RootsChat.Com

England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Yorkshire (West Riding) => Topic started by: Cliffelinks65 on Sunday 03 August 14 12:11 BST (UK)

Title: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Sunday 03 August 14 12:11 BST (UK)
This is my first post here, so hope I am doing it correctly! I have been researching the Butterfield family in the Keighley area for some time now, and have quite a large draft tree, which I am now checking over in detail...and so am finding out quite a few things to question.

My most pressing question at the moment is this - I can trace the family back in a direct line back to a James Butterfield, who married a Mary Tempest in Kildwick in 1806...but who were his parents?

For a while I had a Jacob Butterfield, who was married to Alice Moorehouse...but I have since discovered that their son James died in 1791 aged 5, so clearly not the same one!

Now I have several others to consider - is he James, b 1778,  son of Isaac and Betty Brigg?  Or is he James, illegitimate son of Mary b about 1785? Or is he someone else??

I've seen a couple of posts on here this morning, which suggest there might be someone who knows more....if so, I would love to hear from you!  It's worth saying that most of these other James's are in my extended tree anyway....but whether they are in the right place is another matter!

Living in hope...

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: jim1 on Sunday 03 August 14 12:23 BST (UK)
Hello & welcome
Have you seen James' marriage entry to see if there are any Butterfield witnesses?

jim
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Sunday 03 August 14 12:32 BST (UK)
Hello Jim,

No, I haven't seen the record - I only have info from the Select Marriages information, which doesn't show written details.....but I will look again...right now!

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: jim1 on Sunday 03 August 14 19:37 BST (UK)
The James son of Isaac is an interesting entry:
Born May 10 1778 son of Isaac Butterfield comber of Denholm ? & his wife Betty daughter of Joshua Brigg.
I don't think I've ever seen an entry like that.

James son of Mary says she's from Stanbury which is near Haworth.

jim
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: jim1 on Sunday 03 August 14 19:55 BST (UK)
& the other James:
Born March 29 1786 son of Jacob Butterfield of Hill Top & his wife Alice daughter of John Monkhouse.
Died 1791.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Sunday 03 August 14 20:02 BST (UK)
I agree, Jim - I have this record already and think the same.

Actually it was my second best guess for the right James, after realising that Jacob's James had died at 5. Now I'm not so sure - there are several with the same name who would fit as the husband of Mary Tempest, all born within the right time span - and it seems most of them are in the extended tree!

Mary, the mother of the James who was illegitimate, had a sister Martha, who also had an illegitimate son, named Elijah. I think there may be other children too, and another sister, so that's where I am searching at the moment. 

The 1700s aren't that easy, are they?!

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: jim1 on Sunday 03 August 14 20:10 BST (UK)
Quote
The 1700s aren't that easy, are they?!
Nope, that's why you need the information from his marriage to see if there are any Butterfield witnesses as this narrows the field considerably.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Saturday 16 August 14 18:47 BST (UK)
I agree, Jim - I have this record already and think the same.

Actually it was my second best guess for the right James, after realising that Jacob's James had died at 5. Now I'm not so sure - there are several with the same name who would fit as the husband of Mary Tempest, all born within the right time span - and it seems most of them are in the extended tree!

Mary, the mother of the James who was illegitimate, had a sister Martha, who also had an illegitimate son, named Elijah. I think there may be other children too, and another sister, so that's where I am searching at the moment. 

The 1700s aren't that easy, are they?!

Cliffelinks65

Hi there Cliffelinks
I do not have an online tree but can post an link to some info from a previous rootschat topic i posted (I think you may have seen these , but if not here is info)

The Elijah you mention is my grt x 4 grandfather , he was born illegitimate ,  his mother was Martha Butterfield born 1763 d/o Joseph and Mary , Martha had a sister Mary who is baptised the same day( Mary i believe also has illegitimate children) and I believe is also the subject of a removal order when she was age 4 " a poor child" (see link at bottom of post) . There was another sister too Eunice / Unice. I think there is also a brother John.
One strange thing is that at thier parents Joseph and Mary (Hey) marriage 1755 is that Joseph makes his mark with a circle O instead of the usual cross X
 Elijah was born at a place called Pitchers Clough not far from Ponden Mill. Its all rather sad I'm afraid as Martha died in the workhouse (in a time of famine 1795-6). If you notice in the Keighley burials for the same time period there are quite a number of early / young deaths of "decay"  .  She had other illegitimate children, Michael and Martha . Baby Martha was baptised after mum Martha had died "abode workhouse" .

Elijah marries Ann Hoyle.

An interesting Butterfield is Henry , who was a physical force chartist and sent to prison for illegally drilling men in Bradford. I believe he is probably the Henry born about 1816 Bingley he marries Mally Judson), occupation Stuff weaver 1841 .  . He is living at Hainworth Shay toward Bingley in 1851 . Near where many of his co-accused (sedition, drilling , riot ect)  are and not far from the ringleader Isaac Ickeringill . There is a long list of them in court same time. His record is on ancestry criminal records in 1848 . He is a pauper in 1851.


Sorry if this post is all a bit cobbled together  but do not have info at hand at moment . Just going by what I remember. Will post more info soon

Info from link below
"... believe Mary is the daughter of Joseph and Mary (nee Hey) Butterfield m 1755 . Mary was bpt Keighley 19th Oct 1763 (with sister Martha bapt the same date) Both born Ponden Mill  near Stanbury (owned by a different local family and before the big mill was built there)  .
There is a family connection with Addingham mill but thats later on .   
Another thing is that sister Martha has  illigitimate children  (as does Mary and another sister Unice)  .
Marthas  illegitimate children are bapt  at Keighley  ,  at  Haworth and a possible one  is bapt as far away as  Dewsbury .  ( Martha dies just after childbirth with her baby bapt living /Oakworth/Keighley Workhouse . Martha dies of 'decay' age  31  and is buried Keighley d/o Joseph)  .
Mary dies age 29 of "lung"  d/o Joseph  buried Keighley . So if its same Mary in above removal order   im wondering why Addingham and West Layton .
There is a lot of ilegitimacy in this family  and also im wondering if the siblings are moving around for work.."
also there is a later removal order
Held at Keighley library 1784
Removal order of Mary Butterfield from Haworth to Keighley
unfortunatly , this one dosnt give an age but it does fit with our Mary being pregnant and unmarried
(son James bapt Haworth 15th feb  1785 b****rd )..
... . . . also held at Keighley archives .
"Bastardy bond of John Butterfield of Pitcher Clough , Keighley , shalloon weaver , and Mary Butterfield same , the mother of a female child .  28 Feb 1760". 
All these 3 orders in my above posts are (i believe) about an extended family from a very remote sparsly populated part of the Keighley/Haworth Moor area near Ponden mill ..."

Topic with infi above about Mary removal order "a poor child" and bastardy orders
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=604211.0

Another topic about Joseph and Marys (Hey) marriage The mark of is a circle
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=584780.0
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Saturday 16 August 14 20:58 BST (UK)
Hello sallyyorks,

I am so pleased you have seen my post, and many thanks for all this information.  Yes, I had seen your earlier posts - they prompted me to join up!

I will compare the information you have given with what I have here, and post again sometime tomorrow if that is ok with you.

The James I am looking for is my 3rd greatgrandfather, and I have his descendants direct to me all in place - if he is the one you mentioned, born 1785 to Mary illegitimately, then it would solve a lot.  He would certainly fit. (...but so do the other two James' I have....!)

Anyway, for now, back to my files to work things out, and I will write again tomorrow.

Many, many thanks for this.

Cliffelinks 65

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Saturday 16 August 14 21:41 BST (UK)
OK great . I will have proper dates and more info tomorrow.
Am int pub at moment , funnily enough with another Butterfield !  :) (theirs  from Leeds area originally though)
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Sunday 17 August 14 16:32 BST (UK)
Hello again, sallyyorks,

Here is what i have so far -

I have a record of a marriage in Kildwick between James Butterfield and Mary Tempest, 18 Feb 1806.

James and Mary had the following children - William b1806 (my direct line), Ann b1807, John b1809, Joseph b1810, Elizabeth b1812, Martin b1814, and Thomas b1816. I have further information about most of these children, and their descendants.

My William appears to have been married twice, first to Anne Smith, with whom he had 5 children, and then Mary Laycock, with whom he had a further 4. The last one of these was my paternal greatgrandfather Gill. At some point William moved to Bradford, I think with his second wife. Until starting this research, I had always assumed my family were all Bradford born - not so, it seems. I can give you more details on this if you need them.

So...the question is, where does my James come from in the first place?  These are the choices, all of whom appear in my extended tree (which is now turning out to be very large!):-
 
I have a James, b 1778 to Isaac and Betty Brigg – they had other children as well – John, Sally, then James, and lastly Isaac.
Isaac’s father was also Isaac, married to Anne Harrison, and his father seems to have been a John Butterfield, b 1676, and married to Mary Smith. These two seem to be as near as I can get to a “beginning” – I have many lines coming from John and Mary, and their children.

Then there is the James I mentioned in my first post, son of Jacob and Alice Moorehouse, who died when he was 5. Jacob also goes back to John b 1676.

I also have a James, b 1791 to Isaac and Martha  Hey (a relative of Mary Hey perhaps). Their other children were Mary,b 1782, Isaac b 1784, John b 1785 and Nicholas b 1794.

There is yet another James, living in Sutton, born in Haworth, on the 1841 census, with children Thomas, Anne Isaac, Adam and an Edmund Berry, who I think was Anne’s son.  Not sure where this James fits in!

It’s pretty clear that this family was in the area around Keighley – Stanbury, Haworth ,Kildwick, Glusburn, Sutton and towards Bingley...and I also think to the Barrowford/Colne area.  As you have said in an earlier post, likely to be all related, but moving around locally for work.

