Thanks all for replying ... I thought Maybe I had found My Mary Polly Pace in another State as her children were right ages as my Mary Polly Pace children I sure cannot find her in Harlan Co Census in 1830.. I wonder if she could have remarried .. and was under another name but the 1840 Harlan Co Court records still note her as Polly Pace so guess she was up in one of those Hollers where Moonshiner shot at anyone coming up if they didn't know who they were... or maybe the Census takers did not want to climb that Hill....so many reasons people were not on Census ...and I have heard the Census Taker were pretty snockered from Tasting the moonshine at each house ... He probably just climbed on his mule and went Home..hers being last house.. I will tell you some from Harlan Co Still living and said when they were boys in Harlan Co Ky in 1930's or so That they were careful they did not go near anyone Stills, as a warning shot would ring over the Hollers ....Harlan Co was a dry County in 1900's, I have forgotten what years that took Place .. some arrested for Smuggling in Liquor and Many had Stills..Some of my Pace's married Maddens and some of those Madden boys had shoot out with Sherriff In Harlan Co Ky one was killed was a nephew by Marriage to one of my Great Aunts Darlene ----- Original Message ----- From: Rebecca Christensen To: darlene Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 1:10 PM Subject: Re: [PACE-L] 1830 Cen Rutherford Co TN William Pace & Ezekiel Pace Darlene, I'm on vacation away from my records but the Rutherford Co. TN Paces are my Paces. This is the William Pace - Ruth Lambert family and descendants. Mary Pace is Mary Ann Loving Pace, my ancestor, widow of James Pace who died in the Battle of New Orleans. We don't know exactly how Ezekiel Pace is related. William Pace is connected to my family - without my notes to verify ages, I believe the William Pace below is Melea Allan's ancestor (several William Paces in the family). If I recall correctly, there should also be a few other Paces in the 1830 Rutherford Co. TN census as I recall going through and making a sheet identifying all of them. Rebecca darlene <darlene@adweb.net> wrote: I sure need help here who are these guys: 1830 Cen Rutherford Co TN William Pace age20-30 Years had one son age Under 5 wife abt same age as Wm this one Hh Ezekiel Pace age20-30years had two sons wife same as Husband Mary Pace age 40-50 who was her husband?.... ==== PACE Mailing List ==== Check out the Pace GenConnect Boards where you can post or peruse Pace Bibles, Obits, Bios, Deeds, Wills, Queries, etc. Bookmark this URL: http://boards.ancestry.com

I sure need help here who are these guys: 1830 Cen Rutherford Co TN William Pace age20-30 Years had one son age Under 5 wife abt same age as Wm this one Hh Ezekiel Pace age20-30years had two sons wife same as Husband Mary Pace age 40-50 who was her husband?....

Please do keep posting. David Sanford

Kathlynn, Please continue posting on the mailing list. Most of us benefit from your observatiosn and efforts. Betty Pace

The sister of Enoch ALLDREDGE, Elizabeth (1816-1888), married Garland SMITH. Enoch and Amelia"s son, Garland Smith Alldredge, was probably named for the husband of Elizabeth. I have several PACE/WALKER marriages. What is your WALKER family? Nancy Webb Wood ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lois Long Carey" <lcarey@bcpl.net> To: <PACE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 9:15 AM Subject: Amelia Pace b. 1811 m. Enoch Alldredge in Ala > Someone has posted that Amelia was the daughter > of John Pace Jr. and Zeporah Kirby > and that the parents of John Pace jr. were > John Pace Sr.m. Ann Russell > > Names of Amelia and Enoch's children were posted > on the web. There were thirteen of them. > one of which was: > Garland Smith Alldredge b.17 Nov. 1836 > > Garland is a name found in the Walker family > is there any connection ? >

Someone has posted that Amelia was the daughter of John Pace Jr. and Zeporah Kirby and that the parents of John Pace jr. were John Pace Sr.m. Ann Russell Names of Amelia and Enoch's children were posted on the web. There were thirteen of them. one of which was: Garland Smith Alldredge b.17 Nov. 1836 Garland is a name found in the Walker family is there any connection ?

This topic has degenerated into silly and petty bickering. Doesn't your system have a delete button????? If you don't want to read about Sarah Maycock, just delete the message. David Sanford

So the biography effectively says that the NC Richard Pace, whose will was probated in 1738, was a son of George (Richard, George, Richard). While others argue that the NC Richard Pace was a son of Richard (George, Richard). And others argue that the NC Richard Pace might have been the son of an unknown Pace not descended from Richard and Isabella. Would be interesting to know which is the right theory. Hmm darlene <darlene@adweb.net> wrote: I just found this: Search through a rare 5-volume Encyclopedia of Virginia Biography, spanning three centuries and including illustrations and many details. Also note the two-volume Maryland and Virginia Colonials, providing well-documented genealogies on 22 colonial families and hundreds of affiliated families. On this data set, you'll find: . Biographical sketches . Family histories and genealogies . Dates and details of vital events . Occupations . A variety of genealogical source material, including private and public records . Interesting supplemental details such as illustrations, coats of arms, and portraits .......below is page 166 from these Volume's Virginia Historical Genealogies, Pace, Page 166 be glad to send to any of you, it says George Pace -m- Daug of Samuel Maycock its really a Biography of Va Pace's ALSO it says one George Pace & ? Woodlief had two sons John Sr March 25 1726-27date of Will & both sons John Str & Richard went to NC ,Richard 's will says of Bertie pct later Northampton date of his will March 12 1736 probated 1738 I have no clue how true but it does mention land owned which help a bit this also mention Samuel Maycock was known as a Capt as Well as a Rev.and a member of the Council in Va it also mentioned that Sarah Maycock was Granted 200 Acres in Surry 1626 see Chapter IX also I believe these biography were written in abt1915 at least Vol 1 was written then does not say who submitted them...or maybe I did not go thru enough pages.. I hit wrong key and went down... darn! makes me so mad...((Grin)) But will be happy to send this Bio to anyone that wants them Darlene ==== PACE Mailing List ==== Be sure to check the Pace Family Genealogy Forum at http://genforum.com/pace/ and the Pace Network at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~pace --------------------------------- Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail . "The New Version is radically easier to use" – The Wall Street Journal

Kathlynn: I am very interested in continuing the discussion and think it would benefit future researchers to have it on the list. As long as our subject line is specific, it would be very easy for those not wishing to view the discussion to delete it. Working through problems together, as far as we are able, is sound genealogy. I am undecided as to the Sarah Maycock dilemma. It may be wishful thinking, but I would love to reach a conclusion before 2007. I have been corresponding with a gentleman who is researching, as he put it, "George Pace of Maycock's Point" for the 2007 Jamestown anniversary. He is not a descendant. I am just one of many who appreciates your efforts. Nancy Webb Wood ----- Original Message ----- From: <Kathlynn3@aol.com> To: <PACE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 3:31 PM Subject: Descendants of Pace/Smythe/Maycock/Baker/Eppes/Woodlief > Will all descendants who have the above ancestors and/or have any interest > or desire in discussing these lines please let me know and in the future I > will Post privately, in order to prevent unsetting/wearying those on the list > who don't have any interest. > > However, I prefer to make all post to the list, in consideration of others > who are searching all lines and newbies who need all information in order to > find their connections. Actually, I thought that was a major purpose of the > list serv. Guess I'm wrong again! LOL! > > However, I don't need or want the upset myself of the backlash of criticism. > > Sent with good intentions. > Sincerely > ~Kathlynn~ > > ______________________________

Since this is a public List, the only way anyone would not be "kept on the list," in my understanding, is to proactively "Unsubscribe" via the conventional method. Of course, any private discussions would no longer be part of this List. So I believe the question is not whether to be kept on this List, but whether to take a particular discussion offline, which, as someone else has stated, basically defeats the purpose of having the List. How many times have we found a particular discussion tiresome (brings to mind the ole' Pace Picante Sauce thread). For those who seem annoyed, just take heart that anything will eventually wear itself out and something else will take its place on the scale of reading desirability. - jhh -----Original Message----- From: Charlotte Hazel [mailto:chazel@otelco.net] Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 6:21 PM To: PACE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PACE-L] Descendants of Pace/Smythe/Maycock/Baker/Eppes/Woodlief Please keep me on the list for the discussions

