|
Pages: 1 [2]
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Falconbridge family (Read 690 times)
|
myrtlebank
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 40
|
Hi, me again Clayton, just wanted to clarify what I said previously. I have gone back and read my info over again and your Mr Rhodes was not involved in the court case as far as I can see...the involvement was with Mr Roebuck of Prestonpans and his partner Garbett (employers of Samuel Falconbridge) and involved a patent. Best you read the article yourself. Cheers Valerie
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kisler
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 3
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Thanks Valerie,
I was able to find the book on line. I found the case very interesting. I am a retired chemist. The chemical plant where I worked for 35 years had a sulfuric acid plant. Our plant was bought by the Finns (Kemira Oy) in 1985. I was able to take a business trip to Helsinki and Pori, Finland in 1988 and stopped over for about 4 days in London on the way home. I hope to overcome my reluctance to fly and take a trip to Bridgnorth sometime in the future.
I will let you know if I find anything else on the Falconbridge family.
Clayton
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
ac66
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 5
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
I am interested in the Falconbridge family of Bridgnorth, in particular, the Thomas Falconbridge buried in 1791. If there was any record of his age at burial, I would be very pleased to learn of it. His wife's name was Mary and she moved to Birmingham after his death but I would really love to learn any other details of this man as I am trying to prove, or disprove, whether he is part of my family tree.
In my search for Falconbridges at Bridgnorth, I came across the following letter which I hope someone may find interesting. It's too large to fit into a single message at Rootschat, so I will follow with the second half.
Anne
The St. James's Chronicle; Or, British Evening-Post.
From Saturday, May 13, to Tuesday, May 16, 1769.
To the PRINTER.
Dowles, near Bewdley, May 6, 1769.
SIR,
BEING lately called upon to give an Account of the Reception and Encouragement my Discoveries in Chemistry met with before the Society of Arts, &c. I take the Liberty of making a Reply thereto through the Channel of your useful and entertaining Paper.
You must know, Sir, that I made it my Study to improve on the Method of making Sal Ammoniac, and was not a little happy to find my Endeavours answer every Expectation; Experience making the Process conversant, and the Perfection consequently more certain. I think it unnecessary to enlarge on the Expenses attending the Preparation and putting in Execution this laborious Undertaking. In 1767, the Society of Arts Manufactures and Commerce, offered a Premium for the Encouragement of making the above Salt, in the following Words:
"For the making the greatest Quantity of Sal Ammoniac, equal in Goodness to the best generally imported, (not less than two Tons) prepared at one Manufactory in England or Wales, Fifty Pounds Weight of which to be produced as a Sample on or before the first Tuesday in February, 1768, One Hundred Pounds."
You may reasonably suppose I declared myself a Candidate, and accordingly a Week before the appointed Time, I sent a Sample of fifty Pounds, as the Premium specified; but the Porter, by Mistake, delivered the Cask at the Office of Polite Arts, instead of the Office of Arts and Manufactures, though both Offices belong to the Society. This Mistake, however, was overlooked, and the Merits of the Claim were taken into Consideration; when it was allowed to be equal, if not superior, in almost every Respect, to the Sal Ammoniac generally imported.
[rest of letter in next message]
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ac66
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 5
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
[continuation of letter]
Here their Decision rested a considerable Time, notwithstanding the repeated Efforts of several Gentlemen belonging to that Society, who were satisfied of my Title to the Premium.
I cannot pass in Silence this Opportunity of repeating my Gratitude to the Hon. Mr. N. for his generous and friendly Intentions towards me, as well as to Messrs. M-----, S-----, P-----, &c. who interested themselves in my Behalf; and declare myself as infinitely obligated to them, for the Twenty Guineas they procured for me from that Honourable Society, as a Reward for my Ingenuity, as though it were the full Sum of One Hundred Pounds promised, and which at first I was allowed to be so justly intitled to.
Whilst I relate these Transactions, it would be a Matter of much Uneasiness to me, should they proved the least Check to the aspiring Hopes of any Artist or ingenious Person; tho', at the same Time, I do not recommend an implicit Confidence or sole Dependance from the Rewards and Premiums promised by the Honourable Body. It is true, I cannot assert it was the Opinion of that respectable Body, nor even the Whole of the Committee of Chemistry, who were the last Determination; but attribute it to the selfish Motives of two Persons of the latter. That I may be thought justifiable in this Assertion, I beg Leave to observe, That Mr. Ir----n, then Chairman of the Committee, &c. paid me a Visit at Dowles (as he said) on Purpose to inform me of a Mistake in the Delivery of my Sample, assuring me of his Friendship, and proffering his utmost Assistance to prevent its affecting my Claim, modestly requesting to be admitted to inspect the whole Chemical Works. Thankful for his friendly Proffer, though not free from Apprehension of his having other than real Motives of serving me, I declined embracing either his Friendship or Assistance. I did not, till after Mr. Ir----n's Departure for London, understand his Language; for, from some concurring Circumstances, if I may be bold enough to hazard a Conjecture, had I made him acquainted with the Process of my Invention, he would not only be ready to accept, but insist upon a Part of the Bounty I then was in Expectation of receiving. Mr. Ir----n, enraged at finding himself disappointed of gaining his desired Knowledge, had Recourse to other Means; accordingly on his Arrival in London, he publickly declared his having obtained every Information he could with, tho' he had no other Authority than what I have before related, and that he would erect a work for the making that Salt; but find he has not as yet made any Attempt towards it. I should before have observed that Mr. Ir----n was not without an Associate in carrying him Point against me. Mr. D--e, Author of some late Memoirs of the Society of Arts, &c. who most strenuously opposed my receiving the Bounty of my Labours; though he (Mr. D--e) has lately experienced some Advantages from the Labour of other Men.
I cannot finish this Relation, without recommending to every Person of Ingenuity, possessed of any valuable Secret, to be careful of confining to themselves the Mystery; for there are always greedy Vipers to sap the Sweets accruing from the laborious Artist, in which may such Serpents be ever disappointed, is the Wish of your constant Reader, and humble Servant,
SAMUEL FALCONBRIDGE.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
myrtlebank
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 40
|
Hello there, I found your letter signed Samuel Falconbridge very very interesting. As you can see I have accrued a lot of information about the Falconbridge family and would be most happy to pass on to you what I have. Perhaps you could contact me at my personal e mail address?
What is your connection with this family and do you have much information?
I would like to know some of the names contained in the letter. I believe one of the persons named was possibly John De Bourdeu and I have letters between he and William Falconbridge who lived in Antrim. Many of the Falconbridges seem to be have been connected with the sulphuric acid (vitriol) industry in Scotland, England and Ireland and I think this particular Samuel was either the Samuel from Prestonpans who was dismissed by Dr Roebuck or else it was his son Samuel who married a Mary Brown in Edinburgh and who eventually died and was buried in Shropshire. (There was a Thomas in Shropshire too).
Look forward to hearding more from you soon, Valerie
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
myrtlebank
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 40
|
I have looked up my papers and found the dates of letters from William Falconbridge to John Du Bourdieu and from John De B to "His Lordship" (whomever that might be!) - were dated 1787. John De B was rector of "Anahilt" at the time in County Down Ireland. William's address was No 52 Main Street, I don't know if was in County Down or Antrim. Essentially the letter from William to John referred to the offer of a position which he could not take up immediately because he had established AN "elaboratory" (laboratory) of some sort. I have a hunch that would have been to do with the sulphuric acid. It would appear that William and John were friends.
William, the author of the letter, I believe married a Miss Kennedy in 1776 in Antrim (first name unknown) which makes a connection to my branch of this family who thereafter in 2 generations named two offspring John Kennedy Falconbridge No 1 and John Kennedy Falconbridge No 2.
JKF No 1 went to Ontario Canada and died there in 1819
JKF No 2 was born in Coleraine in 1819, possibly named after his dead uncle. He too went to Ontario later and was the father of a well known Kings Court Judge, Sir William Glenholme Falconbridge. JKF No 2 was the elder brother of my great grandfather Alexander Falconbridge, gr newphew of Dr Alexander Falconbridge of Bristol. A number of family members went to Canada, including the 20 year old younger brother of JKF No2, William, who died there in 1837.
I also have a "tree" of Thomas Falconbridge married to ?Mary Smith 1759?.This Thomas was born in 1734 and was provided to me by his descendent in Bristol.
I also have a copy of the will of Samuel Falconbridge who I think was the Samuel Falconbridge of Prestonpans who married Jean Boyd. He would have been the same Samuel who ended up in the Bridewell in Warwick after being dismissed from the Roebuck vitriol works in Prestonpans. However it would seem that thereafter Jean was referred to as Jane and they appeared in Bridgnorth later. I am assuming the connection because although Samuel did not mention his wife's name in his will (it seemed she was already dead in 1794) he did leave money to his "wife's mother Susannah Boyd". this Samuel had a son William and grandchildren William and Mary. I think this could be the same Samuel (a chemist) in Dowles and he died in Bristol.