As far as James, son of Mary is concerned, I also have Eunice/Unice, Martha and John in my files. I don't know anything about Eunice at all, but John may have married a Mary Tatham, and had a child called Jacob. I knew about Martha's children, Martha and Michael, but not about the workhouse/bastardy issues you mention.

I've just read all this back - all quite confusing really, so I apologise if you thnk the same! I'd be very grateful for any clarification you can give, both about these James's and the family generally.
 

The irony of all this is that I lived in Bingley myself for ten years until moving north...my parents lived there longer, and had been born in Bradford before moving away for about 12 years before returning - and as a family we had no knowledge of family connections in the area at all!

Thanks in advance for anything you can add or take away!

Regards
Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Sunday 17 August 14 20:42 BST (UK)
Hi again .
Yes a lot of them do seem to stem from John and Mary (Smith) married 1696 Keighley
Have in my notes
Children
Isabel 1699
Ann 1705 (dies young ?)
Susannah 1707
Isaak 1710
John 1712 (Martha & Mary sisters with sons Elijah & James line)
Abraham 1715
Thomas 1718 ( think this is the mill owners line)
Anne 1720


Think my line back is (bapt or born)
Tom Butterfield b Bradford 1890 (m Ruthannie Ingleson)
John William Butterfield b Keighley 1852 ( m Sarah Jane Barton)
William Butterfield b Keighley 1816 (m Martha Pickles)
Elijah Butterfield b 1787 born Pitcher Clough (m Ann Hoyle)
Martha Butterfield b 1763 Ponden (near Pitcher Clough)
Joseph Butterfield b 1733 Keighley (of Ponden/Pitcher Clough)
John Butterfield b 1712 ,a weaver, Keighley (of area) (m Susanna Pighells/ Pickles)
John Butterfield marries Mary Smith in 1699 Keighley (of area)

What ties them together is that the parish records often give abodes. Pitcher Clough and Ponden Mill area are very close. They are on Google maps and I think where Elijahs brother Michael is born is right next to Pitcher Clough at Throstles Nest (Deanfield ?)

More in my notes is (though nothing certain because its so far back)
Joseph , a weaver,  and Mary (Hey) m 1755 both make mark but Joseph unusually with an O
Children
Unice 1756 abode Pitcher Clough
Martha and Mary 1763 Ponden Mill (next to each other on page)
John 1764 of Ponden (dies young ?)
John 1766 of Ponden
Ann 1766 of Ponden
Susan 1769 is bapt Haworth but of Pitcher Clough
Sally 1778 of Pitcher Clough
Rachel 1781 of Pitcher Clough
Whether these last few are of same Jo and Mary not 100% sure.

Martha has (all illegitimate)
Elijah 1787
Michael bapt (probably late) 1795
Martha 1795 (who is baptised just after Martha dies , abode Workhouse)

Mary
What can I say about Mary
I am pretty sure that Mary (i looked for another Mary it could be)  is the "Poor Child age about 4" in the removal order.
Here are the details

BC90049 Addingham Township Records 49D90
Overseers of the Poor
Removal Orders
49D90/6/e5
9th October 1767
Removal order of Mary Butterfield a poor child aged about 4 , from Long Addingham to West Layton
Location of Archive Bradford GB 202


Then there is this

Keighley Township Records BK1/16/1/88
Removal Papers
Removal Orders
Held at Keighley
Administered by Keighley Local Studies Library
Removal Order of Mary Butterfield , from Haworth to Keighley
Date 1784


This fits with the bapt of James and of Mary being removed because she is pregnant .

James 1785 Haworth bas***d son of Mary Butterfield
There is also I think a brother (also illegitimate)
William 19th May 1789 Keighley (I have in my notes Pitcher Clough for both but need to double check that)

Also relating to Pitcher Clough is an earlier Bastardy Order back in 1760

Keighley BK1/3/1/42
28th Feb 1760
Bastardy Bond of John Butterfield of Pitcher Clough , Keighley , shalloon weaver, and Mary Butterfield same , the mother of a female child


Running out of space . Will have a look on ancestry  tomorrow at your lot  :)


Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Sunday 17 August 14 20:47 BST (UK)
Cont ....
PS forgot to add . Rather touchingly Martha and Marys sister Unice names her (illegitimate) daughters Martha and Mary
Keighley 6th of July 1786
Mary age 1 year dau of Eunice Butterfield of Pitcher Clough
Martha age 1 year dau of Eunice Butterfield of Pitcher Clough

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Sunday 17 August 14 20:55 BST (UK)
Thanks for all this - I will compare with what I have here (I think you have added a bit for me!), and also post again tomorrow.

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Monday 18 August 14 16:11 BST (UK)
Is this your James / the family or maybe a cousin in Sutton / Kildwick ?
Edit Sorry i see you have already mentioned these

1841 Census Sutton/Kildwick
Lane Ends / New Hall, Low Fold
Keighley dist 29
("All that part of the township of Sutton in the Parish of Kildwick,
 comprising from west Lane bottom to the nook, the north side
of the Bent . Northside of the Turnpike Road to Lane Ends")
All born in county
James Butterfield 1786 - lab (labourer)
Thos Butterfield 1821
Ann Butterfield 1821
Grace Butterfield 1821
Addam Butterfield 1826
Edmd Butterfield 1836

1851 Census (i think same place as above, or nearby)
Sutton
James Butterfield b 1781 - born  Haworth - widower- labourer ag
Isaac Butterfield 1821- b Sutton  son - - warp dresser
Adam Butterfield 1826 - b Sutton - son -  ag labourer
Edmond Berry - 1836 - B Sutton - grandson


Have double checked this from my earlier post
"James 1785 Haworth bas***d son of Mary Butterfield
There is also I think a brother (also illegitimate)
William 19th May 1789 Keighley (I have in my notes Pitcher Clough for both but need to double check"

As Jim said its Stanbury (not far from Pitcher Clough/ Ponden)
 
Haworth St Michael and All Angels
15th feb 1785
James a son of Mary Butterfield, Bas***d (of ) Stanbury

Willam is bapt 19th may - 1789 at Keighley of Mary


Edit - There is also this at Haworth
James Butterfield
20 Jan 1783
Baptism 
Haworth, St Michael and All Angels
Father's Name: John Butterfield

There are more James than i thought there would be , i see what you mean , its quite a common name at the time and id thought of it as unusual
 
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 18 August 14 17:13 BST (UK)
Hi again,

Just seen your latest message - will read now!
Meanwhile, here is what I have written this afternoon in reply to yesterday........

Going from John Butterfield  and Mary Smith, married 1696, I have all the same children as you, with the addition of a Mary b 1701. Of these children I have the following :
Susannah, b 1707 possibly marrying a John Midgeley 1727. She dies 1729
Isaac – marriage to Anne Harrison in 1733 , and 7 children
John – marriage to Susan(na) Pighills in 1732, and 3 children
Abraham – marriage to Sarah Bins 1843, and one child
Thomas – marriage to Alice Smith 1738, and 6 children

Rather than Thomas, I have this  Isaac as the ancestor of the Butterfields who owned the mills and ultimately Cliffe Castle in Keighley – I have traced out their ancestry as a separate tree, which is very   interesting its own right, with several prominent American and French connections, including Theodore Roosevelt’s family.

Looking at your line, I also have Tom Butterfield  b 1890 in Bradford....looking further into this, it suggests that we are probably distantly related (quite how depends on the” elusive James’s”, but related nonetheless!) At the moment Tom could be a 6th cousin 1x of mine.....or something like that anyway.

A few months ago I visited Cliffe Castle (fascinating!) and the surrounding area, in particular Haworth and Stanbury, for the first time in more years than I care to remember.  Our destination was the Grouse inn at Oldfield  - the landlord there in the later 1800s was a Butterfield – and, to get there,  we passed from Stanbury across the valley to Ponden, Pitcher’s Clough and Scartop.  All round that area I have Butterfield abodes at different times. Deanfield or Deansfield comes up quite often, also Hill Top, Two Laws and Haworth itself.  .  As you have said, it is still very rural, and must have been even more so then...so it is highly likely that most  of the Butterfields then were related. All these places are really quite close to each other.  But what a jigsaw it is proving to be!

 As regards Joseph Butterfield and Mary Hey, I’ve looked into this family today, and think that Susan, Sally and Rachel are indeed  their children, as well as the others we have who were born earlier..  The Baptism records for Sally and Rachel mention both Joseph and Mary Hey; Susan’s just says Joseph as the father.

When we come to Elijah, Michael and Martha, it does seem odd that Michael was baptised about 4 months prior to Martha, so maybe it was a late baptism as you suggest. There are a lot of “gaps” between some births and baptisms in many of the other records I have from that time.
I note your comments about Eunice – I did not have this information at all.

Also, I am not familiar with the Township Records you mentioned – I only have the printed records from Haworth Parish and  I extracted the Keighley parish records myself from an online resource. I also have some printed records from Kildwick. Are these Township records held in Keighley and Bradford?

Lastly, for now, I have also done some preliminary searching for this Michael, who I didn’t know about – it looks like he went into Lancashire later, but I need to do more before I can confirm that.
All this is showing me how I need to focus on the detail – I feel I will be drawing more charts this week!

Now I will look at what you have just sent....back soon!

Cliffelinks65


Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Monday 18 August 14 18:13 BST (UK)
Yes :) probably related ... great post about the area, yes it is interesting and Bronte country too. We used to go up to the Silent Inn sometimes , you can see Pitcher Clough from one of the car parks. Can't say ive heard  much good before about  any of the Keighley mill owners at that time though.

