Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Labadie Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: Marie Mannon
Posted by: gerry rock Date: March 06, 2002 at 10:56:11
In Reply to: Re: Marie Mannon by Jody Hunt of 410

Hi Jody. The last child borne to Marie Badichon was 2 years before the establishment of the Assumption Parish and church. The first child of Charlotte Barthe was among the first to be baptized in the new parish. The area was given the name Assumption by the priests of Ste Anne de Detroit. They also established the Red Chapel on the later to be known as the Canadian side of the river to service the growing population there. That Chapel was the predecesser of the Assumption Parish. Assumption University still has a historically significant ROSE CHAPEL in its main building. I understand that their records may have been transferred either to Saulte Ste Marie or to the Mormon ancestral files. That does not preclude the fact that the files may have been sent to Ste Anne de Detroit when Assumption parish was formed ie about 1780. There are indian and original settler records which were sent to the Archdioces of Detroit from Ste Anne. The only way to validate all of the existing controversy is to view those records and/or the records in the Saulte. ( I do not believe that any Catholic institution would have sent records to the Mormons. )
CODE NOIR DEMANDED THAT SLAVES AND CHILDREN OF SLAVES BE BAPTIZED. The children of slaves were to be baptized with the surname of the slaver and if desired the surname of the slave mother appended as a DIT, IE; LABADIE DIT BADICHON. The presence of the DIT name is absolute proof that the mother had been baptized. The presence of the slaver surname is NOT PROOF of parentage by virtue of CODE NOIR rules. You may assume that the children are biologically his but you cannot prove that fact without the baptizmal records. So we are Indian until proven differently. Then we become Metis. If it cannot be proven then we are not biologically related to the other children


Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

http://genforum.genealogy.com/labadie/messages/264.html
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Agreement of Use
Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network