Keep getting error messsage that this hasn't been delivered so apologies if you have already seen this! Hi list I've finally got the marriage certificate for Emanuel Pace and Jane Joiner in Tanworth-in-Arden, UK. I've struggled for many years to find Jane Joiner and on the census' she has her place of birth as London on 3 records and Birmingham on 2 records which doesn't make any sense. However her father's name doesn't seem to be Joiner although it states she is a spinster. I just don't understand this. I'm not too sure what the surname of the father is, is it Tonks or Jonks??? Why would she have a different surname to her father? I can send you a copy of the certificate to see if you wish to help me read his name. Many thanks Jaquie
Governor, off and on. Try wikipedia for further info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Wyatt Betty Bivins <halbet@angus1841.com> wrote: Does anyone know anything about the Sir Francis Wyatt who is referenced in the post? thanks, betty in ga ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nancy W. Wood" To: Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 4:34 PM Subject: [PACE-L] Sara Maycock > 1626, May 8 - "Att a Court held May 8, 1626, being present Sir Francis > Wyatt, Governor Capt. Francis West, Captain Roger Smith, Capt. Samuel > Matthews, Mr. William Claybourne, it is ordered ye Sara Maycock for four > servants brought over in the Abigail, in 1622, upon the account of Mr. > Samuel Maycock, shall have 200 acres of land to be taken up by her in any > place not formerly taken up." Virginia Magazine Vol. 25, p 342 > > 1626, May 8 - "It is ordered yt for fower servants brought over in the > Abigail uppon the account of Mrs. Samuel Maycock shall have two hundred > acres of land to be taken upp by her in any place not formerly taken up." > Original record in the Library of Congress, Last item on page 247 - there > are two pages numbered 246. > > These two transcripts do not agree as to whether it was Sarah Maycock or > Mrs. Samuel Maycock who received the land grant. Does anyone on the list > live in or near Washington who could check this original record in the > Library of Congress? > > Nancy Webb Wood > > > ==== PACE Mailing List ==== > To subscribe or unsubscribe send email to PACE-L-request@rootsweb.com with > the one word message: subscribe OR unsubscribe > For digest mode, use PACE-D-request@rootsweb.com > > > ==== 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 --------------------------------- The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider.
Did Sara come over on the ship named Abigail?
If Sarah Maycock aged 31 was a passenger on a ship travelling from London to Virginia in the year ending Xmas 1635, as recently posted, that might be evidence that the widow really did survive. I could not find it in the facsimile pages. I too am inclined to think that the old assumption (that George married the daughter) is more likely than the new theory (that he married the widow), but I acknowledge that we have no proof of either. It's possible proof may be found, with enough digging. To me it's worth pursuing in the hope of positively identifying the wife of George Pace. This lady might be an ancestor of those of us who descend from Richard Pace d. abt 1738 in NC. I for one would like to know who she was, and (if it was the widow he married) who her parents were, and where they came from. --------------------------------- Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail . "The New Version is radically easier to use" The Wall Street Journal
The second version -- the one that omits the grantee's name -- appears to be the version posted by Ruth Keys Clark in this forum on 23 Feb 2003. There is a later posting by Ruth Clark (19 May 2004) which also refers to the same record. In this posting, Ruth says that the record reads "in part" as follows: "It is ordered yt Sara Maycock for fower servants brought over in the Abigail uppon accoupt of Mr. Samuel Maycock shall have two hundred acres of land to be taken upp by her in any place not formerly taken upp." This agrees with the transcript from the Virginia Magazine. --------------------------------- The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider.
