my older family records also say mary knowles or mary baker. but there is a marriage record for poythress in marriage records for this period ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Blair" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:40 PM Subject: [PACE] Richard m. Mary, Richard m. Rebecca > > There seems to be very firm evidence on some of those points. The wife of > Richard Pace of Bertie Co. NC could NOT have been Rebecca Poythress, > daughter of Francis and Rebecca Poythress. > > Prince George Co., VA Will & Deed Book 1710-1713 > P. 70 - 10 Sep 1711 Rec 13 Sep 1711 > "We, Charles Bartholomew & Rebecca Bartholomew, for love and affection to > our daughter Anne Bartholomew, after our decease, give her 200A on both > sides of Easterly Run in Westover Parish; being rest of 1000A granted to > said Rebecca in her widowhood by escheat patent 29 April 1692; the moiety > whereof is at present belonging to Col. Littlebury Epes, and 300 more > whereof is given by us to Rebecca POYTHRESS, by deed of gift to her this > date. The said 200A is bounded by said Rebecca's 300A." > > P. 76 ibid > "Charles & Rebecca Bartholomew of Prince George for love & affection to > out > daughter Rebecca POYTHRESS of same 300A. Quit rents to be paid by Charles > & > Rebecca for 2 years." > > That proves that Rebecca Poythress (daughter of Francis and Rebecca > Poythress) was not the same person as Rebecca the wife of Richard Pace of > Bertie Co. NC. So it's no longer a controversy. > > It's also been proved that Mary, wife of Richard Pace, was not Mary > Knowles. See James Pace's posting of 15 June 2007, in which he shows that > there were two different men named John Knowles in the area at the time, > and neither had a daughter Mary. So that one, also, is no longer a > controversy. > > That leaves the theory that Richard's wife Mary was a daughter of Richard > Baker. This theory arises from the fact that in 1655, shortly before his > death, Richard Baker made a deed of gift of 140 acres of land to Richard > Pace. Personally, I have been somewhat doubtful of this, as it seems a > slender hook, especially since Richard and Mary had already been married > for at least three years when the deed of gift was made. > > However, coincidentally and as a result of a discussion elsewhere, today a > scenario has occurred to me which could explain why the deed of gift was > made when it was. > > Richard Baker's wife Ann mentions (in her petition to the Westover vestry, > see http://searches2.rootsweb.com/th/read/PACE/2002-09/1032643426, also > posted by James Pace), having "the charge of two children to maintaine". > If these were children of Richard Baker's, and if one was a boy, by law > that child would inherit all Richard Baker's property. So if Mary Pace > really was Baker's daughter, and he realized he was soon going to die, > that might be why he would give her husband a deathbed gift of land -- > because he couldn't leave it as a legacy. > > Wholly theoretical, however. The maiden name of Mary Pace remains > unproven. > > James > > --- On Mon, 1/5/09, Roy Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> From: Roy Johnson <[email protected]> >> Subject: RE: [PACE] The PG land sold by John and Richard Pace 1759 >> To: [email protected], [email protected] >> Date: Monday, January 5, 2009, 10:27 PM >> Debbie and others, >> >> We have to be very careful to distinguish between theory >> and fact in citing >> these early Pace records. On the Pace Network I have a >> section called >> Problems and Controversies in Pace research, in which >> several competent Pace >> authorities state that (1) there is absolutely no firm >> evidence that Richard >> Pace married a Knowles or a Baker, although some >> genealogies cite one and >> some the other. (2) the Pace-Poythress marriage is also >> quite questionable. >> >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pace/poythres.htm#boykin >> >> The above is a discussion of the Pace-Poythress >> controversy. >> >> >> This URL discusses the Baker-Knowles controversy: >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pace/bkr_knwl.htm >> >> If there are no sources verifying an assertion, it cannot >> be cited as a >> fact. >> >> Roy Johnson >> > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message