MD-L Archives

Archiver > MD > 2004-10 > 1097538039


From:
Subject: Frederick Thomas Cockey Deye FORD?
Date: 11 Oct 2004 17:40:39 -0600


This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list.

Classification: Query

Message Board URL:

http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/SFB.2ACI/4234.1.1.1.1.1.1.1

Message Board Post:

Your dates for Lloyd FORD prove that he was the son of Thomas FORD and Leah PRICE. Lloyd FORD (10 Nov. 1727, St. Paul's, Baltimore, - 1816, Washington Co., TN) m. Mary GRANT, d/o Alexander. [BARNES' book does indicate that this family moved to Tennessee.]

Those with the extra initials "C. D." can only be the ones born in Maryland. Thus, those two must be the ones in the book and in St. Paul's Register, Thomas Cockey Deye FORD & Frederick, sons of Thomas FORD & Charlotte COCKEY. John C. D. must have been another son.

John FORD of William was so listed in Maryland to indicate which one he was, son of William, b. 28 Feb. 1721, son of Thomas FORD & Leah PRICE. Thus, he's probably the one you found also listed in Tennessee as John of William. To complicate things further, John FORD of William may have married a daughter of Thomas FORD and Charlotte COCKEY.

Mordecai FORD must come from this family. Mordecai was not a common name, as far as I know, except in these Maryland families.

SHIPLEY fits, too. However, the Shipleys of MD group have had great difficulty proving the Tennessee connections. Shipleys of MD, 2002, has Rachel SHIPLEY (b. ca. 1819, of Joshua of Eli) m. Frederick T. C. FORD (1818 - 1841). They had John Wm. FORD (9 Jan. 1840, Sullivan Co., TN - 28 Aug. 1872, Putnam Co., MO) m. Ann Elissa CHILDRESS, 29 Aug. 1867, Sull. Co.

There are several Nathan SHIPLEYs, but I don't see one connected to FORD.

Howard was a respected name in early Maryland, so I would think that John FORD's son John Howard FORD, b. 1753, would have used that name. If so, that leaves us with Benjamin, b. 18 Dec. 1723, of the sons of Thomas and Leah, and there's nothing about his family in the book, so he's still a possible father of your John.

Sorry, I have to stop.


This thread: