----- Original Message ----- From: <lower-delmarva-roots-request@rootsweb.com> To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:00 AM Subject: LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 308 > > > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS Administrivia > > For information about the Lower Delmarva Roots Mailing List, including > list guidelines and instructions for unsubscribing and subscribing, see > the LDRoots FAQ: > > http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Maryland State Archives research (Sally Rudolph) > 2. Re: Rawley and Rencher & Underwood (Miller's Choice) > 3. Re: Rawley and Rencher & Underwood (Patricia Charron) > 4. Re: Finding Worcester County Land Records by Property Name > (Patricia Charron) > 5. Re: Address of loyalty 1689 (Patricia Charron) > 6. Re: Rawley and Rencher & Underwood (Patricia Charron) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:56:09 -0400 > From: "Sally Rudolph" <Sara.Rudolph@worldnet.att.net> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Maryland State Archives research > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: > <MFBBIHMOEGMJBOHLMHLOAEBACHAA.Sara.Rudolph@worldnet.att.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" > > Thank you for this information and all others who were kind enough to send > information and to share their experiences with the archives. > > Hopefully, we will be able to find something to tie our great, great > grandfather Samuel Henry Savage to his family in MD. I have exhausted > family history, local resources, and on-line resources, with no luck. > > Sally Savage Rudolph > > > -----Original Message----- > From: lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of Frank > Collins > Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 12:22 PM > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Subject: [LDR] Maryland State Archives research > > > It is very important that researchers do their homework before visiting > the > archives. www.mdsa.net is the website for the archives. If you visit the > archives, this is the same website you will see to request records. So it > is best to know what you want before you visit. Otherwise you will waste > a > lot of time at the Archives trying to decide what to request. > > If you are looking for State, County, Municipal records (paper, microfilm, > or digital), they can be found at this link. http://guide.mdsa.net/ > Click on all the links to see what they have for your county. The records > referred to as Transferred indicated archives staff haven't completed the > process to fully describe the contents. Due to funding many of these > records labelled as Transferred have remained under the Tranferred title > for > many many years. For each record, the question will remain what type of > information is contained in the record and is the record indexed. In > some > cases you will not know until you request the record an take a look at it > (microfilm, digital, or paper). The types of records available will vary > somewhat by county. I have tried to take a small snapshot of Dorchester > County by providing the contents of certain types of records on my "in > progress" East New Market, MD website. www.eastnewmarket.org Click on > the > links for Tax Records, Court Records, and Probate records for examples of > these types of records. > > I would recommend researching land records online at www.mdlandrec.net and > researching Government Acts at http://aomol.net/html/index.html rather > than > visiting the Archives. > > Some workers at the archives are volunteers/interns and probably many are > underpaid for the valuable work they do. I have found all the people at > the > help desk to be very helpful, especially Robert Barnes. The staff may > sometime appear to be crabby when certain people are making unrealistic > demands of them. They are not going to do your research for you. I have > found that a smile and thank you goes a long way with the staff at the > info > desk. Maryland residents should contact their state representatives to > request more funding for the archives. > > Frank > *************************************** > QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? > Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: > http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.17/1655 - Release Date: 9/5/08 > 7:05 > PM > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.17/1655 - Release Date: 9/5/08 > 7:05 > PM > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 12:50:51 -0700 (PDT) > From: "Miller's Choice" <milchoice@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Rawley and Rencher & Underwood > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <263971.66620.qm@web56605.mail.re3.