Just to clarify: It's not a family reunion, and it's not a family mailing list, and it's not a Pace Society mailing list. It's an unmoderated Rootsweb mailing list, open to anyone who wants to subscribe to it. Anyone who does subscribe is entitled to post. All Pace descendants are not necessarily kin. And you don't have to be a Pace descendant to post to the list. The statement of purpose is at http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/p/pace.html. "While emphasis will be placed on the ancestors and descendants of the famous Richard Pace of the Jamestown Colony (d. 1624), all Pace research is welcome." --------------------------------- The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider.

It is always moving to see original records from the 17th century, at least I find it so. However I personally can't see that it's either necessary or desirable for those of us who are merely pursuing our personal family history, to see and handle these fragile documents. There is a difference between relying on transcripts found on the internet (including this list), and relying on the published transcripts of the records. Transcripts uploaded to the internet may or may not be correct. But the published transcripts will have been proofread with great care, and should be reliable. Historians and professional genealogists rely on the published transcripts, so it seems to me that us amateurs should do likewise. With regard to the record from the Minutes, about Sarah Maycock receiving land: the question that arose, as I understand it, was whether the item did or did not include a reference to a Mrs Samuel Maycock. Ruth Clark, in one of the two transcripts which she posted to this list, had "Mrs Samuel Maycock"; in the other transcript which she posted to the list, she had "Mr Samuel Maycock". Kim Zapalac has now confirmed that the transcript in the LoC, which is the same transcript that Ruth saw, has "Mr Samuel Maycock". That seems to settle the question, unless I'm missing something. Thanks to Kim for taking the trouble to find it. --------------------------------- Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail . "The New Version is radically easier to use" – The Wall Street Journal

Please keep me on the list-gkeller@esinet.net On Jul 9, 2006, at 3:31 PM, Kathlynn3@aol.com wrote: > Will all descendants who have the above ancestors and/or have any > interest > or desire in discussing these lines please let me know and in the > future I > will Post privately, in order to prevent unsetting/wearying those > on the list > who don't have any interest. > > However, I prefer to make all post to the list, in consideration > of others > who are searching all lines and newbies who need all information > in order to > find their connections. Actually, I thought that was a major > purpose of the > list serv. Guess I'm wrong again! LOL! > > However, I don't need or want the upset myself of the backlash of > criticism. > > Sent with good intentions. > Sincerely > ~Kathlynn~ > > > ==== PACE Mailing List ==== > If you haven't done so within the last six months, please post a > message describing your Earliest Pace Ancestor and how you descend > from them. Please include dates, places, spouses, etc, if > possible. Send the message to PACE-L@rootsweb.com >

Please keep me on the list for the discussions. I descend from Francis Marion Pace and Elizabeth Walker Pace and am very interested in these discussions. Charlotte Hazel Somerville, AL

Will all descendants who have the above ancestors and/or have any interest or desire in discussing these lines please let me know and in the future I will Post privately, in order to prevent unsetting/wearying those on the list who don't have any interest. However, I prefer to make all post to the list, in consideration of others who are searching all lines and newbies who need all information in order to find their connections. Actually, I thought that was a major purpose of the list serv. Guess I'm wrong again! LOL! However, I don't need or want the upset myself of the backlash of criticism. Sent with good intentions. Sincerely ~Kathlynn~

Howdy Pace Cousins:   My Pace Family Connection Starts with William Johnson B ca 1700 Middlesex County Va. D- 3/10/1744/5 M. 1721 Middlesex County to Margaret Pace-BAPT. 3/15/1701. My 5th Grt Grand Parents, To their Son;   Stephen Johnson B. 2/1/1741 Died in Amherst County Va. Will PR. 1805 Married  Goochland County, Va10/1/1756 to Sussan Pace B. ca, 1740D. after 1813 in Nelson County, Va.   I see all of this ABT <Sarah Maycock>_______???  WHO is she ever been Directly Connected to??   SEEMS That she has become an OBsession.   FOR Betty, EVERY one has seen, Kathlyn's reply, I would take that type of reply as an insult. More of a reprimand than a family like reply. <OH FOR SO MANY THOUGHTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER NEVER EXPRESSED> NOW as a Pace Descendant I AM entitled to COMMENT.   CUZ A T & Leona  <atpowelljr@aol.com

