|
Pages: [1]
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: 1810 Woburn PR - John HENLEY Death (Read 161 times)
|
silicondale
RootsChat Senior
 Offline
Posts: 329
ggg-grandad William Vine's mill in Brighton
|
I thought I had a complete set of BMD data for Henleys in Woburn from 1730s to 1850s, but perhaps not ...
Today I found a newly listed item in BLARS - the will of John Henley, dated 1810
http://tinyurl.com/3cvg93
I don't know if this is the year of his death: if so I don't have any John Henley death in or around 1810. The nearest I have is 1818. The will also mentions a nephew John Gurney, but I have found no Gurney relatives at all. However, this John seems to have been married to Ann X (no marriage record found, and her death record in 1799 gives just "Ann, wife of John Henley". Inspired guess is that Ann's maiden name was Gurney - but when and where did they marry ? Also, is it likely that John's will is dated 1810 even though he died in 1818 ? (i.e. would this be the date of writing or of probate?)
I've just looked in www.woburnratesbook.org.uk and the householder of 41 Bedford Street certainly changes from John Henley in 1809 to John Gurney in 1810 so looks like John Henley actually did die in 1810. Could the 1818 date that I have be a transcription error (or maybe a different John) ?
Many thanks in advance for any thoughts - Stephen
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Henley (Brighton 1820+, Bedfordshire pre-1840), Vine, Button, Bradford, Bodle (Sussex), Willey (Sheffield, London), Nattriss (London), Wood, Jones, Blaker, Shrimpton (London), Dalby (London 1800+, E.Yorkshire pre-1810), Hillmann, von Thun (London and Hannover)
|
|
|
bedfordshire boy
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3526
|
With other wills that I've seen in this series, which relate to chain of title with
properties, the date has been the date of the will, not the date of probate. I
suppose it could be a transcription error, but we can speculate till the cows come
home - there's only one way to settle it and that's to get a copy of this item from
BLARS!
The next item in this series is the will of John Gurney dated 1823, but he doesn't
seem to have been buried until 1839 aged 80. Notwithstanding the rates book I
think it likely he made the will in 1810 (perhaps he was ill and could see the end
in sight, but recovered) but didn't die until 1818 aged 83.
The relative ages make an uncle/nephew relationship possible, but I can't find
the connection either. John Gurney may have been the son of George Gurney and
Ann Woodland, and George did have a sister Anne, but there's no marriage to
John Henley. John Gurney seems to have married Ann Hull
A couple of thoughts
- could he have been a nephew by marriage - ie Ann Hull was John Henley's
niece?
- could the connection come through the Woodland name? Unlikely perhaps given
that two sisters would have both been Ann.
A Puzzle!
Regards
David
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.ukBeds: Cople: Luke/Spencer Everton: Hale Henlow: Cooper/Watts/Sabey Potton: Merrill Southill: Faulkner/Litchfield/Sabey Woburn/Husborne Crawley: Surkitt Hunts: Gt Gransden: Merrill/Chandler/Medlock Toseland: Surkitt/Hedge/Corn Cambs: Bourn: Bowd Eltisley: Medlock Graveley: Ford/Revell |
|
|
silicondale
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 329
ggg-grandad William Vine's mill in Brighton
|
Hello David, and many thanks for the thoughts. Yes, the age at death seems to clinch it (1818), as I definitely have a John Henley born 1735, and this is the one who I'm assuming it is: the other possibles are all otherwise accounted for. It could be that he became incapable - through injury, blindness, or whatever - in 1810, so John Gurney took over management of the household (and paid the rent). There's no evidence that I've yet found of any links with Woodland or Hull families. John Henley doesn't seem to have had any children. Hence I think the most likely is that he married George's sister Anne Gurney. Something specific to look for on my next visit to BLARS. Will need to look at the original handwritten PR records rather than the typed transcripts, though, most probably.
Thanks again for the thoughts! -
Stephen
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Henley (Brighton 1820+, Bedfordshire pre-1840), Vine, Button, Bradford, Bodle (Sussex), Willey (Sheffield, London), Nattriss (London), Wood, Jones, Blaker, Shrimpton (London), Dalby (London 1800+, E.Yorkshire pre-1810), Hillmann, von Thun (London and Hannover)
|
|
|
bedfordshire boy
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3526
|
As John and Ann appear to have had no children, it's possible that it could
have been a late in life marriage, possibly a second one for Ann, so she
would have married under her first husband's name.
Academic though as I can't see ANY John Henley/Ann marriages!
Regards
David
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.ukBeds: Cople: Luke/Spencer Everton: Hale Henlow: Cooper/Watts/Sabey Potton: Merrill Southill: Faulkner/Litchfield/Sabey Woburn/Husborne Crawley: Surkitt Hunts: Gt Gransden: Merrill/Chandler/Medlock Toseland: Surkitt/Hedge/Corn Cambs: Bourn: Bowd Eltisley: Medlock Graveley: Ford/Revell |
|
|
silicondale
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 329
ggg-grandad William Vine's mill in Brighton
|
There is one thing though, of course. It could have been a very early marriage. All the Henley records in Woburn before 1755 were written as "Endley" so it's possible there was a John Endley / Ann marriage before about 1755. He would have been under 20 at the time, but it's possible.
Why were they all "Endley" ? I haven't seen the original manuscript records but I suspect strongly that the parish clerk changed in 1755 and the previous one spelled the name as it was pronounced, dropped-aitch and all.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Henley (Brighton 1820+, Bedfordshire pre-1840), Vine, Button, Bradford, Bodle (Sussex), Willey (Sheffield, London), Nattriss (London), Wood, Jones, Blaker, Shrimpton (London), Dalby (London 1800+, E.Yorkshire pre-1810), Hillmann, von Thun (London and Hannover)
|
|
|
silicondale
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 329
ggg-grandad William Vine's mill in Brighton
|
The possible marriage of John Henley and Anne Gurney may not have been in Woburn. Anne was born in Husborne Crawley (on the other side of the Woburn Abbey estate) so the marriage might have taken place there and not in Woburn. All depends where the Gurney family were living at the time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Henley (Brighton 1820+, Bedfordshire pre-1840), Vine, Button, Bradford, Bodle (Sussex), Willey (Sheffield, London), Nattriss (London), Wood, Jones, Blaker, Shrimpton (London), Dalby (London 1800+, E.Yorkshire pre-1810), Hillmann, von Thun (London and Hannover)
|
|
|
bedfordshire boy
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3526
|
There's no such marriage in Husborne Crawley PR transcript unfortunately. Plenty of other Gurney marriages though
Regards
David
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.ukBeds: Cople: Luke/Spencer Everton: Hale Henlow: Cooper/Watts/Sabey Potton: Merrill Southill: Faulkner/Litchfield/Sabey Woburn/Husborne Crawley: Surkitt Hunts: Gt Gransden: Merrill/Chandler/Medlock Toseland: Surkitt/Hedge/Corn Cambs: Bourn: Bowd Eltisley: Medlock Graveley: Ford/Revell |
|
|
silicondale
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 329
ggg-grandad William Vine's mill in Brighton
|
many thanks, David - sorry for the delay in replying. I've been away in remotest Siberia on a buisness trip and way beyond Internet contact!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Henley (Brighton 1820+, Bedfordshire pre-1840), Vine, Button, Bradford, Bodle (Sussex), Willey (Sheffield, London), Nattriss (London), Wood, Jones, Blaker, Shrimpton (London), Dalby (London 1800+, E.Yorkshire pre-1810), Hillmann, von Thun (London and Hannover)
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
|
|