If any of this is of interest please let me know and I can provide more information.
Valerie
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ac66
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 5
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Dear Valerie
Thanks for your messages.
I don't know whether I am connected to the Bridgnorth Falconbridges, or not, but am trying to find anything about the family that may help me find out.
This is my research problem:
I have two Thomas Falconbridges, one of whom is my ancestor. One was the son of John & Elizabeth née Garner, baptised in 1735 at Fillongley, Warwickshire. The other was the son of William*, baptised in 1737, also at Fillongley. I suspect they were second cousins.
*William was not from Fillongley and the only parish record for him is the baptism of his son.
One Thomas married Mary Kerby in 1757 and the other married Mary Smith in 1759. Between them, they had 19 children baptised at Fillongley and Allesley. Unfortunately, the parish registers provide no help in allocating the correct children to each set of parents. In addition, there are no Wills found at the Lichfield Record Office to help either.
One set of parents stayed in the Allesley area and are buried there, the other set are not found in the parish after the 1770s.
One Thomas Falconbridge was recorded as a Tailor & Breeches Maker at Fillongley and one Thomas as a Cordwainer at Allesley. What I don't know is whether the records refer to the same Thomas. How likely is it that a tailor would be a shoemaker? Anyway, I presume the Thomas who was a Cordwainer is the one who married Mary Kerby because in 1750, a Thomas Falconbridge was an apprentice to William Kerby of Allesley, Shoemaker. I'm fairly confident this William Kerby was the father of Mary, baptised in 1740 at Allesley.
What made me question whether the Thomas Falconbridge who was buried in 1791 at Bridgnorth might be the missing Thomas was his occupation; he was a Cordwainer. And there's also the fact that when he died, his widow moved to Birmingham, a town where I know some of those 19 Falconbridge children moved to.
Of course, the occupation and Mary's move to Birmingham may just be a coincidence and they may simply be another set of Thomas & Mary Falconbridges. I suppose I am really hoping that there may be a researcher of the Bridgnorth Falconbridges who could say whether the Thomas buried in 1791 could have had children baptised in Warwickshire during the late 1750s through to the 1770s. Or whether any connection had been found to the Warwickshire Falconbridges.
If the connection of Thomas Falconbridge to Bridgnorth is proven, then I'd certainly be interested in learning more and I am very interested in anything you could share about the family of Thomas Falconbridge and Mary Smith. Will send you a message with my direct email.
Lastly, Samuel Falconbridge's letter to the newspaper is transcribed exactly how it was published. The surnames weren't shown.
Anne
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mr Gwynne Chadwick
RootsChat Member
Posts: 142
|
Hi,
Just to add to an already complex situation, are you aware of this marriage at Worfield, just 3 miles from Bridgnorth? Could he be the Thomas FALCONBRIDGE who died in 1791 rather than either of the two mentioned?
Marriage by Licence at Worfield on 5 Aug 1782.
Thomas FALCONBRIDGE of this Parish to Mary HANCOX of the Parish of St. Leonard's, Bridgnorth, widow.
Witnesses - Thomas BACHE and Theodofin WILLINGTON.
Gwynne
(an interested observer not researching FALCONBRIDGE)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ac66
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 5
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi Gwynne
Thank you for taking the trouble to provide detail of the marriage. I was aware of it but hadn't yet gone as far as checking the parish register for any details. I consider the only way for it to fit my missing Thomas would be if it was for a second marriage. I don't suppose your record shows whether Thomas was a bachelor or widower? Or whether he and Mary signed their names or made their mark in the register?
Both pieces of information would be quite helpful. If the Thomas at Worfield was a bachelor and made his mark then I would be reasonably certain he was not my missing Thomas. If he was a widower and signed his name, he's still in the field! If so, I would put viewing the marriage licence on my "to do" list as it should give me Thomas' occupation and an approximate age.
Anne
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mr Gwynne Chadwick
RootsChat Member
Posts: 142
|
Hi Anne,
The Parish register doesn't provide any indication of Thomas's martial status so I would assume he was a bachelor.
Thomas signed the register but widow Mary made her mark.
There are no other B, M or death entries for FALCONBRIDGE in the register between 1751 to 1785 inclusive.
Gwynne
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ac66
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 5
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi Gwynne
Thanks for providing that information. Looks like I will need to look up the marriage licence.
And thank you for letting me know there were no other Falconbridge entries between 1751-1785. Even a negative result is really helpful to know.
Anne
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2]
|
|
|
|
|