Everyone keeps talking about seeing this original document yet no one has done anything about it. If someone will tell me WHERE the original document is held, I will call and get a copy of it. Then when I receive it, I will scan it and send it to everyone who is interested. It couldn't cost more then possibly $10 to get a copy? I am just really tired of hearing about seeing the original document. PLEASE, someone tell me where to send for a copy and I will more then happy to do this for everyone. Then maybe this issue will be settled. Julie

Betty I think What we are trying to find out was ..... The Sarah Maycock that -m-George Pace was it Samuel Maycock Wife or daug ?and it kinda looks like it turning out to be daug as I read it ..at least we know daug was reserved some land by Men in goverment but then I can get confused reading document so I leave it up those who seem to understand those old writing better than I and I am glad we are sorting it out on this list .. as more minds do help clear it up... I just found this: Search through a rare 5-volume Encyclopedia of Virginia Biography, spanning three centuries and including illustrations and many details. Also note the two-volume Maryland and Virginia Colonials, providing well-documented genealogies on 22 colonial families and hundreds of affiliated families. On this data set, you'll find: . Biographical sketches . Family histories and genealogies . Dates and details of vital events . Occupations . A variety of genealogical source material, including private and public records . Interesting supplemental details such as illustrations, coats of arms, and portraits .......below is page 166 from these Volume's Virginia Historical Genealogies, Pace, Page 166 be glad to send to any of you, it says George Pace -m- Daug of Samuel Maycock its really a Biography of Va Pace's ALSO it says one George Pace & ? Woodlief had two sons John Sr March 25 1726-27date of Will & both sons John Str & Richard went to NC ,Richard 's will says of Bertie pct later Northampton date of his will March 12 1736 probated 1738 I have no clue how true but it does mention land owned which help a bit this also mention Samuel Maycock was known as a Capt as Well as a Rev.and a member of the Council in Va it also mentioned that Sarah Maycock was Granted 200 Acres in Surry 1626 see Chapter IX also I believe these biography were written in abt1915 at least Vol 1 was written then does not say who submitted them...or maybe I did not go thru enough pages.. I hit wrong key and went down... darn! makes me so mad...((Grin)) But will be happy to send this Bio to anyone that wants them Darlene

Dear Cousins, I personally find all of these discussions interesting and informative which explains why I subscribe to the Pace list. I now find myself more knowledgeable about the Julian and Gregorian calendars, for which I am grateful. I think that Kathlynn is totally justified in desiring to see original documents and in questioning previous conclusions. At some point we all have to examine the available evidence and form our own conclusions as to what most likely happened. And the original documents are better than another persons best guess as to what that document means; after all, our own interpretation might differ from theirs. I think that people on this list ought to feel free to express their opinions and others ought to feel equally free to disagree with those opinions. But always in the context of a family reunion - explain patiently to Uncle Joe why he is wrong, but try not to alienate him to the point where he will write you out of his will. So, here's my opinion, formed from following discussions on this list, and totally unsupported by references to specific documents or links to previous posts: 1. Samuel Maycock died in the massacre. 2. His daughter, Sarah, born shortly before or not long after the massacre, survived him. 3. His wife, Mrs. Samuel Maycock, died in the massacre or not long after, possibly in the epidemic following the massacre. 4. Capt. Roger Smith took the orphan Sarah into his household and appears to be acting as her guardian, witness the Council's declaration of young Sarah's right to 200 acres of land. 5. Blanks to be filled in here. 6. On coming of age (perhaps mid teens), the orphan Sarah marries George Pace, son of Richard. I realize that my opinion makes no material contribution to the advancement of Pace research. I offer it in the hope that someone will correct me where I am wrong and help me to formulate a better hypothesis which will always be subject to change in the face of new evidence or when presented with a more logical interpretation of current evidence. Best regards to all, Joe Anderson ----Original Message Follows---- From: Kathlynn3@aol.com To: PACE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PACE-L] Sarah Maycock questions?? Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 01:05:19 EDT Betty, I assume you are talking to me, since you addressed your following email only to me, personally. I believe my following message that you attached after your message IS SELF-EXPLANATORY! I was simply thanking Joe and Kim for their replies stating their opinions in regard to the message I had posted previously. There was no source included, because a source was not required for this particular thank you message!