Have just noticed something about the 1841 Census we mentioned (Keighley dist 29). 
It is only an 8 page Schedule , so i have been looking through it page by page
James and co are on the very last page 8, and is the last household listed . I think  going toward Cowling and Oakworth area
On the previous page 7 is a Tempest family (living very close to yours)
Wm Tempest 1776 - pensioner
Ann Tempest 1791
Ann Tempest 1825
Jonas Tempest 1837

and on page 2 of same schedule
Jane Tempest 1781
George T 1821
Mary 1826
Edward 1836

page 5
Ruben Tempest 1821
Martha 1821


Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Monday 18 August 14 19:47 BST (UK)
..sorry forgot to add . This is where you can find the Bastardy and Removal Orders . Its the archives wyjs
There is a search link top right
http://www.archives.wyjs.org.uk/

This is Marys first ? removal order
http://catalogue.wyjs.org.uk/Record.aspx?src=CalmView.Catalog&id=BC90049%2f6%2f5%2f5&pos=8



I do think that the James on the census might be your James . He is in the right place and the right age . There is also a Thomas b 1821 with him . The age for Thomas is out but ages can be on the 1841. The "Grace" with them might be a wife of one of the sons (on 1841)
With baptisms , the baptism might be late, so not the same year as born. Elijah's wife's family the Hoyles have late late baptisms . Anns (nee Hoyle)  mother Agnes (nee Sugden)  is buried the same day as her (anns) little brothers baptism, he was named Sugden Hoyle . Some are job lots,  when a few siblings might be baptised on the same day . They were living in remote areas like you say and the nearest churches were Keighley and Haworth at that time , so a bit of a traipse for them .

Tempest being used as a first name in the family is fortunate . We have this with a line of Sugden Butterfields . Toms brother and uncle and so on were both called Sugden Butterfield , it comes from Elijah's wife's mum . Way back !

Hope all that made sense  :)
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 18 August 14 22:18 BST (UK)
Is this a "lightbulb"moment.....?

Although I am no nearer establishing for certain the parentage of James.....although I think I am getting there....maybe, just maybe, there is something in your post that makes a new connection....here goes.....
"
Firstly, looking at the records for 1841 and 1851, I don't think Grace is Grace at all - in fact this is Isaac, and the index has a transcription error, something which is not uncommon on these forms when you look at the actual writing, rather than the printed version. Also, the forms seem way off in terms of the ages recorded, also common, particularly in 1841 apparently....this one really is difficult to work out, we have 55,20,20,20,15 and 5 on one, then 70, 30, 25 and 15 on the next.

But......(here is the "lightbulb"!)..... in my own tree, James and Mary had a daughter Elizabeth. I had no further info about her....but I have just found her marriage in 1833 to an Edward Berry, and on these census forms we find Edmund Butterfield and Edmund Berry (same child) as a grandson of James!  By the time of the census both Elizabeth and Edward are missing....early deaths?? This makes the link for me, so many thanks to sallyyorks for making me think!

I haven't decided who Ann is yet, or Adam, except that I have a death for Adam Butterfield in 1851, presumably after the census was conducted.

So now I am "on the case", and am very grateful for the push to make this connection.

Thank you....more to follow, I hope!

Cliffelinks65

 
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Monday 18 August 14 23:03 BST (UK)
Oooh reet Grand ! , as we say  :D ! . Well spotted with Isaac / Grace and looking good with the added Berry connection.
The ages all rounded off together at 20 for that age group I have seen before . It seems to happen that way in other 1841 census I've seen. Ages can be out a little on other census too sometimes
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Wednesday 20 August 14 19:30 BST (UK)
The plot thickens....

James' details on the 1841 census for Sutton are proving very elusive...I can find a Thomas in my tree b 1816, he might fit quite well, but as for Ann and Isaac, no joy yet. Can't find any birth/baptism records to make them the last two children of my James and Mary, or even Isaac the husband of Ann. The Thomas I have already I have showing as married in 1844 to someone else. As for Adam/Addam, also no birth baptism record, just a death in 1851.  I841 really is difficult sometimes, isn't it...!

However, better news elsewhere....Michael, illegitimate brother of Elijah, married Susan Judson/Judgson in 1815, and had the following children - William, Mary, Susanna, Martha, Nancy and maybe an Isaac. In between Nancy and the possible Isaac is the curiously named Jepy. More of him lower down in this message.

In 1833 Michael seems to have married Martha Hodgson/Hodgkin, moving to the Bury/Blackburn area of Lancashire - more children follow - Solomon, Charlotte, Cornelius, Michael, another Susanna and Jane E.

There is a really interesting entry of baptisms under Lancashire/Blackburn, Ebenezer Chapel for Jun 2 1835 which shows the following -

Jepy (?), b 1827 to Michael Butterfield and Susan Judson
Charlotte b 1835 to Michael Butterfield and Martha Hodgkin.

These 2 entries are on the same page next to each other, and the first shows Michael as living in Oldfield (which is the right area for his birth and first marriage). I haven't deciphered the abode for the second entry yet.

Still on the case.....

Cliffelinks65
 
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Wednesday 20 August 14 20:24 BST (UK)
I had a look for William s/o Mary b 1789 to see if he could shed any light on brother James .

I think this is him , (wife Alice nee Pighills/Pickles)
(Listed males in household first)

1841 Census
North St , Keighley
William Butterfield 1791 - Tinner
Pickles -(male) 1821
Alice 1796 (wife of William)
Martha 1826
Mary 1829
Lydia 1831

Pickles Butterfield was bapt 1816 of William , Tinner, ,  and Alice. Abode Clubhouses

1851 Census
Temple St , Keighley
William b 1789 Keighley- tin plate worker
Alice - 1793 Keighley - wife
Lydia 1831 Keighley - dressmaker

1861
Temple Row
Keighley
William 1789 - tinner and brazier
Lydia Redman - 1831 - dau
Frederick Redman age 1 grandson


Also looked at burials . Do you have James burial ?
I think this is burial of James son of Mary
(I was in a rush and scribbled down numbers but might have got one of numbers bit wrong)

Burial at Christchurch , Oakworth (this ,if i remember right, is where Elijah his cousin is buried)
1865
James Butterfield of Lane Ends
Age 70 ? (Need to look at this again)

Unless you already have a burial , this fits with your James (did he come home ?) because we know your James is on the census and alive in at least 1851. But a problem is on the bmd index there are two James Butterfield deaths for that year in Keighley dist.  If you do have a burial then this discounts James s/o Mary as being your James .

Something else I need to look into is a detail about one of Elijah's grandsons Joseph (son of my William 1816, my line)  . In one of my  old notes I have him giving "Kildwick" as his place of birth on a census .  There is a further connection going toward that area at Addingham .  William (Elijah's son) and family are on census there in 1861 probably working at New Mill. Also wonder if this is connected in some way with the Mary Removal Order 1767

Anyway, i am enjoying getting all the old Butterfield notes out and reading them
Will look into it again at online records  tomorrow  :)




Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 21 August 14 17:54 BST (UK)
I've been looking at William's details this afternoon - I agree with you about his children (I also have a John before Pickles, and a Mary after him, but all the others in place like you). So far so good...but alas I have William as the child of Jacob B and Alice Moorehouse, and born in 1779 which doesn't fit!  The ages on the later census forms suggest I'm wrong and you may be right...but that's ok....

So now I'm revisiting the William I have, born in 1779....and as always, a few to choose from!

So James and William remain difficult...I have no death for James (well not this one anyway, so that's another to seek...)

Pickles as a Christian name is interesting - corruption of Pighills, or Pighells, which I have also seen as surnames in this area, I think.

And while all this is going on, I have stumbled on 2 possible and conflicting Davids as well.

Happy days....!

Cliffelinks65



Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Thursday 21 August 14 20:04 BST (UK)
Now have correct details for James burial I mentioned earlier (but had scribbled it)

Christchurch , Oakworth
24th April 1865
James Butterfield of Lane Ends
Age 76
(est year of birth 1789)
I think this is probaly Marys son James bapt 1785 (age a bit out but that is not unusual for a death as people sometimes didnt know the exact age of deceased). The other James same year was from Bingley b 1816

Some of Elijah and Anns family are missing bapts , might be register is to hard to decipher/ damaged or they just didn't bother. I have never been able to find William 1816 bapt (though he names Elijah his dad at his wedding)
Also looked into a Betty Butterfield puzzle , turned out to be another coincidence

1841 Census - Lane Ends - Oakworth
Elijah Butterfied 1786- carrier
Ann (wife) 1786
John 1821 (names his son Elijah) - wool comber
Mary 1823 (think dies young) - factory
Betty 1826
John 1836

Looked into Betty , she marries John Lund in 1846 , at her marriage there is no father named , just a line drawn through . It turns out that Betty was born Cowling . This is very close to where your James is on the census . Your James is Bent Lane area I think .

Another coincidence between the Elijah family and the James family on census (Bent Lane/Kildwick , near the Colne rd area) is that Elijahs son William (b 1816) and family are in the Kildwick area in 1838 . Because Joseph his son (b 1838) repeatedly gives "Kildwick" as place of birth on census.

I wonder who Betty's mother is and if she was from Kildwick / Cowling area . Its the areas that I think are the clues
Still on the case  :)
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 21 August 14 20:40 BST (UK)
Just looked at the first part of your reply - I also only have some of the baptism dates for Elijah and Ann's childen, as follows:-

Joseph bapt 31 Aug 1809 (6 weeks old)
Christiana bapt 24 Jun 1811 born 25 Dec 1810
Jonathan bapt 30 June 1813

Other children listed as :-
William b 1816
John b 1821
Mary b 1823
Betty b 1826
Elizabeth b 1827
and another John b 1836

Could Betty and Elizabeth be the same person, I thought Betty was a version of the name Elizabeth?

I have marriages and descendants for Jonathan and William sketched out, but nothing as yet for any of the others.

Back to the rest of your message....

Cliffelinks65

.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Thursday 21 August 14 21:36 BST (UK)
The thing is though , on the 1841 census no relationships are stated. The Betty on the 1841 census living with Elijah family I don't think is Elijah and Anns daughter . In 1848 she marries John Lund but she seems to be illegitimate. I was expecting it to state "father Elijah" but it doesn't , there is a blank space and a line drawn through where the fathers name should be.
I am starting to doubt the John is the one who names son Elijah. The Thomas (edit sorry should read John) I don't think is Elijah's  son
A problem I have just noticed is that there seems to be two John and Alices .