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > I descend from John Rencher (d. 1711) three ways: > 1.? daughter Elizabeth (1678-post 1729) m. John Grandee-Roberts > 2.? son Thomas Rencher (1687-1772)?m. Bridget Shiles > 3.? son Underwood Rencher (1692-1750) m.?Sarah Fisher > ? > Another son, Samuell Rencher, ancestor of Martha Shroeder of this list, > witnessed the will of James Ralley on 12 March 1710/1711 (EB9:1) who had a > wife Frances and?a number of children, including a son William who sold > Ireland Eye to my ancestor John Shores in 1713 which Shores sold to John > Nicholson in 1724 (GH:160). ?Samuel Rencher signed as next of kin on the > inventory of James Royle on 22 March 1710/11 (32B:265).? > ? > Ralley and Royle are apparently the same man and is also likely the James > Rawley who owned Ireland's Eye which I believe is in or near the community > of Sharptown. > My question to Martha and anyone else is:? Who is James Rawley and why?did > Samuel Rencher sign as a next of kin on the inventory of his estate? > ? > There should be a lot of Rencher descendants on this list and I hope > someone has looked into the identity of > John Rencher's wife, Frances,?surname unknown to me.? I'm looking at > Rawley for a clue.? I thought perhaps Frances was an Underwood considering > a son was named Underwood.? > Anthony Underwood owned Little Belean?because he married the widow of > Robert Ridgely of St. Mary's County (d. 1681),?but I don't know anything > else about him (and haven't looked thoroughly as yet). > ? > Any help or thoughts welcome.? I'm trying to make a list of?specifics I > need to look up at the MSA in Annapolis sometime this fall. > ? > Thanks, > Becky M > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 22:19:23 -0400 > From: "Patricia Charron" <patricia7@cinci.rr.com> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Rawley and Rencher & Underwood > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <07598C3A15834D5E864CC1F763A7E7D8@kitchenfruit> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I misspoke, the Sarah Fisher born to Phillip and Eliz Maddox Fisher would > be > too old for your Underwood Rencher. Perhaps a grandchild? Pat > -----Original Message----- > From: lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Miller's > Choice > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 3:51 PM > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LDR] Rawley and Rencher & Underwood > > I descend from John Rencher (d. 1711) three ways: > 1.? daughter Elizabeth (1678-post 1729) m. John Grandee-Roberts > 2.? son Thomas Rencher (1687-1772)?m. Bridget Shiles > 3.? son Underwood Rencher (1692-1750) m.?Sarah Fisher > ? > Another son, Samuell Rencher, ancestor of Martha Shroeder of this list, > witnessed the will of James Ralley on 12 March 1710/1711 (EB9:1) who had a > wife Frances and?a number of children, including a son William who sold > Ireland Eye to my ancestor John Shores in 1713 which Shores sold to John > Nicholson in 1724 (GH:160). ?Samuel Rencher signed as next of kin on the > inventory of James Royle on 22 March 1710/11 (32B:265).? > ? > Ralley and Royle are apparently the same man and is also likely the James > Rawley who owned Ireland's Eye which I believe is in or near the community > of Sharptown. > My question to Martha and anyone else is:? Who is James Rawley and why?did > Samuel Rencher sign as a next of kin on the inventory of his estate? > ? > There should be a lot of Rencher descendants on this list and I hope > someone > has looked into the identity of > John Rencher's wife, Frances,?surname unknown to me.? I'm looking at > Rawley > for a clue.? I thought perhaps Frances was an Underwood considering a son > was named Underwood.? > Anthony Underwood owned Little Belean?because he married the widow of > Robert > Ridgely of St. Mary's County (d. 1681),?but I don't know anything else > about > him (and haven't looked thoroughly as yet). > ? > Any help or thoughts welcome.? I'm trying to make a list of?specifics I > need > to look up at the MSA in Annapolis sometime this fall. > ? > Thanks, > Becky M > > > > *************************************** > QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? > Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: > http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 22:29:12 -0400 > From: "Patricia Charron" <patricia7@cinci.rr.com> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Finding Worcester County Land Records by Property > Name > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <94651043758A410F8BC6636120198D17@kitchenfruit> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > This is a bit late due to my squirrel in a cage technology as I sit in NH > 40 > miles from the Canadian border waiting for a nut to fall and fuel my > e-mail > provider. Sorry. > > Ahhh, my favorite spider web...the Maddocks/Maddox/Maddux family. I too am > away on vacation and without files. Sooo...I'm talking though my hat > here... > > I have Merril and Bell Maddox in my database as a sort of hip-shove > reference. If I have more proof, I'll send them on as soon as I get out of > the boonies and get to my Maddox/ux notes. > > It appears that Bell Maddox and my Lazarus descend from two marriages of > Alexander Maddox ( there's about 15 Alexanders... careful). The father of > Bell in my working data with me is Thomas Maddox the presumed husband of > one > Mary Bell. I do not pursue this line so proof is not in the sketchy data > with me. Thomas is the son of Alexander and Mary Stevens Maddux. My line > of > interest is Alexander and second wife Elinor White Bozeman ( later Caine) > who's son Lazarus spawns a brood, most of whom leave MD. > > I do wish to point out that the mid 1780's is marked by the discovery of > gold in GA and the passing out of many Rev War soldier grants in GA. I > mention GA because I can prove that many of the grandsons of this Maddox > line transfer from a Baptist Church in Sussex, DE to founding a Baptist > Church in GA... The Powell Creek Baptist Church. Lazarus' son Alexander is > claimed by a Powell line as the husband of Elizabeth Powell, I know I have > her line at home and a traceable land record... The Maddox line splits > here, > and the bulk goes on to IL. One skinny string goes to AL...I think. I'm > working on it. There is a whole packet of provable MD/DE lines that come > to > GA in this time period. > > In addition, there is a Maddox line in GA that comes from NC in the same > time period. I have to tell you, this bunch of Madddox/ux is in > Bute/Warren > Co NC in the 1760's and contains an intermarrying cluster of Bells, > Powells, > and Riggins of unproved origin. The bulk of this cluster go to KY and TN. > > One further observation, probably ground you have covered, Merril Maddux's > wife was Comfort Coston daughter of Mathias and Elizabeth Riggin Coston. > This might source your Riggin land. And, as I poke around in this group, I > keep stepping on Tulls. I don't follow Tulls, but I'm just pointing out > that > if you find Tulls in your land search, you may have hit the right > neighborhood. > > Darren Dodson ( a Maddox researcher, sent the following: > > 1880 Bells District 817, Cherokee County ( GA) Census. Spelling of first > name looks like Waldon in 1880. > > I find nothing in the 1900 Census, and of course the 1890 Census was > destroyed . > > In the 1910 Decatur, DeKalb Co, GA Census, Walton M. "LATTOX" (34) is > listed > with wife Sallie (26) and one daughter, Neta (4). Walton is an Insurance > Solicitor. > > In the 1920 Marietta, Cobb Co, GA Census, Walton M. MADDOX (48) is married > to Sallie (37). They have a daughter, Neta Bell (14). > > In 1930 Cobb, Walton MADDOX (56) lives alone with his wife Sallie (46). If > this age is correct, then this is consistant with the Waldon on the 1880 > Census. Because of the similarity of the names Waldon and Walton, and > because of the similarity of age and location, I am assuming that Walton > MADDOX, husband of Sallie, and Azalee's brother Waldon are the same > person. > > This Walton Maddux is later than you want, but interesting. I don't agree > with Darren's speculations as to the 1700's origins of his Maddox line, > but > his research is good as far as it goes. > > Without data I am of little use to you, except to offer a few oddities of > possible sources. Patricia > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Pam > Pearson > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:26 PM > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LDR] Finding Worcester County Land Records by Property Name > > Mike, > > Thank you for the helpful comments. My next step was, as you say, to "sift > through" the deeds. I went the KY route several years ago, spending four > days at the KY Archives and stopping in Lewis and Mason counties for > research. The Bell and Margaret Maddux family is slow to give up its > secrets! And unfortunately the KY records from the time period are few and > far between. > > And Richard, > > Well, consider yourself hugged! I rechecked the online deed index and this > is another case where the deed is not indexed under the grantor's name. > Maybe it's standard for the MD indexes, but