Edward Peters, Buckley

[Devablue]

I suspect this this is yet another line of the Peters family in Buckley and, therefore, not directly linked to earlier posts.

I am trying to track Edward Peters born approx 1857 and living in 1871 at Spon Green, Bistre with his parents - John Peters and Ann(e) Peters - formerly Hall. I am pretty sure that Edward had four sisters Esther, Elizabeth, Mary Ellen and Hannah, two brothers Arthur and Joseph and one sister, Esther, who died aged 8.

I am also sure that he is the father of my grandfather, John Edward Peters. John Edward Peters was born approx 1880 and died in 1930. The funeral report lists Edward's brothers and sisters as aunts and uncles attending the funeral. Also John Edward's marriage certificate in 1908 to Elizabeth Evans names Edward Peters, Miner, as his father.

However, I have failed to track Edward Peters other than in the 1871 census. Any help with this would be appreciated ie what happened to Edward. Also no sign, as far as I can see, of a marriage certificate for Edward or a birth certificate for John Edward.

Regards,

DevaBlue

[sgf28]

1881 Census at Lane End Johnsons Row, Hawarden (Flint), Chester, Cheshire, England

John    Peters born 1832, Mold, Flintshire, Wales, coal miner
Ann    Peters born 1834, Mold, Flintshire, Wales, wife    
Edward Peters born 1857, Mold, Flintshire, Wales, coal miner   
Elizabeth Peters born 1868   
Joseph Peters born 1872   
Mary E Peters born 1874    
Hannah Peters born 1876    
Esther Peters born 1879

All born Mold, Flintshire

[vronlady]

RG11 Piece  3565 Folio  88 Page  21 1881

[sgf28]

Coulsd this be Edward on 1891 Census in Mold, Holywell, Flintshire, Wales, age is out by a couple of years but he does have a son John

Edward Peters born 1862, Buckley, Flintshire, coal miner       
Elizabeth Peters born 1861    Merionethshire, Wales    
Ann M Peters born 1883 Merionethshire, Wales    
John    Peters born 1887 Merionethshire, Wales    
James Peters born 1888 Merionethshire, Wales    
Emma Peters born 1891 Merionethshire, Wales

RG12
Pce no. 4609
Folio    133
Pg 10

[Devablue]

Thanks for the response and suggestions.

1881. There is no doubt about this. The ages and family names match exactly. So he was still in Buckley at or around the date that John Edward was born ie 1880 - based on John Edward's wedding certificate - 28years old in 1908, 1911 census - 31 years old and death certificate - 50 years old in 1930.

1891 census return is more difficult. The birth dates for both Edward and John are some way out and John is fairly consistent later in life that it was 1880. Also again far from conclusive but John Edward gives his place of birth in the 1911 census as Buckley. However, it would be worth my tracking the John Peters is this census to see where he ends up.

The key would be to make a definite link between Edward and John - ie a birth certificate - but Edward is clearly still a single man in 1881. Beyond this I would love to know what happened to them between 1881 and John Edward's wedding in 1908.

Thank you for your help. It is much appreciated.   

[RunKitty]

Hi,

Just some food for thought....
I was looking at the marriage cert for John Edwards and Ann "Hall" in 1858.  Are you sure it is Hall and not Ibell (or Iball, etc)?? 

There is a baptism for an Edward Iball, mother Ann, single lady, of Bistre, in Jan 1857

John, Ann are in Buckley in 1901 - with son Arthur, daughter Esther Messham and her husband Alfred.  RG13, Piece 3378, Folio 18, Page 27

I have this branch of the Peters family on my tree in a peripheral way.  (Alfred Messham, Esther's husband, is a distant cousin) 

RK

[Devablue]

RunKitty,

Thanks for your e-mail and apologies for the delay in replying.

You are right about Iball. I was thrown by the transcription in the 1841 census where the Iball (I think that it is Iball rather than Ibell?) family are living at Buckley Square but the transcription refers to them as Robert and Ann Hall. Easy enough I suppose with an unusual name, There are obviously close links in that an Edward Iball (aged 16) is living with John and Ann Peters as a boarder in 1861.

The baptism is a very interesting piece of information. Given that I have Edward Peters' birth date as 1857 (a year before the marriage in 1858) it could be that Edward was either John Peters' son but not named on the record of baptism or that John gave him the family name when he married Ann.

Yes, I had spotted the Messham connection. I think that my father (who was born in 1916) used to refer to a school pal called Messham. A longshot but I will see if I can find the name.

Thanks again for your help. I am quite encouraged by the possibility of finding Edward's baptism record. His life post 1881 is still a mystery - as is the birth/baptism of John Edward - but this is a good step forward.

Regards,

DevaBlue     

[RunKitty]

Hi,

The name Iball/Ibell/Eubal etc etc (lots of variations) isn't particularly unusual in the Buckley area.  Neither is Messham/Mesham/Messam (again, lots of spelling variations to check).  My Dad was born in Buckley too, so half of my family tree is from that area.   

RK

[despair]

This is rather fanciful and a little convoluted,but might be worth considering(including my data,or more specifically lack of data when that is relevant!)

Edward Ibal(sic) is born to Ann as a single parent,as already given.
He is given as Peters while the census data is given by John Peters up to 1881

He reverts to his registered name as a married man by the 1891 and 1901 censuses
1891  RG12  4610  23  40
1901  RG13  5214  141  16

Although these entries have different partners Edward Iball is given as born 1857,Buckley
I cannot find this Edward Iball in 1871,1881,which is why I have proposed the theory.

I had hoped to extend the theory to suggest that it is his son John Edward Iball registered Sept Quarter 1879 who somehow chooses the reverse option and becomes John Edward Peters.
Not being able to positively identify this John Edward Iball in 1881doesn't help,and of course Edward Peters(aka Ibal) is still with main Peters family in 1881.Perhaps this is a step too far.

It is also possible of course that it is all a "red herring barking up the wrong tree"

Regards
Roger