Betty, I assume you are talking to me, since you addressed your following email only to me, personally. I believe my following message that you attached after your message IS SELF-EXPLANATORY! I was simply thanking Joe and Kim for their replies stating their opinions in regard to the message I had posted previously. There was no source included, because a source was not required for this particular thank you message! I agree it is not an easy task to refer back to the previous messages in order to know what some are referring to, however, that is exactly what I have to do and I suggest you do the same and I think it will be clear what I was thanking them for. Botton line: I don't have time to find every post in order to cover everthing for you....but if you will look at the most recent post - namely: 1. 7/1/2006 post from Kim Stracener Zapalac > _Zapnyou@aol.com_ (mailto:Zapnyou@aol.com) > Which reveals the fact that she went to the time and trouble to find and posted to the list the complete May 1626 document regarding Sara Maycock's land. Note: This is the first time the whole document has been posted, including the names of men and the source for where it can be found. 2. See my [Kathynn3@aol.com] 7/8/06 post [which included above # 1 again]. 3. See 7/8/06 two different post from Joe > _janders45@hotmail.com_ (mailto:janders45@hotmail.com) 4. See 7/8/06 2nd post from Kim Stracener Zapalac > _Zapnyou@aol.com_ (mailto:Zapnyou@aol.com) 5. See my following 7/8/06 post that you attached after your message [which is my thank you to Kim & Joe for responding with their opinions. .......and surely all of this should clarify for you, and I think you will find that sources were included on all post that required sources....certainly, a thank you does not require a source. BTW you said this has been going on for months, and you get more confused with each persons comments.....have you responded with your help/opinions/documents? If you did I guess I must have missed them. I am sending a copy of this to the list in case someone else is confused and needs explanation. Sooo now I guess I'll get backlash from someone complaining about that too...huh? O' Well! O' yes, one more thing, just for the record.....if I find it necessary to mention Julian and Gregorian dates again, I will certainly do so. It is your responsibility to handle it on your end however you choose to do so. ~Kathlynn~ ************************************** In a message dated 7/8/2006 8:50:07 PM Central Standard Time, halbet@angus1841.com writes: Could not some kind person put a primary source on this page for all of us to see and solve this questions once and for all? This discussion has been going on for months and I just get more confused with each person's comments. Please don't any of you send me any emails telling me that all I have to do is press the "delete" key. I would not dare miss reading one of them for fear I might miss something. No, I am not just lurking. I would really like a definitive reference for this Saray Maycock and to really understand if there is an answer to the question. Forget about the Julian or Gregorian dates. Thank you for your time and work on this subject. betty in ga ----- Original Message ----- From: <Kathlynn3@aol.com> To: <PACE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 6:19 PM Subject: Re: [PACE-L] Sarah Maycock - Virginia Magazine Source Reference > Thanks Joe and Kim, for your reply. And I agree Kim, before we carve > this > in stone we definately need the original document to make sure someone > hasn't > changed the wording.... > > I am really beginning to have reservations about taking earlier > researchers > word for anything. It has been proven that they tamper with the wording. > > I really don't understand why anyone, earlier researchers as well as > current > researchers, would state as documents but enter it in their own statement > form according to their own personal discernment [instead of entering the > actual document word for word] OR extract only a tidbit of the actual > document OR > change Julian dates to Gregorian dates without out explanation. > > To me this just shouldn't be done. Only the word for word document should > be > stated [without changing the wording according to how they themselves > discern it] and also include where the document was found. > > Agree? > > ~Kathlynn~