LOCKE-L Archives

Archiver > LOCKE > 2010-07 > 1279867809


From:
Subject: Re: [LOCKE] Lonnie L. Lock b. 1894, d. 1954 Texas, obit
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 06:50:09 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <1652326633.144345.1279865952233.JavaMail.root@sz0068a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net>


Hi Sharon
Your brother is the perfect candidate for the project! He may not be willing to spend his own money on something that may not be of interest to him.
But if you offer to pay for that test yourself, he might do the test for you.
That is very often the case with us men, if we are not in to genealogy, we are not willing to fork over our own money for something that does not interest us.
But offer that same man a free test, he is likely more open to the idea.

Your David Lock lineage is one that I have been looking forward to seeing in the project! And if I were to guess, my best guess is that your lineage will likely DNA match the Lincoln County Kentucky Lock clan. I don't know why I think that, just a gut feeling. I have personally done just enough research on your lineage, to believe your line is not related to my line, but then again we don't know who David's parents were, so anything is possible.

The name David Lock is also known in my tree, but I can find no direct connection between our families in the paper records.
With your lineage being at a dead end in the paper trail for this many years, yours is a perfect lineage to be tested just to see if a genetic match can be found which can give you clues beyond your direct lineage. This is exactly why I started this project in the first place, because so many lineages are at a dead end in the paper records, and have been for at least a decade or more, and this technology can at least tell us yes or no if 2 Lock(e) men shared a common male ancestor or not.
Using that knowledge of who we are a genetic match with, then gives us other branches of Lock's in which to continue that paper trail research on, in hopes that paper trail connection can be found.

All you can do is try with your brother! Genealogy may not be his cup of tea, but you are his sister and you are in to genealogy, offer him a free test and see what happens.
Explain to him that you are tired of being stuck, you need clues and that this technology can help find clues for you. It is simple and painless, it is a simple mouth swab test much like you see done on the TV shows, and is done in your own home, about that simple! There are a good many Lock / Locke men in the project, who still do not have a genetic match to any lineage!
Who knows who your brother maybe a match to! It could be to one of the 11 family groups that we have identified, or he could match any number of the other participants who do not have a match yet, and or it is at all possible, your lineage may not match anyone in the project yet. But that is just as important! To find new unrelated Lock(e) lineages is equally important to this study, because for every lineage identified, tells us that there are that many more unlreated lineages that had not been accounted for until your lineage tested.

But I just have this gut feeling that your lineage is related to the Lincoln County Kentucky Lock's, I could be wrong! lol.
Having a genetic match to even one other Lock lineage, just gave you a very important clue to follow! You will then have another lineage in which to study and hope by studying that branch of the tree, will help you find that paper trail connection. That other lineage that you may be a genetic match, may already have your direct line in their tree, but may have wrongly believed that child or adult passed away because they too became stuck in the paper records. That is very often the case with researchers, if they could not find a death certificate, and could not locate that person in the paper records, they may wrongly presume that person to have passed away, and it may have been as simple as he or she simply moved away from the family. A classical genealogical error on our parts to wrongly presume because we can't find them in the paper records, that they likely died.

The Lincoln County Kentucky Lock's are the perfect example where multiple branches had no idea that they were related to one another. And in fact DNA proved that they must be very closely related to each other because they were 65/67 and even 66/67 DNA matches to each other. Those specific Lock lineages got a monster clue! They are still stuck last I knew, but they all got a monster clue just from this genetic test! Now it is only a matter of finding the paper records to be able to tie those 3 or 4 branches back together. Even I had no idea that they were all related to one another until I saw the DNA test results with my own eyes. And virtually every day, more digital records are being added online, it is only a matter of time before we finally have access to all the right records, before al the pieces of the puzzles fall in to place.

And it can be just that simple too! That when the right records are scanned and placed online, maybe that very record we all have been searching for to find that major clue!
I have had many Eureka days over the years, and I look forward to having many more days like that in the future when the paper records are found and the genetic testing being done helps support those paper records.

If your brother won't do it, try to find another male family member and ask him. It really does not matter which of the men does the test because they all share the same Y chromosome, with possibly very slight marker mutation differences, as longs as he is a biological Locke by birth.
And Lock or Locke, the spelling doesn't matter in most cases. Virtually all the lineages used the original spelling, Lock. My direct forefathers spelled it Lock also, but I am a Locke today, it is just a spelling variation, and the spelling we use today has zero bearing on a genetic level.
Many Lock's have told me, you are a Locke, you can not be related. Wrong! We all need to for the most part, ignore the spelling and concentrate on the genealogical facts as they are, that originally the vast majority of us were using the old spelling, Lock. I only know of one very specific case which just happened to have happened during a court case, that Mr. Lock is now known as Mr. Locke.
That is the only specific case that I am aware of, where in a court record that they made the name change from Lock to Locke. Yet he was very clearly a Lock in every historical paper record before that court date.

I can on paper, prove thousands if not tens of thousands of Lock's who changed the name to Locke. But regardless the spelling, we all descended back to the same common male ancestor in each of our trees. So do not fret over the spelling, it plays no roll in the genetic out come of our tests.