I've encountered 3 index > oversights just for this one family grouping. > > In case anyone else is interested, or just for posterity, here's the story > regarding this Maddux-Walston connection: > > In Dec 1773 Bell Maddux of Somerset Co wrote his will; he mentioned wife > Margrit, son Bable, and daughters Cathren, Nancy, Betty, Rachel, Emela and > Lanty Billings Sheppard. > > On 23 Mar 1783, Margaret Maddux and son Zorobable "formerly" of Somerset > Co > conveyed the lands of Bell Maddux (Ruscomon, Daniels Denn, Conveniency, > Cow > Quarter) to Merrill Maddux of Somerset Co. (Somerset Co Deed G: 374+) > [Zorabable appeared in the 1781 Somerset Co court records for commiting a > robbery. Was this their impetus to get out of town?] > > On 13 Aug 1784, Merrill and Comfort Maddux of Somerset Co conveyed land in > Worcester Co (Riggans Addition) to Margaret Maddux. (Worcester Co Deed L: > 26-27) [her son Zorabable Maddux was taxed on Riggins Addition in 1783 in > Worcester Co] > > On 27 Oct 1791, Margaret Maddux conveyed "Riggans Addition" to Chares > Walston. (Worcester Deed O: 433-434; not in grantor index under Maddux) > > In Mar 1797 Margaret Maddux of Worcester Co wrote her will; she mentioned > daughters Cataron Ruke and Lanty Shepherd, and son-in-law Charles Walston. > > On 15 Feb 1802, Merrill Maddux of Somerset Co conveyed "Oak Ridge" > (contiguous to "Riggans Addition") to Charles Walston. (Worcester Co Deed > V: > > 100) > On 7 Jun 1802, Charles and Nancy Walston conveyed "Oak Ridge" to John > Powell. (Worcester Co Deed V: 151; deed indexed as "George Walston") > > On 18 Oct 1805, Charles and Nancy Walston conveyed "Riggans Addition" and > "Content" to William Powell Sr. (Worcester Co Deed X: 397-398; not in > grantor index under Walston) > > A Charles Walston, presumably the one from Worcester Co, is enumerated in > the 1810 census of Fleming Co, KY; he is then enumerated in the 1820 > census > for Lewis Co, KY. He purchased land in Lewis Co in 1810, 1811, and 1812. > He > settled in the same area where Zorabable Maddux, son of Bell and Margaret > Maddux, settled in 1794. The Walston surname disappears from Lewis Co in > 1830 and starts appearing in Pickaway Co, OH - the same area where > Zorabable > > Maddux and his descendants went to live. > . > Returning to my original question, Charles Walston definitely had a wife > named Nancy from 1802 to 1805. Bell Maddux named daughter Nancy in his > will > in 1773. Margaret Maddux called Charles her son-in-law in 1797. The > evidence > > certainly suggests (but does not prove) that Nancy Maddux was the wife of > Charles Walston. Possibly more evidence will turn up, but I'm not going to > hold my breath. > > Now, who was Merrill Maddux and how was he related to Bell Maddux? Were > William and John Powell also related by marriage? A William Powell > witnessed > > Margaret's will, and Charles and Nancy Walston conveyed "Riggans Addition" > to a William Powell Sr. Their other property, "Oak Ridge", was conveyed to > John Powell . Too many questions, too little time.... > > *************************************** > QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? > Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: > http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 22:29:37 -0400 > From: "Patricia Charron" <patricia7@cinci.rr.com> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Address of loyalty 1689 > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <36D7B37BE88549DFB592CD7C26B45106@kitchenfruit> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Stewart...preferred Scot spelling....Stuart...French preferred > spelling...Mary Stewart/Stuart was briefly married to the heir of the > French > throne whose Medici mother allowed him to die rather than have a mastoid > operated on. > > Siblings James II was raised at the French throne with his Catholic > grandmother and Ann lived with her sister Mary in the Protestant Orange > environs....thus the followed their youthful bent. Anything was better > than > returning to the days of the Cromwell spirit of suppression. Pat. > > -----Original Message----- > From: lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of John Polk > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:37 AM > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LDR] Address of loyalty 1689 > > You are right of course - Catholic Stewart (Stuart), singular, not plural. > James II was perceived as a Catholic and his accession in 1685 led to > turmoil and the fear of the reinstatement of Catholicism in England. This > boiled over when James had the audacity to produce a son in 1688, raising > the prospect of a Catholic dynasty. This precipitated the crisis that > brought William and Mary to the throne, with the attendant repercussions > in > Maryland I was describing. > John Polk > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Patricia Charron" <patricia7@cinci.rr.com> > To: "'David Kearney'" <kearneyd@erols.com>; > <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 4:05 PM > Subject: Re: [LDR] Address of loyalty 1689 > > >> Let's keep in mind, of the 6 Stewarts only James II was a Catholic, and > the >> Mary of William and Mary was a Stewart as was her sister Queen Anne who >> succeeded them. the Catholic Stewarts" is a myth...there was only one. >> England was Protestant since Henry VIII got the country placed under >> Interdict wherein the practice of the Catholic faith was forbidden in >> England by the Church itself. ( Yes, Charles I is rumored to have > requested >> a priest at his death, but he was NOT a Catholic King, just a Catholic > dead >> man. Pat. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of David >> Kearney >> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 2:02 PM >> To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com >> Cc: David Roberts; kathlingram >> Subject: Re: [LDR] Address of loyalty 1689 >> >> John Polk wrote: >>> I had chance to visit British Public Records Office >> (PRO) at Kew several years ago and took the opportunity to look at the >> original Address of Loyalty document. It is archived in PRO, not Maryland >> Archives, because it was, after all, sent to William and Mary and all the >> royal records end up in PRO. If anyone else wishes to see it, it is found > in >> CO5-718, p.64. (CO refers to Colonial Office). I have a photocopy of it. > The >> Somerset Address is unfortunately not the actual document signed by the >> citizens, but a "true coppy from the original" made by Peter Dent, Deputy >> Collector of Customs for Somerset. ... The volume contains all of the >> Addresses of Loyalty received from the Maryland counties - Somerset's was >> not the only one. Not all of the counties wrote one, although the > Associator >> government that had seized power from Lord Baltimore in 1689 strongly >> encouraged all to do so. William and Mary had just come to the throne in >> England, displacing the Catholic ! >> Stewarts, and it was their accession that triggered the Protestant > faction >> in Maryland - the Associators - to stage the bloodless coup which we now >> call the Maryland Revolution. <<< >> >> _____________ >> >> >> >> John and All, >> >> >> >> I'm enjoying the discussion involving the Address of Loyalty. I'm > interested >> in how the Address fits into how the different religious groups in > colonial >> Maryland interacted during the period. In this regard, given Maryland's >> Catholic-influenced roots, it's interesting to explore the colonial > history >> from a somewhat "Catholic-centric" perspective. Of course, as with most >> everything, different angles of view exist. >> >> >> >> David Roberts, who I've "met" through another rootsweb list, has passed >> along some interesting information about the interplay of the different >> religions during Maryland's colonial days. David lives in St. Mary's > County, >> Maryland, and has studied local history for many years. >> >> >> >> Despite early Maryland's identification with the Catholic faith of the > Lords >> Baltimore, David cautions that except for Jesuits in Cecil County - > Bohemia >> Manor - and a few other spots on the Upper Eastern Shore, there really >> wasn't much Catholic presence on the Eastern Shore of Maryland or >> Delaware >> or on Virginia's Eastern Shore during the colonial period. He states that >> Catholics were mostly in southern Maryland during the colonial period, >> including St. Mary's County; Charles County; Prince George's County; and >> Frederick County. All of these counties are on the Western Shore. >> Nevertheless, given the Catholic faith of Maryland's proprietors through >> much of the 1600s, the possible importance of Catholic influence in all >> of >> Maryland, including the Eastern Shore, shouldn't be overlooked. >> >> >> >> Prior to the Revolution, Maryland was one of the few places in English >> colonial America with a significant Catholic population. According to > David, >> some clusters of Catholics also existed in various places in colonial >> Pennsylvania. Maryland as a whole in the 1600s reflected a somewhat > uniquely >> diverse mixture of religious faiths in the English American colonies. >> >> >> >> The English Jesuits held huge land-grant "manors" in Maryland through the >> 18th century, with David indicating that the four largest