APG-L ArchivesArchiver > APG > 2007-03 > 1174448652
From: "Elizabeth Whitaker" <>
Subject: Re: [APG] DAR "Proofs"
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 23:44:12 -0400
The DAR changes its requirements on acceptance every so often. When I came
on my mother's membership (1986-1990), she had to submit additional material
application. Because she misplaced my papers when she received them from
Washington, I had to send off for a copy last year: when I got it, my
stamped with the info that future applicants on this ancestor will have to
definitive proof that _____ was truly the father of _______. (I've moved,
this is packed, in storage in North Carolina.) Ancestor was 68 when putative
son was born.
One thing that the DAR is very keen on is that prospective members have to
establish contact (visit in person) with a chapter. (The registrar is the
officer in charge of membership paperwork.) The _chapter_ votes on
whether to accept the prospective member. Even if headquarters approves
the ancestor, a membership is not a "go" without an approval from a chapter.
This is so important that I have told relatives on my father's side who are
interested in my researching some likely ancestors to _first_ make contact
with a chapter. (Any area with a population of a 100,000 is likely to have
at least three or four chapters, including one that meets evenings or
Since I've joined the DAR, I have found several likely ancestors, mainly
on my dad's side of the family, and plan to add them as "supplementals."
In 1986, when I told my mother I was interested in joining, I was just
to become seriously interested in genealogy. (She submitted the
paperwork in 1986 or 1987, but it took a long time for it to process. I had
met the ladies of her chapter some years previously, so they knew who
I was.) I had no Revolutionary-era information on my dad's lines until
the late 1980s and early 1990s as I was unable to get that far back on
On 3/20/07, Richard A. Pence <> wrote:
> I know little about procedures used by the National Society of the
> of the American Revolution.
> I am in contact with a lady who is relying on the lineage last submitted
> a patriot in 1963. As many of you know, I "collect Pences" and I have not
> had very good luck with DAR lineages as they relate to Pences. So far, not
> single one of them has panned out. (My article in 1987 in NGSQ exposes one
> wrong line.)