There is the John with Elijah in 1841( who possibly  marries an Alice Newell) Then , also Oakworth in 1841 is
Then
1841
Living near Oakworth (notes)
John Butterfield 1811 - ag lab
Alice 1816
Joseph 1840

So the John with Elijah isn't that one

Then

Keighley 1851 census
All b Keighley
John Butterfield 1806 - ag lab
Alice 1813 (nee Womersley ?)
Joseph 1840
William 1844
Paylina 1847
James 1848
Joseph Womersley 1781 - wool - lodger

This is part of a mass baptism ( of a lot of people ) on Christmas day
Christchurch , Oakworth
Christmas day - 1851
Elijah Butterfield
born 1848
Son of
John and Alice

So this is this a different John and Alice to the 1806 John and 1813 Alice . Because they don't have an Elijah with them in 1851 . Unless "Paylina" is Elijah . A further complication is that William is down as female too


Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Thursday 21 August 14 21:46 BST (UK)
...yes sorry , I see what you mean about Betty / Elizabeth
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Thursday 21 August 14 23:12 BST (UK)
If the James on census near Kildwick  (with the Edmund Berry connection) is your James then I  still think your James is probably from this area originally.
Might come in useful in future

District 19 Keighley, Lane Ends/Oakworth area
12 pages (pages ancestry index)
 (Sorry missed occupations for first few)

1841 Census

Butterfields (all born in county)

Page 5
Hannah 1786
Mary 1816
Nancy 1836

Page 5
Mary 1816
James 1816

Page 6
John 1816 - wool comber
Mary 1816
Ann 6 months

Page 6
Robert 1816 - wool comber
Ann 1821 - wool comber
Emma 1838
Sarah Ann 1839
Squire (baby ?)

Page 7
Susannah 1796 - worsted weaver
Thomas 1822 - worsted weaver
Ogden 1826- wool comber
James 1826 -worsted weaver
Richard 1829
Abraham 1835
Betty 1838

Page 8
Elijah 1786- carrier
Ann 1786
John 1821 - wool comber
Mary 1823 - factory
Betty 1826 - factory
John 1836

Page 11 (near Pitcher Clough)
Wm 1816- worsted weaver
Martha 1816
Joseph 1839
Agnes 14 days
Mary Ann Pickles 1834 (illeg dau of Martha)

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Friday 22 August 14 17:39 BST (UK)
Just started looking at the detail on reply 25, but began today with reply 27 - (no wonder we get confused!)

Anyway, a lot of this does seem to point to James...I feel there is something connecting here, but haven't worked it all out yet. I agree that Lane Ends as an area seems significant in all this.

The 1841 list you sent is very interesting in its own right - Elijah clearly lived near to William his son.

That much is reasonably straightforward. This afternoon  I have been focussing on Susannah nearby.  She seems to be a "spinster", and I have the records for baptisms for sons Thomas and Ogden who were living with her at the time.

However, I also already have a record for a son Robert,born 1814. She is registered as being at Turnshaw when Robert and Thomas were born. And on the previous page of this census, we have a Robert who fits the bill - so more of her family living close by. So it looks like yet another illegitimate birth here - who is Susannah??

I've traced some new lines from Ogden which I didn't have before - and thankfully there are some unusual names which is making it easier - Lot and Selina for example, so I will complete that chart later on today.

The more I look at what I have here, and compare it with detailed maps of the area/districts at that time and the suggested population figures, the more I think the Butterfields were more or less all connected - but it is proving to be a major jigsaw. 

My part of the family moved to Bradford in the mid to late 1800s, when there was much more movement for work than earlier, the Industrial Revolution being in full swing then. But prior to that all the names are local to Keighley, and often very near to each other.  I have locations in Kildwick, Glusburn, Sutton, Steeton, Keighley itself, Cowling, Oakworth, Haworth, Oxenhope,  Hill Top, Two Laws, Long Lea, Turnshaw etc and many places in between - many of the other names look like farms or perhaps hamlets.

Very grateful for your help, sallyyorks....guess we could do with help from other "relatives" too...there must be some, surely!

Time for a chart, I think....

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Friday 22 August 14 18:22 BST (UK)
re Susannah - I found a baptism in Keighley for a Susannah, b 1793, parents William B and Mary Lawson - could this be her?

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Saturday 23 August 14 16:16 BST (UK)
Sorry for confusion with posts. I do wonder sometimes wether it is better to edit or add another post, as i know it's easy to miss a post when reading .
Yes Bradford, I expect many families moved to towns and cities.
I noticed your Butterfields are at Tumbling Hill Street area (Butcher Street) , right near the centre off Thornton Road,(/Longside Lane/New Gratton/Thornton Road/)  wich was near where my John William B 1852 is in 1891 census , Leathem Street, not there anymore.
Your Gill is then up at Little Horton Lane and also not far from where John W moves to Havelock st , Grt Horton (near the big tesco at Grt Horton now) and then Tom is born at Rosse Street , back down toward Tumbling Hill Street. I wonder if the Bradford Butterfields ever  met up and knew their relatedness to each other . Sat in a pub like the Mill Lane with clay pipes debating it , "nay lad , that wer 't tother James o'er at Sheepoyles, yonder , favthurs muther wor a Pickles " , like that  ;D
When my lot first appear in Bradford on the census (1871 ) it is at Bowling (West) , near "Ripley Ville", Bowling Old Lane area. A lot of it all pulled down in the clearances of the 1970s.

I am very interested in the industrial revolution and Bradfords history, especialy the strikes, early trade unions, chartists and so on. The high rates of illegitamacy might partly be connected to the mill bosses / managers, but thats nothing certain me saying that.
Illegitamcy wasn't uncommon in rural areas anyway   

Your chart sounds great , quite a task. Im afraid im a bit all over the place with my records but have been thinking about doing some more 1841 Butterfield lists for the area this week . Will post them  :)
Will have a look for Susannah too

Keighley aug 20th ,1844 At Ogden Butterfields x marriage , overlooker,  of Lane Ends,  to
Hannah Lister x , of Lane Ends , minor, d/o Thomas, wool comber, 
Ogden has no father named , line drawn through
Witnesses
James Hey x
Sarah Foulds
 
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Saturday 23 August 14 20:09 BST (UK)
...and thinking about you saying "could do with some help " from other Butterfields.  The site moderators/staff  can move the topic to the Yorkshire West Riding section of the website if you like. Could request topic moved from Beginners section to there .
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Calverley Lad on Monday 25 August 14 09:09 BST (UK)
2nd that request for this subject be moved to West Riding board.
 Brian
[Could a passing mod oblige]
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 25 August 14 10:24 BST (UK)
I agree too - thanks - how do I ask for this?  Just reading the site notes...
Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 25 August 14 17:52 BST (UK)
Moved to the right board now - thank you!

Tried to be more organised this afternoon - I have extracted all the Butterfields (incl variant spellings) from the Keighley, Sutton, Kildwick, Haworth, Bingley and Addingham 1941 Census records. (Might check over Skipton, and Barrowford/Colne later).

So that's about 350 altogether. Now checking against my tree......

I suppose this is a statement of the obvious to more experienced researchers, but it is interesting to see how many other surnames keep appearing in these records time and time again. Feather, Hey, Pighills, Sunderland and quite a few more, all apparently much larger "families" than mine. I also noticed that it was very common for sons to be given the mother's maiden name as their first name - and in the Butterfields' case, this is very helpful with the jigsaw.

Hoping there are others with links to this area,

Cliffelinks65



Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Tuesday 26 August 14 18:42 BST (UK)
It seems a common trait in the West Riding to use mothers maiden names as forenames for sons.
Although those names can be passed down a few generations too. I suspect there are also quite a few cousin marriages in the remote areas and before the industrial revolution.
Toms brother was named Sugden Butterfield b 1872 (and his uncle b 1845) and some other Sugdens in the family, but it is back in the mid 1700s where the name comes from (Agnes Sugden b 1753)

Squire is a forename found in the WR too, but according to elder family i remember, it has a different meaning than a passed on surname and was seen as cocking a snook at the Gentry in an act of defiance . How much truth is in that i dont know but it woudnt surprise me when you consider the harsh poaching laws and the "Bloody Code"
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Friday 29 August 14 19:33 BST (UK)
Just picking up on a couple of points from previous posts....

I cannot work out "Paylina" at all - I've enhanced the census writing and it still looks like that name, but I haven't found the name anywhere else.. Looks like a mystery.

I liked the comments about Tumbling Hill etc for the Bradford Butterfields...if only they had written it down somewhere! :)

I looked through Colne for 1841 earlier this week - about 30 individual names,  at 9 addresses, but maybe involving less families....no clear links there as yet, but maybe 1851 will reveal more.

At that time Keighley, and the districts out of Keighley on the Colne road, and also the road to Haworth and Oxenhope show the most family numbers, and there is a bit of a spread to Bingley as well. I've managed to establish a few more links to what I already had here, but there's a way to go yet. Also. for what it's worth, i have no entries at all for Addingham in that year.

The Lane Ends, Oakworth part is really frustrating still - it looks like there must be some kind of  relationship between Elijah and family, who we know about, and Susannah and her children, but I can't pin it down. I find it hard to believe that in the Lane Ends of that time these two would be part of two different families.

I've found another entry for a Susannah, baptised in Haworth 18 Feb 1795, parents Joseph and Sarah, living at Lane Ends too....but who are they?? I have several Josephs marrying different Sarahs at around that time - there is Sarah Hird, Sarah Gott, and a Sarah Arnold (that one is a bit out of the timescale though). Any thoughts?

Also about Susannah - I can't help but think that son Ogden gives us a clue here....there are a number of Ogden families in the area....