Don


----- Original Message -----
From: "sharon wright" <>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 22 July, 2010 6:53:46 PM
Subject: Re: [LOCKE] Lonnie L. Lock b. 1894, d. 1954 Texas, obit

Don, Actually, I have one son that is a Wright by my husband now and one a
Tannehill by my first marriage. I don't know if my brother would be willing
to do a DNA test or not but he is Kinney Locke who is the son of my dad
Kinney Doyle Locke, his father, Samuel Talbert Lock(e), his father was
William Washington Lock(e), his father was Fields Jarvis Lock(e) and his
father was David H. Lock(e), the is of course is used on and off all of the
time in all documents and census as you know how that is. We do have the e
on our name , but our grandparnts didn't and our gr. uncle did and so forth.
I can prove my Locke line back to David and that is as far as I can get. My
brother and his son is the last of our Locke line and my nephew has no
children. I will ask my brother if he would be willing to do the DNA test. I
would love to see where we fit in. Thanks so much. Sharon
----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [LOCKE] Lonnie L. Lock b. 1894, d. 1954 Texas, obit


HI Sharon, good to hear from you.

If your sons are of the Wright surname, then they would not work for this
project. It would take a brother, father, uncle or closer cousin of the
Locke surname to work for this study.
Your sons I am going to presume are of the Wright surname, which means they
would carry the Wright Y chromosome not the Locke Y chromosome.
Does not really matter which Locke male who is tested, as longs as he is a
biological Locke by birth.

My first guess would be that your David Lock is likely a part of the Lincoln
County Kentucky clan, and not likely related to my lineage. But who knows
until we see the DNA test! :)
If by chance your David turns out to be related to my lineage, I don't even
know how I am going to try to link him in. I do have a couple stray David
Lock records of Barren County Kentucky, but they married other ladies and
after your David went to Illinois. So I can be fairly certain the stray
David Lock records of Barren County Kentucky, can't be your David because
your David was already in
Illinois by that time.

But there was another David Lock of Kentucky, with ties to Lincoln County
Kentucky who could easily be related to your David Lock.
Testing one of your Locke men could give us a big clue!

Don




----- Original Message -----
From: "sharon wright" <>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 21 July, 2010 6:30:49 PM
Subject: Re: [LOCKE] Lonnie L. Lock b. 1894, d. 1954 Texas, obit

Don, I am Sharon Locke(Lock) Wright, I come from the David Locke line that I
have traced to 1819 or really earlier in Ill. . I do have sons that are
willing to do a DNA test and I would be thrilled to find out which line of
Locke(s) I come from. I know that we did talk years ago. I have just joined
the Locke web site. Would love to hear again from you. I also discovered a
new cousin of mine who lives in Calafornia , but have not heard from him in
awhile and I know he would love to know about the Locke website so will try
and contact him too. Thanks so much Sharon Locke Wright
----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: "Email List, Lock" <>; "Email List, Locke"
<>
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:18 AM
Subject: [LOCKE] Lonnie L. Lock b. 1894, d. 1954 Texas, obit


Transcribed an obit of one of my distant cousins.



Kerrville Times
Kerrville , Kerr County , Texas
May 4, 1954
Lonnie L. Lock
Native of Kerr will be buried Wednesday


Funeral services for Lonnie L. Lock, age 60, native of Kerr County , who
died at

Van Horn Sunday, will be held Wednesday afternoon at 2 o’clock from the
chaple of

Smith Funeral Home Interment will be at the Nicholas Cemetery .
Pallbearers, nephews of the deceased, included Levi Alexander, Everett
Alexander,
Raymond Watcher, Houston Schumacher, Bill Schumacher, and Henry Robertson.

Mr. Lock was born March 27, 1894 in Kerr County . He had been living near
Van Horn engaged in Ranching for the past 44 years.
Survivors include six sisters, Mrs. Lizzie Joy of Brawley California , Mrs.
Nora Watcher of Ingram ( Tx ) , Mrs. Ida Baldwin of Camp Wood ( Tx ) , Mrs.
Mattie Schumacher of Pearsall ( Tx ) , Mrs. Minnie Alexander of Ingram (
Tx ) , Mrs. Ellen Taylor of Kerrville ( Tx ) , three brothers, Zed ( W )
Lock of Roswell New Mexico, J. G. Lock of Bastrop ( Tx ) , Levi Lock of
Ingram ( Tx ).
Interestingly, Zed Lock lived in Roswell NM at the exact same time my direct
lineage was in Roswell! I knew long ago that one of Zed's daughters was
buried in Roswell, but did not know Zed himself was still living in Roswell
as late as 1954. My grand father and great grand father must have known of
Zed! Roswell was back then, a very small town.
I found a news paper for Hobbs New Mexico which only said that Zed Lock had
been admitted to the hospital in 1965. I had been searching the Texas death
records for Zed, but this clue may have lead me to New Mexico instead! :)

Now to stop by the NM vital records and see if I can locate Zed's death
certificate. This is a branch of my tree that I have not been able to locate
living descendants, and the obit just helped me find clues to where some of
them folks are possibly living today. This is the Richard Lock III lineage
who traveled from Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Illinois before finally
settling down in Barry County Missouri, and after the deaths of the elders,
some of the grand kids moved on to Texas. The Richard Lock IIl branch of my
tree is a branch that I have been searching for for years, in hopes one of
their men will join us in the DNA project. It isn't really needed, we have
ample documentation for this branch, but it would be nice to have a 4th sons
branch, son of Richard Lock Jr. to be tested for no other reason then to get
that 100% confirmation of a genetic match. If and when I can find Richard
III's male descendants and get one tested, I will have 4 of the 7 sons
lineages tested.
Then all I will need is a James Lock descendant and I will have 5 of the 7
sons lineages accounted for DNA wise. 2 of the sons lines have no surviving
sons that I am aware of, so the best I can do is test the 5 branches and be
happy with that. The other 2 brothers, William Lock and David Lock have no
known living male descendants, though I did locate a living female
descendant of William Lock but lost touch with her, but she said she knew of
no surviving men in her direct lineage.

Don



-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in
the subject and the body of the message


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: