QUAKER-ROOTS-L Archives

Archiver > QUAKER-ROOTS > 1998-06 > 0898647115


From: Bill Blackburn <>
Subject: MADDOCK (MADDOX)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 17:11:55 -0700


Dear Sarah and List,

I would like more information before 1700 on the MADDOCK family mentioned below. I
daughter out on MADDOCK when Esther Maddock (born 1661 Chester, Cheshire England,
died Chester Co. PA) marries Peter Dicks (born 1652). All information on DICKS and
MADDOCK before 1700 will be appreciated and reciprocated.

Also - I cannot find Wrightsborough in my atlas. Can anyone tell me where it is or
was ?

Bill Blackburn
Mt. Shasta, CA

ALSO RESEARCHING: BLACKBURN, BRINTON, TAYLOR, DARLINGTON

> >From: Wini Tanges:
>
> >He wrote a letter to his family in the "Maddox" settlement. Would this
> >be the Wrightsborough one?
>
> Hi Wini!
> It doesn't look like we're related on this line-- the Sarah MOONEY who
> married Peter BUFFINGTON was related to me through the MOORE family, so
> descendants of that pair would be my cousins, but not descendants of Peter's
> brothers and sisters-- however I'm interested in any and everything related
> to Wrightsborough-- so I'm very interested in the letter to the 'Maddox
> settlement' relatives. This would indeed be Wrightsborough-- my ancestor
> Joseph MADDOCK was one of the founders (the creek running near the site of
> the original town is named after him-- also spelled MADDOX, though as far as
> I know the family always spelled the name MADDOCK).
> The period of the Revolutionary War is very interesting in terms of how
> Quakers reacted. Joseph Maddock is a good example of the contradictory pulls
> that Quakers seem to have felt -- on the one hand he signed a condemnation
> of the Boston Tea Party and on the other hand the main reason for his
> leaving North Carolina and setting up the Wrightsborough colony was his
> involvement in the Regulators movement there. This movement preceded the
> Revolution, but is generally considered to have been in the same spirit --
> although it was harshly and successfully repressed-- being primarily a
> protest of the arbitrary rule of the British governor there. The Quakers at
> Wrightsborough had a rough time with both the British and American
> authorities during the Revolution-- although they seem to have received
> worse treatment from the Americans-- probably because some of their former
> members were ardent patriots and took the refusal of the others to fight
> personally. Joseph himself was disowned by the meeting towards the end of
> his life for exhibiting 'war-like' attitudes, although he was later
> readmitted. Three brothers-in-law, the Dennis brothers all served on the
> American side and received land grants on the basis of their service. Joseph
> probably had close friends on the other side of the conflict as well and I
> suspect was pretty free in expressing his opinion of the excesses on both sides.
> -- Sarah Shaw Tatounova
> The Czech Republic
>
> *************
> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/2064/
> - My home page- focus on genealogy, history
> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/2064/squaker.htm
> Southern Quakers
> **************

This thread: