Lane, a cousin to my direct line. It seems in the 1880s, Harry disappeared! His horse, hat, and *supposedly* his blood were found on the road to Scenery Hill (Rt. 40 East). He had been headed home to his parents' in South Strabane where he lived. He had been last seen in Washington, flashing a large sum of money. Accounts say a huge search party was formed, but Harry's physical body was not found. Grandma clued me in that one of our branches of the family, of another name, had been publicly "accused" by many of harming the young man because of possible business rivalry; Harry and members of the other family were prominent and successful hucksters, taking their wagons through neighborhoods in summers to sell vegetables, new gadgets, and ice blocks, and to sell coal in the winters. The informal accusation of murder against the other family was enough to cause a rift between the Lanes and the other family for many decades...possibly even now. Grandma wanted the facts, but did not want to stir old wounds.
I found the tale of Harry Lane's "murder" in the local newspapers, and it certainly caused local uproar and buzz for many weeks at the time. The paper recounted every move, every
suspicion, every effort made to find this "nice, young man." They even assembled a Grand Jury to review the "facts" of the
case and see if charges should be made.
However, Harry's "murder" was not quite a murder after all ! From Harry's own pen, he reported (proudly) his mischief to the local paper, writing his tale from the State of California! It seems Harry wanted to leave town; his cousins had already moved to mid-northern CA and he wished to join them. A family accomplice killed a chicken and left its blood on Harry's hat and saddle. Then, his cohort staged the scene more, leaving Harry's horse loose to graze next to the road while Harry caught the first train west, probably from Zediker Station Railroad stop (Zediker Station Road) or from nearby Baker's Railroad stop. He wrote that he thought his "murder" was greatly exaggerated, and seemed to enjoy his lark.
Unfortunately, like many persons in their youth, Harry seemed blatantly unaware of the consequences he caused and the turmoil he left behind. His parents, of course, were devastated and worried beyond fear--I felt great sadness for this middle-aged conservative set of parents, imagining the mom walking the floors at night worrying about her boy. Gratefully, his grandpap, Rev. Daniel Lane, was deceased (or Harry might have gotten a visit from a very conservative preacher!). Members of the other family were,
understandably, very hurt and angry---at one point, a search party even dug the other family's land looking for a "burial" location! And, as I've said, the rift caused between the two families was painful to many at the time.
It's been 120+ years but I still leave the other family unnamed. I don't have to do that; I doubt anyone would care now, and I could just as ethically include the name. But, I find myself weighing these life stories....trying to decide what is *necessary* to include in *my* writing....and decide what is just sensationalism. If anyone wanted to know the identity of the "other family," anyone can certainly find the same headlines I found. Yet, for me, naming the other family is not important to my genealogical writing. Even Harry's "disappearance" is unimportant. I have the important facts, where he was born, when he left Pennsylvania, that he went to California, and the rest of his life details from there. I can note the newspaper sources and dates without making my own headline in my research book. Interested generations can either look it up, as I did, or find the articles in my files.
Researchers often disagree with how to handle the "bad" (or what might seem bad or immoral) acts of ancestors. Even today, out-of-wedlock births cause reservation for some researchers; others include all "facts" of births and who the "real father" is, regardless of the effect. Some divorcees or persons with multiple marriages prefer to not mention these "facts" (which makes it difficult to explain additional children).
Many researchers include murders and murder-suicides--after all, the obituary or newspaper articles "prove" the date of death or the family connection. When the accused or convicted criminal is a stranger, it's easier to include murder facts about an ancestor. However, when one family member kills another family member (and maybe kill themselves too), more ethical thought must be given about including every fact, name, and detail in the researcher's public write-up. Is it
necessaryto include *all*--or will dates suffice? Is it simply okay to use articles because the notices are public? These are questions every researcher must decide. In trying to make my own decisions, I try to "do no harm". Yet, can I really know whom I might harm, to know which individuals alive now might take offense, or to know which families I might mistakenly embarrass? For ME, the only solution is to use "public information" as responsibly as I can.
Issues also come up about living persons and alternately, living persons who make news and so are in public records like newspapers and court records. Certainly, someone related--if not the person involved--might be upset that the public record is copied or "made public"--again. Ethical journalists every day must approach each story they write and publish armed with facts rather than pure speculation. Otherwise, they could be sued for slander. When juries and courts convict a person of a crime, newspapers and the public presume the story is accurate. Of course, with DNA now, some convictions even from the 1980s get a second court date or are overturned outright. How then can researchers responsibly use "public records"?
Well, no genealogy researcher is a mind-reader, jury member, or judge (well, unless your profession is as a Judge ;-). We cannot know if a person is / is not (*really*) guilty or innocent of crimes. We can only see and know what we read. Yet, researchers sometimes find rich sources of information about family and family relationships within newspapers. Should these just be ignored? Should they remain un-copied or un-noted? Should no researcher post these items? Should webmasters refuse to post items about crimes or should he/she include them? Or, should these articles only appear on the crime & death sensational websites, as many already do?
One solution is to bar all mention of crimes or deaths from questionable circumstances. That seems almost akin to Pennsylvania's refusal to put more public records online. It also would mean that researchers who support this solution should personally refrain from looking online for current news articles (from any newspaper).
Another solution is to post items "as is" without any other information if any is available.
A third solution to the issue is to include crimes in posted newspaper collections, but to also post additional information if anything comes to light.
With a combination of my grandmother's moral guidance and my personal belief in futhering genealogy research through public sources, I will include crime articles on my websites. I realize some researchers may disagree with my decision. Others will applaud finding these items posted in a
non-judgmental and non-sensational area. I hope web visitors will respect the careful consideration I've given this decision.
I also hope this writing encourages each researcher to think about their own genealogy practices. I can't say there is a "right or wrong" conclusion to the issue. Hopefully, each of us will weigh every side and come to ethical decisions.
Judy Florian
FYI Note: The publishers / owners of the newspaper items I mention here have already given prior authorization that any/all articles (to a certain date) can be posted on my websites.
*
|