were Bohemia on >> the Upper Eastern Shore in Cecil County; St. Thomas at Chapel Point, > Charles >> County; St. Inigoes in lower St. Mary's County (present-day St. Inigoes); >> and Newtown at Newtown Neck, near Leonardtown in St. Mary's County. >> >> >> >> The Jesuits have held St. Thomas since 1641, under a grant from Lord >> Baltimore #2. The church there - St. Ignatius - claims to be the oldest >> uninterrupted English-speaking Roman Catholic Church in the United >> States. >> See www.chapelpoint.org. >> >> >> >> Under Maryland law the Jesuit Order didn't own the land, but the > individual >> priests did. When "popery" was outlawed in the 1690s, the priests could >> continue on these manors since "Father X" owned the land - not as a > priest, >> but as a private white male English subject - thus this legal loop-hole >> allowed the Roman Church to operate until Religious Freedom was restored > in >> 1776. Catholic churches were built on this "private" land, with St. > Francis >> Xavier at Newtown (1731) being the oldest one still standing, according >> to >> David. >> >> >> >> David relates that the Jesuits ran mission churches all over Maryland & >> preached into northern Virginia and southern Pennsylvania. He explains > that >> "popery" was illegal in Virginia, but that a Catholic group - the Brent >> group - survived in Stafford County, Virginia from the 1640s. The >> Virginia >> government left the Brent group alone because of its wealth & influence. >> >> >> >> David understands that some "Methodist migrations" from the Lower Eastern >> Shore & the Virginia's Eastern Shore into southern St. Mary's County, >> Maryland occurred circa 1820-1860, mostly watermen. He says that St. > George >> Island UMC on St. George Island (in the Potomac) and First Friendship UMC > in >> Ridge are both Eastern Shore-based, with the "local" members tending to > have >> descended from Eastern Shore Methodists, rather than from earlier, > "native" >> St. Mary's County stock. >> >> >> >> One of the groups involved in the 17th Century power plays in Maryland > were >> Puritans who had been persecuted in Virginia, found welcome refuge in >> more >> tolerant Maryland, and then turned on the Catholic establishment. See, > e.g., >> Joseph L. Meek Manuscript, members.aol.com/chantery/Articles/JLM_3.htm. >> Later, the "Glorious Revolution" in England that resulted in William and >> Mary taking the throne, and that was the impetus for the "Address of >> Loyalty" from the American subjects (and others?), had the ironic effect > of >> terminating what had been in Maryland a remarkable degree of religious >> freedom and tolerance. >> >> >> >> See Let None Dare Call It Liberty: The Catholic Church in Colonial > America, >> by Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D., >> www.traditioninaction.org/History/B_001_Colonies.html, for some very > pointed >> views: >> >> >> >> "The 'Maryland Experiment' began when Charles I issued a generous charter > to >> a prominent Catholic convert from Anglicanism, Lord Cecil Calvert, for >> the >> American colony of Maryland. In the new colony, religious tolerance for > all >> so-called Christians was preserved by Calvert until 1654. In that year, >> Puritans from Virginia succeeded in overthrowing Calvert's rule, although >> Calvert regained control four years later. The last major political > uprising >> took place in 1689, when the 'Glorious Revolution" of William and Mary >> ignited a new anti-Catholic revolt in Maryland, and the rule of the next >> Lord Baltimore, Charles Calvert, was overthrown. >> >> "Therefore, in 1692 Maryland's famous Religious Toleration Act officially >> ended, and the Maryland Assembly established the so-called Church of > England >> as the official State religion supported by tax levies. Restrictions were >> imposed on Catholics for public worship, and priests could be prosecuted > for >> saying Mass. Although Catholics generally maintained their social status, >> they were denied the right to vote or otherwise participate in the >> government of the colony their ancestors had founded. This barebones > history >> is the real story of the famous religious liberty of colonial Maryland." >> >> >> >> [citation omitted] >> >> >> >> For more background, see also Colonial History of Maryland, from Our >> Country, Volume 1, >> www.publicbookshelf.com/public_html/Our_Country_Vol_1/colonialh_ig.html; >> Province of Maryland, >> > en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Province_of_Maryland#Maryland_and_the_English_Civil_Wa >> r; History of the United States of America, by Henry William Elson, The >> MacMillan Company, New York, 1904, chapter