Does anyone know anything about the Sir Francis Wyatt who is referenced in the post? thanks, betty in ga ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nancy W. Wood" <nwwood@cox.net> To: <PACE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 4:34 PM Subject: [PACE-L] Sara Maycock > 1626, May 8 - "Att a Court held May 8, 1626, being present Sir Francis > Wyatt, Governor Capt. Francis West, Captain Roger Smith, Capt. Samuel > Matthews, Mr. William Claybourne, it is ordered ye Sara Maycock for four > servants brought over in the Abigail, in 1622, upon the account of Mr. > Samuel Maycock, shall have 200 acres of land to be taken up by her in any > place not formerly taken up." Virginia Magazine Vol. 25, p 342 > > 1626, May 8 - "It is ordered yt for fower servants brought over in the > Abigail uppon the account of Mrs. Samuel Maycock shall have two hundred > acres of land to be taken upp by her in any place not formerly taken up." > Original record in the Library of Congress, Last item on page 247 - there > are two pages numbered 246. > > These two transcripts do not agree as to whether it was Sarah Maycock or > Mrs. Samuel Maycock who received the land grant. Does anyone on the list > live in or near Washington who could check this original record in the > Library of Congress? > > Nancy Webb Wood > > > ==== PACE Mailing List ==== > To subscribe or unsubscribe send email to PACE-L-request@rootsweb.com with > the one word message: subscribe OR unsubscribe > For digest mode, use PACE-D-request@rootsweb.com > > >
The 1624/5 muster shows eleven persons who are known to have arrived on the Abigail in 1622. Five are described as servants. One of these, Christopher Bankus, appears in the muster of Capt Roger Smith (same household as Sarah Maycock). The Abigail brought an epidemic which reportedly killed twice as many as had died in the attack of March 22. The population was reduced to about 500. --------------------------------- All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine
According to Virginia colonial Abstracts, Vol III Charles City County Court Order 1655-1658 Page 146 where .....Richard Pace Orphan of Desceased George Pace asked that Wm Baugh be guardian of him so Richard was old enough to make that request so abt how old would he have been? Might help determine when George Pace -m- Sarah Maycock So we know he was alive here in Charles City County Court orders The sale of Land in 1650 of George Pace to Thomas Drew in Oct 12 1650 per his son Richard Confirms this Feb 25 1658/9 Richard himself signed this knowing his father George did in fact sell this land to Thomas Drew is the way I read this.... So Richard was old enough to sign this ... also noted in this court Order 1658-1659, both his Mother Sara Maycock and George Pace Deceased Darlene
This has been an interesting discussion and I'm certainly more knowledgeable now about the Julian and Gregorian calendars. On this issue, I think that we are going to have to tolerate some level of uncertainty and learn to live with what appears to be the most likely answer in light of all the available evidence. It seems to me that we have two candidates for the wife of George Pace: 1. The widow of Samuel Maycock, or 2. Sarah, the daughter of Samuel Maycock A few days ago, W. James Pace posted a very logical note pointing out that it was highly unlikely that the widow of Samuel Maycock would have waited 14 years before remarrying. I found this argument persuasive and have seen no evidence countering it. What do we know about the widow of Samuel Maycock? Not much, I think. All that I know is that Samuel had a daughter; hence, he must have had a wife. Do we know more than that? We have the evidence of the young Sara Maycock in the household of Roger Smith, an apparent orphan. To me, this implies that her mother either died in the massacre or afterwards, possibly in the plague that followed the massacre. For me, the most logical conclusion by far is that George Pace married the daughter of Samuel Maycock. Happily, this agrees with the long-held opinion of generations of Pace researchers. I think that it is great to challenge long-held opinions. But you don't overturn them based only on doubt - you overturn them based on new and persuasive evidence. Joe Anderson
In a message dated 6/21/2006 11:01:23 PM Central Standard Time, gkeller@esinet.net writes: Did not the massacre occur on a "fateful friday?" Have you checked the day of the week as well as the numerical date? According to my understanding, the massacre STILL occurred on 'Good Friday March 22, 1621/22. [correction requested?]. To reiterate: The 1621 year = Old Julian Calendar date [which was the Calendar date used at the time of the massacre when the 12 month year consisted of months from March 25 of one year to March 25 of the next year]. The 1622 year = New Gregorian Calendar date [which wasn't adopted until 1752, therefore NOT in use at the time of the massacre, but currently in use and, of course, the 12 months of a year are from January 1 to January 1.