I'm also feeling more and more that my elusive James is in the mix here too.

Confusing, time consuming...but fun!

Cliffelinks65



Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Saturday 06 September 14 20:50 BST (UK)
Yes if only they'd written it down.
We have had a few stories passed down in the family though. Tom and Ruth Annie (mill workers) were very left wing, especially when Tom came back from the war. Tom (a staunch trade unionist) was born during the famous Manningham Mills Strike. I think I have seen a photo of his father John William, in old family photos . If it was him, he had quite long hair, all slicked back, dark hair and eyes. He died quite young in Manningham. So did Sugden, his eldest son (unmarried)

I might have another look into the Physical Force Chartist Henry Butterfield born about 1816 or 1818. I've seen the newspaper reports of his trial 1848 (very poignant), he was certainly a leader of men. Isaac Ickeringill was one of the main ringleaders. The list of those on trial is very long, much longer than in the link below. The whole area was up in arms, as it had been 1839 / 1840, when it was in support of the Newport Rising. .
Henry is mentioned here @ chartists.net
http://www.chartists.net/Chartists-arrested-in-1848.htm
And of course will keep looking for your James :) , I'm curious now , I can't help thinking he is connected to the sisters Mary , Martha and Eunice line
Will keep you posted about any finds  :)
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 08 September 14 14:41 BST (UK)
Thanks for this link - much appreciated.

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Wednesday 10 September 14 17:29 BST (UK)
Just received information re the 2 James's who died in 1865. One was a child, 9 wks old, parents William and Mary. He died in Gilstead, near Bingley, and the death was registered in Keighley.

The second one registered in Keighley that year died in an industrial accident at Oakworth Mills, aged 16.

This is verified, so both of these are out of the equation for the James I am looking for.

As I haven't found any census record that fits him for 1861 either, I'm thinking my  James died between 1851 and 1861.....so the case continues......


Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Wednesday 10 September 14 19:24 BST (UK)
...and then there is "Paylina"....I've just found Paulina Butterfield, died aged 5 in 1851. Abode given as Slack Lane, and burried at Oakworth Christchurch. West Yorkshire, England, Deaths and Burials 1813 - 1985.  So that must be her??

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Sunday 14 September 14 10:37 BST (UK)
Had another look through the newspaper archives .

Found a James Butterfield involved in the Plug Riots (now known as the 1842 General Strike).
James Butterfield, who seems to have led this particular mob, was convicted for his part in an attack on a mill at Bingley.
From
The Northern Star
Sept 10th 1842
(Includes long lists of other strikers on trial , who were in Halifax (where 5 or 6 people died), Bradford, parts of Leeds and other WR locations)
16th of August 1842
"A mob proceeded to the mill of Mr Townsend and the rest shouted 'Mr Butterfield, come forward'. They then went to the engine house and the prisoners and others attempted to draw the plug of the boiler...the mob then said they would show no partiallity and draw the [mill] dam...".


Had another look at Henry Butterfield the chartist convicted 1848
He had been drilling men at Clayton. There is a Henry living Clayton on the 1841 census. Living on his own born 1821. Whether this is actually the Henry chartist (and not the Haworth Henry) is hard to know, because often men were drilled at remote locations, like on the moors , so he could be from anywhere in the area.
Nearby Clayton area Henry is a family of Butterfields
Mary 1786
Esther 1823
Priscilla 1831
Interestingly, also nearby, there is a Jowell family (Jowett ?). Possibly connected to the Jowitt who gave evidence against him, who was possibly a paid informer.
From the Bradford Observer 3rd August 1848
(With long lists of other chartists on trial)
"A witness by the name of Jowitt said, that at an early hour in the morning of the 22nd of may last, he saw the prisoner [Henry] with forty men, who were marching in military array. The prisoner shouted 'halt' and the men halted. He then said 'right face' and they immediately obeyed. Other orders were given of a similar character, which were followed with the same precision as before. On being cross examined, Jowitt said he was watching the drilling for about ten minutes, that it was not equal to that of soldiers, but that the men drilled did their best ..."

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Calverley Lad on Monday 15 September 14 07:29 BST (UK)
What about the Butterfields in Shipley?
Any connections as I have found a few living/dying and subsequent burials at 2 cemeteries.
http://vitaldb.moorlandit.com/index.php
(Just enter Butterfield into surname search)
Further references to Butterfield named families can be found in two old books.
1) Ancient Bingley: Or Bingley, It's History and Scenery - 1897
2) Chronicles and stories of Old Bingley - 1898
[I have both books in pdf format that I could make available via my dropbox account]
Let me know if you want to look, both @ 20Mb download.
 Brian
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 15 September 14 11:55 BST (UK)
Hello Brian,

Thanks for the book information - I have found both of them this morning to use for future reading, but I appreciate the offer. I have done a little research on Shipley and Bradford connections, at the moment in the 1840s and 1850s, so the Moorland link will also be useful too.


I am starting to realise just how much information is out there, if you just know where to look!

Thanks also Sally for passing on your links and knowledge of these times.

I have one question, which may well be very naive of me, but I need to ask it....   If I find a death registration (eg Adam Butterfield, death registered in Keighley 1851) why am I not finding a burial record in the area?  I have looked in all the parish records that I think would apply, but no joy. Similarly, I have no birth or baptism record as yet, just two census returns (lived in Sutton 1841 and 1851). Is it simply that the relevant parish is not yet online, or am I missing something? I've only found one other Adam besides this one, but he wasn't born until 1849, and lived elsewhere.

I find this really confusing, but it might be inexperience on my part - can you advise?

Thanks in advance,

Cliffelinks65

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Monday 15 September 14 12:25 BST (UK)
Adam might be nonconformist and the records are not online yet.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Calverley Lad on Monday 15 September 14 12:38 BST (UK)
Some parish records may never appear online?
(Local Baptist church records live inside a locked safe, I know because I asked to see them)
A large number of records have recently appeared online due to many 'local history groups' banding together and after transcribing do a deal with one of the large BMD record companies!
(Like taking the King/Queen's shilling) :o
I was once chasing a number of Methodist records, just got passed from 'pillar to post', never did get the information I required.
 Brian
Have a look here at the Bradford Family History Society website (look under publications) :
http://www.bradfordfhs.org.uk/
There must be hundreds of Butterfield named persons buried in the collective group of burial grounds starting from the 1600's!
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 15 September 14 12:45 BST (UK)
Ok, I thought it might be something like that! 

Thanks

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Friday 10 October 14 20:50 BST (UK)
Following Brian's advice re burial grounds etc, I am still continuing the hunt for the right James. No joy yet...and a major delay from Bradford Registry office in obtaining some certificates. The office is being moved to another building at the moment, but, as always, they are being very helpful, so I am expecting something very soon now.

I've collected quite a collection of burial records now, which have helped with other parts of my extended tree, and at the same time analysised the 1841 census for the Aire valley from Skipton to Bradford - a toil of a pleasure, to say the least....

However, (and I know these are only numbers, and I'd better allow for errors on my part) I have found 541 living Butterfields on the census date, as follows:-

Addingham 1
Skipton 1
Keighley (incl Haworth) 264
Bingley 93
Shipley 46
Bowling 3
East End 31
West End 37
Horton 19
Manningham 4
N Bierley 11
Thornton 9
Wilsden 23

Of these, 63 are called John and 48 called Mary!  James comes in with 16....so I'm really starting to understand all the difficulties...

Hey ho..

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: panic on Tuesday 14 October 14 11:00 BST (UK)
Butterfield's can be slippery customers  ::)

I've recently got them in my tree. I have an Ann Elizabeth Cogan who married John William Butterfield in Leeds in 1889. It should be straight forward to expand that branch you would think? Well, there is another John William Butterfield who married in Leeds in 1889. So I needed to look at the marriage cert or register to make sure (couldn't simply compare 1881 & 1891 census).

Luckily the other John William didn't marry an Ann Elizabeth, however a John William Butterfield did marry an Elizabeth Ann Hipkin in 1873 which isn't as much of a problem of John Butterfield marrying an Ann Elizabeth Dunn in 1885. Then if you add into the mix that the original marriage register entry shows Ann's name as Elizabeth Cogan with Ann written above the Elizabeth in slightly smaller writing - did she prefer being known as Elizabeth (or a variant of) as its not usual for people to put their "known as" names on census and the likes. I'm just glad the baptism records of WY archives list fathers occupation on them.

Not sure if my John William Butterfield b abt 1870, father Oliver Butterfield, links in, but thought I'd share - apologies for hijacking.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Wednesday 15 October 14 21:30 BST (UK)
I like the "slippery customers" idea....!  Indeed they are.....!

At the moment I don't have any direct links to the Leeds area in my records, but have thought about looking there - something else on the to do list.

However, way way back in my research I have seen occasional links to Methley, which is in that general area I think.

I'll have a look via the Oliver you mention, and see if he leads back in any way.

Meanwhile, no news on James - the Registry office cannot find him yet.....

Cliffelinks65





Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: panic on Thursday 16 October 14 11:30 BST (UK)
I like the "slippery customers" idea....!  Indeed they are.....!

At the moment I don't have any direct links to the Leeds area in my records, but have thought about looking there - something else on the to do list.

However, way way back in my research I have seen occasional links to Methley, which is in that general area I think.

I'll have a look via the Oliver you mention, and see if he leads back in any way.

Meanwhile, no news on James - the Registry office cannot find him yet.....

Cliffelinks65
Oliver was baptised at St John the Evangelist, Baildon, 13 Mar 1836 son of William & Sarah Butterfield. William was a weaver by occupation.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 16 October 14 21:34 BST (UK)
I note the Baildon connection here, so I will look more closely at Oliver at the weekend to see if there are any links to my Shipley records - the two places are certainly very close.

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Wednesday 12 October 16 19:52 BST (UK)
Hello - hoping someone is there to help with this!

