Honestly, it's been forever and a half since I have researched my father's family. My mother's side from Finland has been much more prosperous in obtaining information. My family and I just recently moved, and the only genealogy I have out is my mothers- my father's is still packed- I was contacted by a Genealogical Society about my Fox's- I was told that I am of "royal descent" though it is questionable- it is reason to believe that the following excerpts that I am related. I have no proof, and/or etc. I honestly don't know.
The excerpt in which you wish to obtain information (reference), I have it packed in my notes- that was privately emailed to me, and I'm sure at this time, you could look up the Charter for the Colonies, that it would have something about it- I believe I remember that's how I was referred to it. I had not done any further research on that, at that time.
As for a DNA sample, this is not likely, unless the sample were to come from me. Which excludes me, because I am a woman. I have heard lots of contraversy on this subject of DNA genealogy, and I don't know if it's a territory I wish to explore. I'm curious to know what group you are with that maintains such a large database.
By the way, my Foxes owned and settled the Fox Islands of Michigan, as well as Beaver Island. I can confirm that.
(Sir Stephen Fox is supposed to by my Vaniah Fox's father- Vaniah married into the Cadwells of America)but currently, I can't prove it, and from what I read, it doesn't seem likely.
FOX, SIR STEPHEN (1627-1716), English statesman, born on the 27th of March 1627, was the son of William Fox, of Farley, in Wiltshire, a yeoman farmer. At the age of fifteen he first obtained a situation inthe household of the earl of Northumberland; then he entered the service of Lord Percy, the earls brother, and was present with the royalist army at the battle of Worcester as Lord Percys deputy at the ordnance board. Accompanying Charles II. in his flight to the continent, he was appointed manager of the royal household, on Clarendons recommendation as a young man bred under the severe discipline of Lord Percy. . . very well qualified with languages, and all other parts of clerkship, honesty and discretion. The skill with which he managed the exiguous finances of the exiled court earned him further confidence and promotion. He was employed on several important missions, and acted eventually as intermediary between the king and General Monk. Honors and emolument were his reward after the Restoration; he was appointed to the lucrative offices of first clerk of the board of green cloth and paymaster-general of the forces. In November 1661 he became member of parliament for Salisbury. In 1665 he was knighted; was returned as M.P. for Westminster on the 27th of February 1679, and succeeded the earl of Rochester as a commissioner of the treasury, filling that office for twenty-three years and during three reigns. In 1680 he resigned the paymastership and was made first commissioner of horse. Iii 1684 he became sole commissioner of horse. He was offered a peerage by James II., on condition of turning Roman Catholic, but refused, in spite of which he was allowed to retain his cornmissionerships. In 1685 he was again M. P. for Salisbury, and opposed the bill for a standing army supported by the king. During the Revolution. he maintained an attitude of decent reserve, but on Jamess flight, submitted to William III., who confirmed him in his offices. He was again elected for Westminster in 1691 and 1695, for Cricklade in 1698, and finally in 1713 once more for Salisbury. He died on the 28th of October 1716. It is his distinction to have founded Chelsea hospital, and to have contributed 13,000 in aid of this laudable public work. Though his place as a statesman is in the second or even the third rank, yet he was a useful man in his generation, and a public servant who creditably discharged all the duties with which he was entrusted. Unlike other statesmen of his day, he grew rich in the service of the nation without being suspected of corruption, and without forfeiting the esteem of his contemporaries.
He was twice married (ffi51 and 1703); by his first wife, Elizabeth Whittle, he had seven sons, who predeceased him, and three daughters; by his second, Christian Hopes, he had two sons and two daughters. The elder son by the second marriage, Stephen (1704-1776), was created Lord Ilchester and Stavordale in 1747 and earl of Ilchester in 1756; ill 1758 he took the additional name of Strangways, and hisdescendants, the family of Fox-Strangways, still hold the earidom of lichester. The younger son, Henry, became the 1st Lord Holland (q.v.).
CHARLES II (1630-1685). King of England.
Letter Signed, addressed at the foot to Sir Stephen Fox, paymaster-general of the land forces, 1 page folio with endorsed leaf, Whitehall, 6 April 1670/1. Ordering the payment of £8 to Dr John Troutbeck, surgeon to the Queen's Troop of Guards, for medicaments for one year. Troutbeck's signed receipt overleaf.
'... Charles R
'Our Will and and Pleasure is That out of such monies as are or shall come to your hands for Contingent uses for Our Forces & Guarrisons in England You Pay unto Our welbeloved Doctor John Troutbeck Chirurgion to Our Dearest Consort the Queene's Troope of Guards the sume of Eight Pounds the same being due unto him for Medicaments for the said Troopes for one yeare commencing the 25th of September 1669 and ending the 24th or September 1670. And for soe doing this Our Warrant together with the Acquittance of the said Doctor Troutbeck Confessing the Receipt thereof shall be your discharge. Given att Our Court at Whitehall the 6th: of Aprill 1670 in the 22th [sic]yeare of our Reigne.
'To Our trusty & welbeloved servant Sr: Stephen Fox Knight Paymaster Generall to Our Land Forces and Guarrisons in England.'
I was also contacted by a Genealogical Society called the Fox-Hound, and they told me of the same story about the ship/Charles II reference. The Fox family in reference supposedly settled in the Virginias, which is a likely for my family, but have not looked into that either. My mother's side has really taken more of my time on genealogical research.
I look forward to your response.
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|