Neither version says that land is to go to "Mrs Samuel Maycock". In the first version, land is due for four servants brought over on the account of "Mr Samuel Maycock" and the land is to go to "Sara Maycock". In the second version, land is due for four servants brought over on the account of "Mrs Samuel Maycock". The name of the person who is to have the land is omitted. So the second version can't be an accurate transcription of the original record. --------------------------------- All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine
Did not the massacre occur on a "fateful friday?" Have you checked the day of the week as well as the numerical date? On Jun 21, 2006, at 6:11 PM, Kathlynn3@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 6/21/2006 2:05:17 PM Central Standard Time, > BetinFL@aol.com writes: > > What about the child Sara Maycock age 2, who lived with the Family > of Roger > Smith? That is a mystery. > Betty, et al....this is redundant, but hopefully it MAYsolve your > mystery. > The following, through trial & error, is what Jim & I worked up > and agree on. > Please, please tell me you all agree....I would hate to have to > take this > back to the drawing board again. Jim & I both got headaches over > this. > Conversely, I am still opened for correction. > > From my notes section: > > Sources of Documentation: > 1. March 22, 1621 = factual date of the Jamestown Indian Massacre > based on > Old Julian Calendar used during this time: NOTE: The following > Order was > written March 4, 1622, however it states Massacre occurred 22 day > of March last. > > From The Library of Congress web site: > _http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage? > collId=mtj8&fileName=mtj8pagevc04.db&recNum=57_ > (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage? > collId=mtj8&fileName=mtj8pagevc04.db&recNum=57) > The Thomas Jefferson Papers Series 8. Virginia Records Manuscripts. > 1606-1737. Susan Myra Kingsbury, editor: > Records of the Virginia Company, 1606-26, Volume IV: Miscellaneous > Records, > Image 58 - page 40 > CCXCII. Governor in Virginia. Order to Keep the 22d. of March Holy. > March 4, 1622/3 > Manuscript Records Virginia Company, III, pt. ii, p. 51a > Document in Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. > List of Records No. 417 > By the Governor and Capt generall of Virginia > > In consideration of Gods most mercifull delivrance of so many in this > Countrie of Virginia from the treachery of the Indians on the 22th > day of March > last: The Governor wth the advice of the Counsell of State hath > thought it very > fitt, that the 22th day of March both this prsent yeare and for > ever herafter > (in memory of that great prservation) be in this Countrie > celebrated Holy: > And therefore doth straightly charg and Comand, Capt Willm Tuckar, > that he, and > all other that are any way undr his charge, do keep that day holy, > spending > the same in prayer thanksgiveing to God, and other holy exercises; > not > suffering any of them to worke, as he will answer the contrary at > his perill. > Given at James Cittie the 4th day of March 1622. > The like (mutatis mutandis) to the Comander of each Plantation. > Francis Wyatt > > Kathlynn comments: The following facts have to be kept in mind in > order to > prevent one from instantly thinking that Sarah Maycock born 1622/23 > [based on > the fact she is found at age 2 on January 29, 1624/25 VA Musters] > cannot > possible be the daughter of Samuel Maycock who was killed March 22, > 1621/22 in > the Indian Massacre. Factually, these dates are correct, but they > don't make > sense unless one realizes: > > 1. The Old Julian Calendar dates were used during this time > frame when > the year began on March 25 and continued to March 25 of > the following > year. In 1752 the current Gregorian Calendar was adopted and a > year was > changed from January to January. > 2. Volume year dates such as March 5, 1623/24 offer both the > Old Julian > year date and the New Gregorian year date and the volume dates are > used only > for the months of January 1 to March 25. > 3. There was only three days [not a year] between the above > dates March > 22, 1621/22 and March 25, 1622/23. It is interesting to note that > a child born > anytime during January 1621 up to March 25, 1622 would be only be > a few > months older than a child born on or after March 25, 1622 [not a > year or more > older}. Another interesting fact: A child born March 24, 1621 > would be only 1 > day older than one born 25 March 1622. > 4. Apparently Sarah's mother, Mrs. Samuel Maycock, was pregnant > with Sarah > at the time Samuel was killed, and Sarah could have been born just > a few > months later. > 5. The Indian Massacre occurred March 22, 1621 AKA March 22, > 1621/22. > Most web sites and published books claim the Massacre date as > March 22, 1622 > [per Gregorian calendar]. This is incorrect and what causes > difficulty when > trying to make other document dates fit. In reference to Sarah > muster dates > information and father Samuel's massacre death date, regardless of > which date is > used they all fit perfectly, i.e., IF you use Julian dates > consistently [or > Gregorian dates consistently]. > 6. You CANNOT make dates fit if you use a Julian date from one > document > and a Gregorian date from another. > Recap using both Julian/Gregorian calendar dates: Samuel killed > March 22, > 1621/22. Sarah was age 2 on January 29, 1624/25 muster = born > 1622/23. > > 6/18/2006 Jim > _jim@williamson-clan.com_ (mailto:jim@williamson- > clan.com) > writes: Kathlynn, I think we are saying the same thing. I think I > just got > mixed up swapping calendars back and forth. To keep me from > becoming befuddled > again, I am strictly using Julian calendar only and working backward: > January 29th, 1624 Muster taken - Sarah has passed her second > birthday but > not yet attained her third > January 29th, 1623 Sarah is past her first birthday but not yet > attained her > second. > January 29th, 1622 Sarah has not reached her 1st birthday, but > would have > been born. > Conclusion: It is possible then, for Sarah to have been born prior > to the > massacre on March 22nd, 1621, but no earlier than January 30th, 1621. > Kathlynn comments: I agree! It is done, it is finished, it is > sealed....and > I have entered daughter Sarah's born date as Bet. January 30, > 1621/22 & > March 22, 1621/1622. > > However, I have not carved in stone yet....so if anyone disagrees, > please > inform me. > > ~Kathlynn~ > > > > > > ==== PACE Mailing List ==== > Check out the new Pace Society of America web page at: > www.pacesociety.org, and please join the Pace Society of America > for only $25.00 per year. >
In a message dated 6/21/2006 2:05:17 PM Central Standard Time, BetinFL@aol.com writes: What about the child Sara Maycock age 2, who lived with the Family of Roger Smith? That is a mystery. Betty, et al....this is redundant, but hopefully it MAYsolve your mystery. The following, through trial & error, is what Jim & I worked up and agree on. Please, please tell me you all agree....I would hate to have to take this back to the drawing board again. Jim & I both got headaches over this. Conversely, I am still opened for correction. From my notes section: Sources of Documentation: 1. March 22, 1621 = factual date of the Jamestown Indian Massacre based on Old Julian Calendar used during this time: NOTE: The following Order was written March 4, 1622, however it states Massacre occurred 22 day of March last. From The Library of Congress web site: _http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mtj8&fileName=mtj8pagevc04.db&recNum=57_ (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mtj8&fileName=mtj8pagevc04.db&recNum=57) The Thomas Jefferson Papers Series 8. Virginia Records Manuscripts. 