I see it is almost 2 years since I last posted - just recently I have returned to my own family research after a long break looking into other branches of our family, so I have been going through the work I did then on the Butterfields...and have managed to correct quite a few errors that I made through inexperience at that time. So here goes with something I can't yet solve....!

When I first posted here, there was some discussion at the beginning of this thread which mentioned Elijah Butterfield and his family.

I have been looking closely at the 1841 census for Keighley, and there he is, living with his wife Ann, and children etc in District 19 at Lane Ends. Also at Lane Ends at the same time is another son, William with his wife Martha, and children.

That part is straightforward, I think.....BUT the same district has some other Butterfields also at Lane Ends....and this is where I seem to be missing something.  I have found a Susannah, with a number of children living with her...and also a Robert, who seems to be her oldest son, with his wife and children.

All these are listed as Lane Ends....so is it safe or reasonable to assume they are related?  If so, how?  I can't make a link between Elijah and Susannah at all....is she a sister, or a cousin? I have Elijah's siblings, but not a Susannah amongst them....

Susannah may have been born to a Joseph and Sarah in 1795 - a baptism of a Susannah shows up in the Haworth records I have, and also mentions Lane Ends.....

I just can't get Susannah to fit in .....every part of what I have done so far shows Butterfields in Keighley and clustered around the first part of the Worth valley up as far as Two Laws. Given the population in that area at that time, it hasn't been too difficult to link people, but this one evades me, so any help or guidance would be much appreciated.

Many thanks in advance to anyone who can shine a light here.....

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Wednesday 12 October 16 22:37 BST (UK)
Hello - hoping someone is there to help with this!

I see it is almost 2 years since I last posted - just recently I have returned to my own family research after a long break looking into other branches of our family, so I have been going through the work I did then on the Butterfields...and have managed to correct quite a few errors that I made through inexperience at that time. So here goes with something I can't yet solve....!

When I first posted here, there was some discussion at the beginning of this thread which mentioned Elijah Butterfield and his family.

I have been looking closely at the 1841 census for Keighley, and there he is, living with his wife Ann, and children etc in District 19 at Lane Ends. Also at Lane Ends at the same time is another son, William with his wife Martha, and children.

That part is straightforward, I think.....BUT the same district has some other Butterfields also at Lane Ends....and this is where I seem to be missing something.  I have found a Susannah, with a number of children living with her...and also a Robert, who seems to be her oldest son, with his wife and children.

All these are listed as Lane Ends....so is it safe or reasonable to assume they are related?  If so, how?  I can't make a link between Elijah and Susannah at all....is she a sister, or a cousin? I have Elijah's siblings, but not a Susannah amongst them....

Susannah may have been born to a Joseph and Sarah in 1795 - a baptism of a Susannah shows up in the Haworth records I have, and also mentions Lane Ends.....

I just can't get Susannah to fit in .....every part of what I have done so far shows Butterfields in Keighley and clustered around the first part of the Worth valley up as far as Two Laws. Given the population in that area at that time, it hasn't been too difficult to link people, but this one evades me, so any help or guidance would be much appreciated.

Many thanks in advance to anyone who can shine a light here.....

Cliffelinks65

Hi again Cliffelinks

If she is a cousin of Elijah, then she might be illegitimate.
Elijahs mother had 2 sisters. All 3 sisters (of Joseph and Mary, of Ponden/Pitcher Clough area) had illegitimate children.
Clearer dates, than in my previous posts, below


Unice/Eunice b 1756
Daughters bapt at Keighley 6th of July 1786
Mary age 1 year dau of Eunice Butterfield of Pitcher Clough
Martha age 1 year dau of Eunice Butterfield of Pitcher Clough
(named after her sisters?, who had also been baptised on the same day back in 1763)


Martha (variously of Pitcher Clough) bapt 19th Oct 1763 - d (d workhouse during 1795 famine?) 14th May buried 17th May 1795
Elijah 29 Aug 1787 at Keighley of Pitcher Clough
Michael 11 Jan 1795 at Haworth (late baptism? of Martha of Throstles Nest near Pitcher Clough)
Martha born 4th April bapt 1 Jul 1795 (of workhouse) at Keighley


Mary bapt 19th Oct 1763 (bapt same day as Martha and probably the subject of a removal order, "poor child  age 4")
*James  of Mary, 15th feb 1785, (abode) Stanbury, bapt at Haworth (linked to a removal order of pregnant Mary?)
Willam of Mary, 19th may 1789, bapt at Keighley

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 13 October 16 13:07 BST (UK)
Hello sallyyorks again,

Thanks for your reply - I agree that Susanna looks to be illegitimate, as I have noticed that some of her children have baptism records with just her name. A number of other trees on Ancestry also record her as Susanna Butterfield (spinster).

At first I wondered if she was the child of one of Elijah's mother's sisters....I've noted your information about Eunice and Mary, and obviously she doesn't show up there.

 Looking back at other records I have, I can see I have recorded further possible children to Joseph and Mary, as well as Eunice, Martha and Mary, so I don't know whether you have that information as well. I'll be checking them out again later today. (I have 4 more names as possibles).

As regards Susanna herself, I'm leaning to her being the child of a Joseph Butterfield and Mary Hird, who married in 1791. These people lived at Lane Ends when their Susanna came along in 1795.  The downside to this is that they seem to be both over 40 when Susanna was born...their birthdates show up as 1753 at this stage, but I need to recheck all this. A second problem is that I then have further possible children for them, but born after Susanna, which would make them even older parents. All a bit doubtful I think....

However, to get back to the main point...I can't see an obvious relationship between Elijah and Susanna; if there is one it may be through the extended family, rather than direct cousins......and indeed Lane Ends may have been a bigger place than I imagine. Given the population of the Keighley area at that time (1841) - about 13000+ I think - it just seems likely to me that there is a connection. What do you think?

As far as Lane Ends is concerned...is that area still there? Am I right in thinking it is in Oakworth?

And talking of places in the valley, where is Deanfield?   I have found a farm and some preserved cottages off Dean Edge Road which seem to be in a heritage category. A number of Butterfields are shown as living there in the early 1800s.....but that's another task......!

On we go....
Cliffelinks65

 
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Thursday 03 November 16 20:32 GMT (UK)
Yes sorry Cliffelinks , you are right it should read Deanfield for Micheal 1795 son of Martha in my previous post, not Throstles Nest then.
Deanfield was just to the left of Pitchers Clough . I remember looking it up on an old map. It is as Throstles Nest now on Googlemaps. Next to the Bronte Barn Cottage.

I found Elijahs death in the newspapers. He had an accident with his cart on the Colne road.

Have all my notes out again, so will have a look for any more clues
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Thursday 03 November 16 21:39 GMT (UK)


Looking back at other records I have, I can see I have recorded further possible children to Joseph and Mary, as well as Eunice, Martha and Mary,
As regards Susanna herself, I'm leaning to her being the child of a Joseph Butterfield and Mary Hird, who married in 1791. These people lived at Lane Ends when their Susanna came along in 1795.  The downside to this is that they seem to be both over 40 when Susanna was born...their birthdates show up as 1753 at this stage, but I need to recheck all this. A second problem is that I then have further possible children for them, but born after Susanna, which would make them even older parents. All a bit doubtful I think....

However, to get back to the main point...I can't see an obvious relationship between Elijah and Susanna; if there is one it may be through the extended family, rather than direct cousins......and indeed Lane Ends may have been a bigger place than I imagine. Given the population of the Keighley area at that time (1841) - about 13000+ I think - it just seems likely to me that there is a connection. What do you think?

As far as Lane Ends is concerned...is that area still there? Am I right in thinking it is in Oakworth?


On we go....
Cliffelinks65

 

...something about Joseph and Mary (nee Hey) and their children puzzles me but I am not sure what it is. I agree there are probably more children. We know that Martha, Mary and Eunice had illegitimate children, illegitimacy seems to be a common thread with some of these families, and that Mary was probably the subject of a removal order "poor child age 4". A removal order that is to the north Yorkshire border of all places. Then there is the strange "mark of" by Joseph at his marriage to Mary Hey 1754, a circle instead of a cross. It is all so confusing.

I think Lane Ends was the Oakworth road area as it went more into Keighley. Between the two.  There was a workhouse on Oakworth road, just below Exley Head/Highfield. I think that is where Marthas daughter was. Maybe some children worked in the mills who were sent from the workhouse?
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Thursday 13 July 17 00:25 BST (UK)
Hi, another cousin here, most likely descended from Elijah Butterfield and Ann, nee Hoyle, via their son, John Butterfield and Alice (Newell), and their daughter Sarah Ann, b c 1854 in Oakworth. However like the other twigs, mine is equally slippery. We have done so much original research, wading through the records, but still can't be positive.

My Sarah Ann appears to have never married ( so no marriage cert to confirm her father's name ) though she had one child,  an illegitimate daughter, Esther Alice, my ancestor.
We have no real idea who Esther's father was, the great aunt who was told all the information gave a vague hint, but otherwise refused to share it with anyone else.

We do know the family came from the Keighley / Haworth area, and that great aunt used to visit one of Esther's relatives in (probably) the 1920s or 30s, who lived over in that direction, and who was a painter and decorator. I also was recently given Sarah Ann's Bible, which said it was presented by Oakworth Sunday School to SarahAnn Butterfield, aged 10, so looked for a SarahAnn living there in about 1864.  SarahAnn ( which is how she always signed her name, running the two together) has led us a merry dance.  She seems to have been born about 1854. I first looked at the Sarah Ann at The Grouse Inn, bc 1861, d.o Joseph, but then found her marriage and death. Ditto for her cousin, the one at Ponden Mill, d.o Thomas, then Harehills.
There was another Sarahann, who ran her name together, up at Stanbury, but again she didn't seem to fit. The best match was that of John and Alice's daughter , they were in Oakworth in the right period, before going to Saltaire. There didn't seem to be a marriage or death entry anywhere for their Sarah Ann. Also given the name of Esther Alice, it appears the son - Sarahann's brother - married an Esther, and of course Alice would have been her mother's name, so makes sense for her to have called her child after them? The year of birth fits too. Esther Alice was born, and brought up in, Sowerby Bridge, near Halifax, and I'd love to know quite how and why SarahAnn ended up there, where indeed she spent the rest of her life. If anyone there has any info or suggestions that might help untangle this conundrum then I'd love to hear from you.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 13 July 17 13:02 BST (UK)
Hello Sherry10,

I have been looking at my information with regard to the Sarahann/Sarah Anns...Like you I have several which could fit!

