As the Kerley family grew and dispersed throughout the United States, its various branches grew further and further apart. The members of these disparate branches rarely, if ever, encountered one another. A notable exception to this pattern was a meeting that took place sometime around 1890 in Hardeman County, Texas. A lady named Ione Kerley Taylor reported on a meeting between the patriarchs of two different Kerley branches.
Ione reported that "when she and her father moved to Hardeman County, Texas [sometime around 1890], we heard of a Kerley family at Big Valley, near Chillicothe [also in Hardeman County]. Father went to see them. All agreed to be from the original four."
As best I can determine, this was a meeting between descendants of two of the original Kerley immigrants. Ione's father was John Jackson Kerley, son of Arthur Kerley, son of Joseph Kerley Jr., son of Joseph Kerley. Joseph was one of the original immigrants. John Jackson Kerley moved his family to Hardeman County sometime around 1890.
The family John Jackson met with was the family of Joseph Chesterfield Kerley. Joseph was the son of William Kerley, the son of James Eldon Kerley, the son of William Kerley, the son of Henry Kerley. Henry was also one of the original immigrants. Joseph moved into Hardeman Co., Texas sometime after the 1880 census.
So, this meeting took place about 110 years after the original immigrants went their separate ways. As you can see elsewhere on this site, Henry moved his family out of the Rimini, South Carolina area about 1780. Although Joseph remained in that general location for a few years, Joseph's descendants eventually started spreading out through the deep South. Now, 110 years later, descendants of these gentlemen got together and swapped stories. I place a fairly high level of confidence in the abilities of John Jackson and Joseph Chesterfield to relate their immediate family histories. If these two guys believed that they were descended from original Kerley immigrants, and that they were related, then I am not going to question that, especially when their conclusion is consistent with my overall theory about the origins of the family.