1606-1737. Susan Myra Kingsbury, editor: Records of the Virginia Company, 1606-26, Volume IV: Miscellaneous Records, Image 58 - page 40 CCXCII. Governor in Virginia. Order to Keep the 22d. of March Holy. March 4, 1622/3 Manuscript Records Virginia Company, III, pt. ii, p. 51a Document in Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. List of Records No. 417 By the Governor and Capt generall of Virginia In consideration of Gods most mercifull delivrance of so many in this Countrie of Virginia from the treachery of the Indians on the 22th day of March last: The Governor wth the advice of the Counsell of State hath thought it very fitt, that the 22th day of March both this prsent yeare and for ever herafter (in memory of that great prservation) be in this Countrie celebrated Holy: And therefore doth straightly charg and Comand, Capt Willm Tuckar, that he, and all other that are any way undr his charge, do keep that day holy, spending the same in prayer thanksgiveing to God, and other holy exercises; not suffering any of them to worke, as he will answer the contrary at his perill. Given at James Cittie the 4th day of March 1622. The like (mutatis mutandis) to the Comander of each Plantation. Francis Wyatt Kathlynn comments: The following facts have to be kept in mind in order to prevent one from instantly thinking that Sarah Maycock born 1622/23 [based on the fact she is found at age 2 on January 29, 1624/25 VA Musters] cannot possible be the daughter of Samuel Maycock who was killed March 22, 1621/22 in the Indian Massacre. Factually, these dates are correct, but they don't make sense unless one realizes: 1. The Old Julian Calendar dates were used during this time frame when the year began on March 25 and continued to March 25 of the following year. In 1752 the current Gregorian Calendar was adopted and a year was changed from January to January. 2. Volume year dates such as March 5, 1623/24 offer both the Old Julian year date and the New Gregorian year date and the volume dates are used only for the months of January 1 to March 25. 3. There was only three days [not a year] between the above dates March 22, 1621/22 and March 25, 1622/23. It is interesting to note that a child born anytime during January 1621 up to March 25, 1622 would be only be a few months older than a child born on or after March 25, 1622 [not a year or more older}. Another interesting fact: A child born March 24, 1621 would be only 1 day older than one born 25 March 1622. 4. Apparently Sarah's mother, Mrs. Samuel Maycock, was pregnant with Sarah at the time Samuel was killed, and Sarah could have been born just a few months later. 5. The Indian Massacre occurred March 22, 1621 AKA March 22, 1621/22. Most web sites and published books claim the Massacre date as March 22, 1622 [per Gregorian calendar]. This is incorrect and what causes difficulty when trying to make other document dates fit. In reference to Sarah muster dates information and father Samuel's massacre death date, regardless of which date is used they all fit perfectly, i.e., IF you use Julian dates consistently [or Gregorian dates consistently]. 6. You CANNOT make dates fit if you use a Julian date from one document and a Gregorian date from another. Recap using both Julian/Gregorian calendar dates: Samuel killed March 22, 1621/22. Sarah was age 2 on January 29, 1624/25 muster = born 1622/23. 6/18/2006 Jim > _jim@williamson-clan.com_ (mailto:jim@williamson-clan.com) writes: Kathlynn, I think we are saying the same thing. I think I just got mixed up swapping calendars back and forth. To keep me from becoming befuddled again, I am strictly using Julian calendar only and working backward: January 29th, 1624 Muster taken - Sarah has passed her second birthday but not yet attained her third January 29th, 1623 Sarah is past her first birthday but not yet attained her second. January 29th, 1622 Sarah has not reached her 1st birthday, but would have been born. Conclusion: It is possible then, for Sarah to have been born prior to the massacre on March 22nd, 1621, but no earlier than January 30th, 1621. Kathlynn comments: I agree! It is done, it is finished, it is sealed....and I have entered daughter Sarah's born date as Bet. January 30, 1621/22 & March 22, 1621/1622. However, I have not carved in stone yet....so if anyone disagrees, please inform me. ~Kathlynn~
Does it give the ship name and the month of departure and destination? I searched the facsimile pages at http://www.allcensus.com/original_lists_index.htm but couldn't find her. --------------------------------- All New Yahoo! Mail Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you.
