I found this marriage on the OPC Database: John Pasco to Mary Wills on 4 April 1743 in Kilkhampton.
I then looked for possible children of this marriage, but only found 3 on the IGI as follows: Grace Pasco, bapt. 24 February 1744, Kilkhampton John Pasco, bapt. 23 March 1746, Kilkhampton Elizabeth Pasco, bapt. 20 March 1748, Kilkhampton
As for Mary Wills, and assuming that Kilkhampton is where she was born I found the following children born to John Wills and Mary: Elizabeth Wills, bapt. 27 November 1727, Kilkhampton Mary Wills, bapt. 21 November 1729, Kilkhampton
You sound sure that Martha's parents were John Pascoe and Mary Wills. Am just saying that because there are other John Pascoes marrying Marys closer to the Redruth area nearer the time of Martha's birth.
If the Cornish Centre in Redruth hold the baptism transcriptions for the right timescale I could look at other possible baptisms for children of John and Mary next time I'm passing.
I've got so many brick walls I could build a Mansion!
Cornishmaid, I would appreciate anything you could find. Also I may sound "sure" about this, but as always when dealing with some else's work there really is no sure about it....
Because Martha Pascoe's marriage to William Rowe wasn't until 1784 and there are listings for three other children (b. 1776, 1779, 1782) I am assuming she is a second wife, although the first three could have been born without benefit of ceremony... the last three (all six born in Camborne) were b. 1784, 1786 and possibly my Sarah in 1789. I am going to try the OPC for Camborne.
I contacted the person who supposedly posted this line as #39755 on Rootsweb but they deny all knowledge of the posting. Talk about your dead end.
If Martha was indeed born in Redruth 17APR1763 then it may well be another John Pascoe and Mary.
Again, anything you could find in Redruth would be helpful. Thanks. Rowen
Post by Cornish Terrier on Mar 8, 2008 10:37:38 GMT -5
Herein we find problems cropping up again.
If someone posts something to a site they should be willing to 'admit to it'.
However, is it possible that some information may, somehow, have been altered by another party.
I should hope not.
Stick with us here and I am sure we can get, eventually, the correct information for you.
This actually sounds a little similar to what you can sometimes find on the LDS 'Ancestral File'.
I visited Salt Lake City back in 1994 and was 'rapt' to find details on some of my own relatives in the US.
But when I got the information back home and went through it I found it fraut with errors.
I was able to easily disprove much information via copies of Wills, Census data and other information.
You will find here that we try our damndest to get information as correct as we can and, if there is some doubt, we mention the fact and try to advise on other avenues to pursue to confirm or deny such information.
Problem here is I am behind the posted census records and others I could use to verify and I don't know where to go from here. The invaluable records I used tracking the Rowes, Northeys and Eddys after Sarah just don't work. I am going to try to bring siblings forward and see what I can find. All six baptisms for this bunch are listed in Camborne, so I guess that is where I must wander.
Tracking this orphaned seven year old Sarah is going to be difficult at best, and maybe impossible to confirm.
Since (apparently) her father died in 1790 and Martha died in 1796 I can only hope the eldest son William b. 1776 (20) or daughter Alice b. 1779 (17) was able to keep the family together. More than likely, the younger ones were disbursed among relatives if they were lucky. Or thrown into workhouses or "service". Kind of brings it home that we are dealing with real people with real problems here and not just "records".
The biggest irony with this (denied) line posted is that when I follow the main branches forward I get into Liverpool and Mersey, the location of the person I spoke with..... I just don't understand their denial of all things Cornish. The only thing I can figure is that I am either too far back for their direct knowledge, or someone else in the family (possibly now "gone") posted it on their account. Or it is just a bunch of hogwash (except William Rowe and Martha Pascoe Rowe DID exist)...arrgghh! Frustrating.... Rowen