IV, pp. 75-83, transcribed by >> Kathy Leigh, www.usgennet.org/usa/topic/colonial/book/chap4_2.html; and >> Historic St. Mary's City, www.stmaryscity.org/History.html. >> >> >> >> I'm interested in the thoughts and other input of list members on the >> interactions, both "good" and "bad," of people of different faiths in the >> Lower Delmarva during the colonial period and how that might have > influenced >> our Delmarva ancestors' lives. For instance, does anyone have known >> ancestors from the area who renounced their Catholic faith during the > 1600s? >> >> >> >> Dave K >> *************************************** >> QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? >> Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: >> http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> *************************************** >> QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? >> Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: >> http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > *************************************** > QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? > Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: > http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 22:14:54 -0400 > From: "Patricia Charron" <patricia7@cinci.rr.com> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Rawley and Rencher & Underwood > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <D9B2230FF0E0493FB784B9CDEA156AE7@kitchenfruit> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Becky,I am off your track and annoying, but can you tell us a little about > Sarah Fisher? I know that Phillip and Elizabeth Maddox Fisher had a > daughter > Sarah speculatively sometime in these 1690's. Is Phillip and Eliz's > daughter > yours, or is Phillip's daughter Sarah the one who married William > Grice/Grace? Pat > > -----Original Message----- > From: lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Miller's > Choice > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 3:51 PM > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LDR] Rawley and Rencher & Underwood > > I descend from John Rencher (d. 1711) three ways: > 1.? daughter Elizabeth (1678-post 1729) m. John Grandee-Roberts > 2.? son Thomas Rencher (1687-1772)?m. Bridget Shiles > 3.? son Underwood Rencher (1692-1750) m.?Sarah Fisher > ? > Another son, Samuell Rencher, ancestor of Martha Shroeder of this list, > witnessed the will of James Ralley on 12 March 1710/1711 (EB9:1) who had a > wife Frances and?a number of children, including a son William who sold > Ireland Eye to my ancestor John Shores in 1713 which Shores sold to John > Nicholson in 1724 (GH:160). ?Samuel Rencher signed as next of kin on the > inventory of James Royle on 22 March 1710/11 (32B:265).? > ? > Ralley and Royle are apparently the same man and is also likely the James > Rawley who owned Ireland's Eye which I believe is in or near the community > of Sharptown. > My question to Martha and anyone else is:? Who is James Rawley and why?did > Samuel Rencher sign as a next of kin on the inventory of his estate? > ? > There should be a lot of Rencher descendants on this list and I hope > someone > has looked into the identity of > John Rencher's wife, Frances,?surname unknown to me.? I'm looking at > Rawley > for a clue.? I thought perhaps Frances was an Underwood considering a son > was named Underwood.? > Anthony Underwood owned Little Belean?because he married the widow of > Robert > Ridgely of St. Mary's County (d. 1681),?but I don't know anything else > about > him (and haven't looked thoroughly as yet). > ? > Any help or thoughts welcome.? I'm trying to make a list of?specifics I > need > to look up at the MSA in Annapolis sometime this fall. > ? > Thanks, > Becky M > > > > *************************************** > QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? > Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: > http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------ > > To contact the LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS list administrator, send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-admin@rootsweb.com. > > To post a message to the LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS mailing list, send an email > to LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS@rootsweb.com. > > __________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com > with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body > of the > email with no additional text. > > > End of LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 308 > **************************************************** >