1626, May 8 - "Att a Court held May 8, 1626, being present Sir Francis Wyatt, Governor Capt. Francis West, Captain Roger Smith, Capt. Samuel Matthews, Mr. William Claybourne, it is ordered ye Sara Maycock for four servants brought over in the Abigail, in 1622, upon the account of Mr. Samuel Maycock, shall have 200 acres of land to be taken up by her in any place not formerly taken up." Virginia Magazine Vol. 25, p 342 1626, May 8 - "It is ordered yt for fower servants brought over in the Abigail uppon the account of Mrs. Samuel Maycock shall have two hundred acres of land to be taken upp by her in any place not formerly taken up." Original record in the Library of Congress, Last item on page 247 - there are two pages numbered 246. These two transcripts do not agree as to whether it was Sarah Maycock or Mrs. Samuel Maycock who received the land grant. Does anyone on the list live in or near Washington who could check this original record in the Library of Congress? Nancy Webb Wood
Re Pace-L, What about the child Sara Maycock age 2, who lived with the Family of Roger Smith? That is a mystery
1635 - The Original List of Persons of Quality, p 31 - Register of the Names of all ye Passinger wch Passed from ye Port of London for one whole yeare Endinge at Xmas 1635. Sara Maycock 31. Is this the widow of Samuel Maycock? Did she return to England after Samuel died, perhaps to settle his affairs there? Nancy Webb Wood
I have a Margaretta Pace who died in Fluvanna Co.Va of old age. born abt. 1792 in Penna. Died Dec. 31 1885, death reported by her son-in-law Who is she?? Found the following on a census for Waldo, Me. Seems like some of this family ended up in phila.Pa Where are their descendents?? 1860 census, Searsport, Waldo , Maine Lucy Pace age 72 Benj.Pace age 42 Margaret B.Pace age 34 Margaretta Pace age 14 Lucy E.Pace age 12 John Pace age 8 most of the above names are familiar in the Va.Pace families. HOpe somebody will claim this lady!! and possibly her son-in-law
Well Barrett and Margaret Walters Pace had Rebecca - b1830 Joseph - b1833 Jacob - b1838 W.H. b1840 James B - b1842 Martha A - bc1845? Margaret R - b1847 We have placed David Foster Pace and Barrett Pace in the same family. Barrett was reportedly born circa 1806 in Tennessee and married Margaret on Dec. 2 or 4, 1828. Margaret was, of course, Gracie Ann Walters' sister. The bond for Barrett and Margaret's marriage was given by James Humphrey. David's brother John Pace married a Susanna Humphrey, his sister Susan, married a Jackson Humphrey and a John Humphrey provided the bond for Barrett and Margaret's wedding. I have no knowledge of a relationship between Susanna Humphrey, Jackson Humphrey and John Humphrey. But it would indicate that both Barrett and David at least knew each other and it wasn't just a commonality of name. There is a record somewhere that indicates that David Foster Pace's parents, Joseph and Patsey "Martha" Pace, were moving around, presumably looking for a place to settle, and David was born shortly after their arrival in Kentucky - but it doesn't say from where. They (Joseph and Martha) were married in either October 1979 or October 1799 - either way, Barrett could easily be one of their children. The children of Martha and Joseph were: Amassa Mercy Pace b1799 John Pace b1802 Nancy Pace b1804 Barrett Pace b1806 Mary Pace born between 1811 and 1815 David Foster Pace b1812 James Pace b1825 Susan Pace b/d unk (married Nov. 14, 1832) Lucy Pace b/d unk (married July 30, 1855) If Martha had Amassa first in 1799, she would have been 17, and if James was the last, she would have been 43. So the two girls may fit between Mary and David Foster and like Barrett are not in the record that gave a list of Joseph and Martha's children. Brenda Howorko Executive Assistant to the Deputy Minister Alberta Energy Ph: (780) 427-7727 Fx: (780) 422-3920 -----Original Message----- From: Lois Long Carey [mailto:lcarey@bcpl.net] Sent: June 20, 2006 11:39 AM To: PACE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [PACE-L] looking for paces from Maine , or pa. I have a Margaretta Pace who died in Fluvanna Co.Va of old age. born abt. 1792 in Penna. Died Dec. 31 1885, death reported by her son-in-law Who is she?? Found the following on a census for Waldo, Me. Seems like some of this family ended up in phila.Pa Where are their descendents?? 1860 census, Searsport, Waldo , Maine Lucy Pace age 72 Benj.Pace age 42 Margaret B.Pace age 34 Margaretta Pace age 14 Lucy E.Pace age 12 John Pace age 8 most of the above names are familiar in the Va.Pace families. HOpe somebody will claim this lady!! and possibly her son-in-law ==== PACE Mailing List ==== Check out the new Pace Society of America web page at: www.pacesociety.org, and please join the Pace Society of America for only $25.00 per year.