Before going into this more deeply, can you confirm that Esther Alice married a Henry Stark?  I have looked at the 1911 census and have seen an Esther Alice married to Henry Stark in Halifax, with children William, Herbert, Harold, John and and Marian. The same address shows Sarah Ann Butterfield as mother in law, but also with a George Henry Butterfield as son.

I am on the case, but it would be helpful to know if these are the right people?   

Regards,
Cliffelinks65





Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Thursday 13 July 17 16:39 BST (UK)
Hi Cliffe,

You are correct. Esther married Henry Stark, the boy next door (and another nightmare family to research!). She was only 16 when she and Henry asked their respective parents if they could be married, and were told no, they were too young. As a result, George Henry was born illegitimate, and was raised by his grandmother SarahAnn. Esther and Henry threatened that if they couldn't be married they'd 'do it again', and with news of the impending arrival of William, the parents finally agreed to the marriage. Henry and Esther moved into a cottage nearby and raised their family. There were a couple more girls as well as Marian - Rosilea, Gladys, and Edith, who died when she was a baby. Henry begged his eldest son George to join them, and to change his surname to Stark (something a change in law by then permitted, if the parents of an illegitimate child subsequently married). However George was having a wonderful time on his own with his grandmother, who by all accounts spoilt him rotten, and refused to go. He didn't join the rest of his family until they all moved in together ( I get the feeling that SarahAnn was failing by then)  and even then he insisted on continuing to use her surname as a tribute to her. There was never any doubt whatsoever of his parentage though. This explains why in the census Henry has George down as his son, and SarahAnn as his mother in law.

Hope this helps. Regards, Sherry.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 13 July 17 17:28 BST (UK)
Hi again,

Thanks for this - an interesting story!

.....and it explains George Henry being on the 1911 census. I have him with Sarah Ann on the 1901 Census, at Norland Hall, Sowerby, where Sarah Ann was employed as a housekeeper. There are several others at that address, and I wonder if it was a large farmhouse - maybe you know of this place.

In the 1891 census, Sarah is with Esther and shown as a boarder, with the occupation of housekeeper to one John Smith, a labourer.   This is at Nether Royd, Soyland (?), Sowerby.

Prior to this, she shows up on the 1861, 1871 and 1881 census forms as being with her family in Shipley.

  I found a baptism at Oakworth for 25 December 1851 for Sarah Ann, daughter of John and Alice. This was a "batch" of baptisms, as their sons Thomas and Elijah were baptised on the same day.  In fact the Oakworth records show a number of Butterfield "batches" being baptised at that time, with different parents, so I will be following these up next.

All these records point to the same Sarah Ann...except that the recorded ages for her differ a bit, particularly on the 1911 census. I would have her older than the age shown there(which is 54), and would say she should be about 61 at that time.  I have also found a death for a Sarah Ann Butterfield, in Halifax in 1918, where she is shown as 67.  I don't know if this helps or not?

Incidentally, all this has resulted in some additions to my own tree!

Regards,
Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Thursday 13 July 17 18:38 BST (UK)
Yes, I have copies of the census entries, and also of Esther's birth certificate. SA was indeed housekeeper to John Smith and in my early research days put 2 and 2 together to get 5, as I assumed 'housekeeper' was a euphemism, and that John Smith ( a striking man, according to his photo) might well  have been Esther's father. Not so, came the barrage of protest from all the great aunts and uncles. She was it seems just the housekeeper. The family said she was able to stay relatively independent because she received an allowance from Esther's father ( who may, or may not, have had the surname of Thornber), and explains why she was a 'boarder'.

With regard to the discrepancy of ages, I'm still recovering from one who was aged 100 in the 1871 census - and still 100 in the 1881! It would seem maths wasn't always a strong point, and the further away from their birth the more unreliable it became. A couple of years out appears almost the norm. It just makes it harder for our searches.

Norland Hall was an interesting place. I've heard a lot about it though there's been nothing left now for generations. By the time SA and co lived there it was divided into 3 , with SarahAnn  (SA) in one, and the Starks next door (and was also haunted according to family legend). It was hit by lightning at some point and became ruinous, before being bought Randolph Hearst, the newspaper magnate, who had it taken down stone by numbered stone and shipped to the USA to be rebuilt. However it seemed something happened and it was never rebuilt but left in its crates. You can read more here:http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/lifestyle/nostalgia/tycoon-who-bought-norland-hall-1-1929574

And there's a photo of it at
https://www.calderdale.gov.uk/wtw/search/controlservlet?PageId=Detail&DocId=102275

There's nothing left on the site now bar a couple of stones
In the end the stones shipped to the USA were reused in the building of a church out there. I have the details and a photo somewhere.

Thank you for looking at your records. I've done quite a bit myself over the years too. Just wish I could confirm it all.
Sherry

 
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 13 July 17 20:13 BST (UK)
Thank you also for this additional information.

I note you said in your previous post that you thought Sarah Ann was failing round about the 1911 census - this might confirm a death in 1918 I suppose.

It seems to me that you have quite a lot of substantiated facts now - I have re-checked what I have and can't find anymore.

I have a lot of further information about Elijah and Ann, their children,  and the extended family - please let me know if you have any questions and I'll try to help.

Regards,
Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Thursday 13 July 17 21:56 BST (UK)
Thank you for your help which is much appreciated. I think you are right about SarahAnn and her death. I'll go through my records and see. There is one other thing that might be relevant to others also. George Henry Butterfield and his own family later moved into an old house called Fields Farm in Norland. It was very old indeed - dating from about 1600 or so. When it was demolished - about 1956 - there was an article in the paper about it, which quoted him as saying that his Butterfield family had been connected with the property for 200 years. Now GHB knew very well that his family came from the Keighley area - in fact they always said they were connected by family to the 'famous' mill owners, and to Cliffe Castle - so I am puzzled by his statement about Fields Farm?  Was it all pie in the sky - wishful thinking -  or did he have some information, now lost, from SA? Apparently there was some information about the property and the family held by the Halifax Antiquarian Society, but we've not had the opportunity to look properly for it as yet.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Friday 14 July 17 10:51 BST (UK)
This is interesting - I wonder why he would say that? Could he have meant a Stark connection, rather than a Butterfield one?

The family was almost certainly right in saying there was a connection to the Butterfields of Cliffe Castle. All my research points to a common ancestry shared by Butterfields in this area, and the Cliffe Castle family definitely are included in that.

There are other "famous" people too - the artist Tom Clifton Butterfield of Keighley appears in the extended tree (maybe I should say VERY extended tree!) as does Sir Herbert Butterfield, the philosopher, who lived in Oxenhope.

I have recently been examining the 1841 census for the area, and, with due regard to the difficulties that this sometimes throws up re ages etc, it is clear that many Butterfields would have had connections with each other, going back into the 1700s, and of which they were probably not aware. Indeed, this may be the subject of another post I should make, as I have some unanswered questions about some families in Keighley on a piece of paper right in front of me now!

All good fun!

Cliffelinks65

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Friday 14 July 17 12:51 BST (UK)
Wow. This is fascinating. Sounds like you have done some amazing work to produce such an extended tree. Well done. Seems we are short of some documentation though.
 The info from GHB very definitely referred to the Butterfield's - he was quite specific about that. It certainly wasn't the Starks, as they were a Palatine family from County Limerick, where Henry Stark senior was born (despite all the differing answers regarding his birthplace he put in the various census!).

Looking at the Oakworth area, it's still such a rural area - even wild in places with those moors around up, for example at Stanbury, Ponden, and Pitcher clough. In those days it must have been even more so. The directories suggest that even then the population was small. I can quite see that it must have taken quite an effort to trek down the hill to Keighley - no wonder they sometimes used Haworth though even that wasn't exactly handy, especially given Oakworth church wasn't built until the mid 1800s. I'm getting the feeling that they didn't bother to go to church that much, or get children baptised, because it was too much trouble to get there. It feels like they could pretty much do what they wanted up on those remote farms. That may explain those batches of baptisms, when the local vicar did the occasional round up. What do you think? I do agree with you that this is one extended family. They seem to have been tough, independent, and self reliant.

I did manage to persuade one of them to take a DNA test, but not sure how much use that will be!
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Friday 14 July 17 17:24 BST (UK)
You have raised a very relevant point here - when I started researching and revisited the area a couple of years ago after many years of living elsewhere, it struck me forcibly how remote parts of this area still seem to be.

Of course the Aire Valley itself is really built up now but you don't have to stray far from it to be in open countryside. Travelling from Howarth to Stanbury, and then across the valley to Harehills and Two Laws and back towards Keighley it was striking to think of so many Butterfields living around there 200 or so years ago....and I was left with the strong impression that there must be close relationships between them. This encouraged me to further the research and although I haven't connected everyone, I have connected enough of them to give rise to the tree I now have....and that, as they say, has "grown and grown". I constantly revisit it to correct the amateur errors I made at that time, and I have no doubt there are many more to check out more thoroughly. This is the pleasure of the activity!

In very general terms, it seems to me that Butterfields moved into the towns from the outlying areas as a result of the wool trade. Some settled nearer to Keighley, some went over the hills to the Colne area and  later some moved on to Bradford. There are "early" Butterfields in Bingley too. Again, as a generalisation, farming was supplanted by mill workers at various levels, and with varying degrees of success, e.g the Butterfields of Cliffe Castle being easily the most successful.