Yes, that Barnabas Pace d. 1831 is my line. There were also two other Barnabas Paces--his nephew (who wrote the "letter") and his grandson. He did have a son named Thomas but he wasn't born until 1783-84. The Thomas I asked about already had a wife and 3 children by 1767. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Betty Bivins [mailto:halbet@angus1841.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 10:45 AM To: PACE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PACE-L] Thomas Pace, early GA (who is this one?) There are references to one Barnabas Pace in Wilkes/Lincoln Co GA records. I think in the late 1700's and early 1800's. betty in ga ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joyce" <joy_harr@swbell.net> To: <PACE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 2:49 PM Subject: [PACE-L] Thomas Pace, early GA (who is this one?) > Could someone enlighten as to which Thomas Pace this would be in these > Georgia land references below? It looks like he would have been Thomas > the > son of Richard IV and Elizabeth Cain; however, the "Barnabas Pace Letter" > says that Thomas "never married" and engaged to marry the widow of Col. > Leroy Hammond when he died on the eve of marriage. > > > > Reference: Georgia Pioneers (magazine), Vol. 6, Aug.1969, No. 3, p 194 > > Heading, "Petitions for Land - Augusta Area, 1744-1773 > > > > "PACE, Thomas > > Jan 1767 Wf, 3 ch., 3 negroes, prays for 200 a. on Kioka Cr., near the > Hunting Path." > > [jhh note: this Thomas had a wife and three children by 1767] > > > > At the same time, January 1767, LeRoy Hammond also petitioned for land. > Assume this is the same Leroy Hammond whose widow (one) Thomas Pace was > about to marry later, according to "The B.P. Letter." > > > > "HAMMOND, Leroy > > Wf., child, 7 negroes, pet. for 250 a. on br. of Uchee Cr., at place > called > Locust Hill, and an add. 250 a. to include 3 small islands (31 a.), orig. > ordered to Wm. Shields, dec'd." > > > > Another reference, assuming the same Thomas but not positive., from: > > Marion R. Hemperley, Surveyor General Department, State of Georgia, Book: > English Crown Grants in St. Paul Parish in Georgia 1755-1775 (State > Printing Office, Atlanta, 1974), p 146 > > > > "Pace, Thomas > > 200 acres, St. Paul Parish > > Granted May 2, 1769 Grant Book G, page 319" > > > > Am assuming that this grant to was to Thomas the son of Richard IV and > Elizabeth Cain, since it was about the same time as Knowles Pace's grant, > and in the same vicinity as Richard Pace's. Could it be that the Barnabas > Pace who wrote "The Letter" was mistaken about the early marital status of > his relative? Or, is this a completely different Thomas Pace and if so, > then who was he? > > > > Thanks for any insight anyone can offer. I have a fair amount of info on > various Thomas Pace(s) in various counties in early GA but have lack some > confidence about their identities. > > - Joyce Harris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ==== PACE Mailing List ==== > Help this list grow - tell other Pace researchers about it. > Also, the Pace Society of America home page is located at: > http://www.pacesociety.org - check it out! > > > ==== PACE Mailing List ==== You can search archived messages from the Pace Mailing List by going to http://searches.rootsweb.com. If you need instructions just ask me - gordonpace@comcast.net