My tree also shows evidence of Butterfields moving to America and Australia, although I haven't followed up many of those instances yet.

The biggest downside of all this is the number of Butterfields with the same Christian name - in this case "John" - there are so many! I suppose this applies in most family research, but it can be very frustrating. 

I think you may be right about church attendance too - I think a previous poster in this thread mentioned that people possibly jumped on the nearest cart to take their children to be baptised, and were not particularly fussy about which church they went to - I have many examples of baptisms within the same family being performed in varied locations.

I also wish there were more Non Conformist records available, which I think would help a lot - hopefully these will come in time.

Rambling over....

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Friday 14 July 17 17:30 BST (UK)
Hi, another cousin here, most likely descended from Elijah Butterfield and Ann, nee Hoyle, via their son, John Butterfield and Alice (Newell), and their daughter Sarah Ann, b c 1854 in Oakworth. However like the other twigs, mine is equally slippery. We have done so much original research, wading through the records, but still can't be positive...


Hi there Sherry! and welcome to rootschat. Another Butterfield 'cousin' ! and great new info.

...most likely descended from Elijah Butterfield and Ann, nee Hoyle, via their son, John Butterfield and Alice (Newell)

Especially as John and Alice named one of their sons Elijah, and the mass baptisms at 'Oakworth' on Christmas day 1851. Elijah senior was buried there after the cart accident
I have also done a lot research on the Hoyles, as well as the Butterfields. Sending you a PM about this, as don't want to stray too far off Cliffelinks Butterfield topic, but they are quite interesting as well, with a possible link to the Coiners.



...I have a lot of further information about Elijah and Ann, their children,  and the extended family - please let me know if you have any questions and I'll try to help...

Regards,
Cliffelinks65

Hi again Cliffelinks
Do you have anymore up to date info about Elijah, Ann and their children, that is not in the topic? and how is the search for James going?


...The family was almost certainly right in saying there was a connection to the Butterfields of Cliffe Castle. All my research points to a common ancestry shared by Butterfields in this area, and the Cliffe Castle family definitely are included in that.

There are other "famous" people too - the artist Tom Clifton Butterfield of Keighley appears in the extended tree (maybe I should say VERY extended tree!) as does Sir Herbert Butterfield, the philosopher, who lived in Oxenhope...


Not forgetting another 'famous' Butterfield, Henry, the physical force chartist. Convicted of secretly drilling men during the chartist disturbances and sentenced at York in 1848.
posts number #37 and #41
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=694553.36


Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Friday 14 July 17 18:18 BST (UK)
Hello Sally again,

No more info about Elijah I'm afraid, except what has been added by Sherry here, and certainly no further forward with my James - it is still a choice of two! Whoever he is, he ended up in Kildwick, so its not clear whether he came from Stanbury or Newsholm, although Mary in Stanbury, and Isaac and Betty in Newsholm both have clear places in the tree. I don't really see any way forward with this one.

Thanks also for the reminder about Henry!

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Friday 14 July 17 19:20 BST (UK)
I do hope you find which one is your James Cliffelinks. You have done so much hard work on the Butterfields, a one name study really.
Something might turn up in the nonconformist records one day, or another record not available at the moment
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Saturday 15 July 17 13:09 BST (UK)
I agree with Sally, I hope you can pin down your James too, I've some time this evening so will sit down and try to produce a tree of it all.

I got into family history really early - whilst at primary school - which meant was able to ask the older relatives for information. I later realised they were evasive about anything they thought unsuitable.
However as they all died out, various things came this way, including SA's bible. Is there any way to post a photo as I'd love to share the inscription with you?

I been away all week and didn't get home till late last night, but am currently surrounded by piles of Butterfield papers, and have found something that is a photocopy from a publication, which on the top of the page says by the 'Halifax Antiquarian Society', and is from pages 136 and 137. It's in that very old typeface style , which suggest it was written a long time ago. It came from my uncle so no detailed reference I'm afraid, but it does refer to Norland Fields farm, and the Butterfield's. It starts 'much might be said of the Butterfield family, who were well known in Halifax in the 18th century, but this is not within our province '. ( More's the pity!).
With the previous page being missing it is hard to get the early part correct, but it goes on to detail the connection with what it calls Norland Fields. In simplified terms, it says that Robert Butterfield acquired the property through marriage to his wife Dorothy, who appears to have inherited it in 1668. Robert left the property to be divided equally between his two sons, James and Robert, when the younger, Robert, should come of age. In 1714 their mother Dorothy obtained their share in the property. She then remarried, to Thomas Holdsworth. From 1730 to 1760 the estate was divided up between the two brothers. In 1760 James conveyed his share, by deed, to his brother Robert ( deed dated November 6th 1760). A month later James made his will, which mentioned lands at Halifax, Pelion and Norland, all of which were to go to Robert. Robert subsequently left the estate to his son, also Robert. It appears it was sold on in 1810 to George Naylor.

It's all interesting, but I'm not convinced that this is actually linked to our Butterfield's. I'd love to know when this was published. Did GHB read of it, put 2 and 2 together and get 5, or did he have some other information?

Yet again nothing is straightforward!
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Saturday 15 July 17 13:29 BST (UK)
Back to Oakworth etc. Looking at a copy of the 1847 map, it's striking how sparsely populated it is. Pitcher Clough appears to be just one or two buildings - a farmhouse perhaps, with a barn - same with Deanfield, ditto with Throstles Nest just across the field. Old Snap has a single building. Ponden has two buildings, plus a third marked 'ruin'. Ponden Mill has a small corn mill, and a larger one marked cotton mill - but it's nothing like the bigger mills of later years. There's a small cluster of cottages around Oldfield House, and perhaps 40 at Stanbury - Haworth isn't much bigger. Its mainly seems to be all little farmsteads.

Incidentally it looks as if Deanfield is up for sale at the moment. The photos show how sparsely populated the area is , even today.  The link is
https://www.primelocation.com/for-sale/details/44455551?search_identifier=8bb3e30db5bc8073687a6882fb577d9a#CCVz6PyRTBJrpYQH.97

I like the bit about the 'wastes of Oakworth' in the description!
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Sunday 16 July 17 00:49 BST (UK)
Fantastic stuff! The Butterfield jigsaw is joining together
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Tuesday 25 July 17 12:09 BST (UK)
You've pronbably already found it, but in case it's of any help to anyone Ann Butterfield was born 9 March 1837, but wasn't baptised until September 1852, at Oakworth, so soon after a church came there. She was the daughter of John Butterfield and Martha Sharp, of Two Laws ( though both later died at Laverack Hall in Oakworth). Ann had two illegitimate children - Emily, 1863, and John Ellis Butterfield, born at Two Law's 22 August 1861  and baptised 19 May 1888 ( another late baptism). I found a reference to the latter being the son of William Mitchell of Dangerous Corner ( just down from Two Laws).
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Wednesday 26 July 17 12:35 BST (UK)
Hello again,

Just seen your message, Sherry - thank you.

I do have this Ann's details, showing with two illegitimate children...but I have Ellen as a name, and not Emily, with John Ellis, so will need to check out that name again. I have a note with John Ellis's record showing him as John Ellis "Kitchell", which was obviously an error in transcribing. The original document is clearly "Mitchell".
 
Just looking quickly at my files this is another line I haven't followed through so it's just as well it's raining again....!

I'm intrigued by "Dangerous Corner" at Two Laws....?  I wonder which one.... it's a very winding road up there.....

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Wednesday 26 July 17 14:16 BST (UK)
 I have Ellen too - didn't spot it had changed to Emily on my post. Sorry. Guess it was autotext 'helping' again. I did a tremendous amount of work on this family branch - over decades - thinking they were mine. Went through the original records etc. So much easier these days - no computers then!

 Dangerous Corner was on the main road, which I believe was a turnpike then, on the way to Colne.  'Keighley became an intersection with other turnpikes including the Two-Laws to Keighley branch of the Toller Lane - Blue Bell turnpike (1755) from Bradford to Colne etc' (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keighley_and_Kendal_Turnpike)

 the Grouse Inn website adds :
'The popularity of the Grouse Inn dramatically increased, when the Toller Lane, Haworth and Blue Bell Turnpike Trust was established in the middle of the 18th century to improve the road connecting Bradford & Colne: it ran from Heaton in Bradford to the Blue Bell Inn in Two Laws near Colne.
The Toller Lane, Haworth and Blue Bell Turnpike Trust was founded in 1755 ..l.This Turnpike (toll) road is the road that runs along the front of the Grouse Inn, which must have benefited from the increased traffic.'

It looks like they had problems in situating the gates:

'Colne Turnpike: The positioning of the gate at Two Laws caused endless debate. Before the construction of the road through Ingrow the main route from Keighley to Colne lay through Oakworth and along Harehill edge to join the Bradford—Colne turnpike at Two Laws. If the gate were positioned on the Stanbury side, traffic from Keighley to Colne would be able to evade payment. If the gate were on the Colne side, traffic from Haworth and Stanbury to Keighley could avoid tolls by using the track through Pitcher Clough and Oldfield which rejoined the Harehill road at Pickles Hill. The Trustees tried to solve this problem by setting up an additional gate in Stanbury. The villagers accused the toll collectors of charging people for using the village street and driving their cattle to the fields.
Haworth presented similar problems. The game of moving the toll gate must have assumed the proportions of a major entertainment. In 1759 a toll gate was erected in West Lane. By 1763 we know it had migrated to opposite the Black Bull in Main Street
With four, and possibly five bars, instead of the original three all sorts of complicated arrangements had to be made to ensure that no one had to pay twice. In 1772 the Trust proposed a plan whereby half tolls should be paid at two successive gates in three combinations — (1) ½ Ling Bob, ½ Haworth; (2) ½ Two Laws, ½ Haworth; (3) ½ Hewinden, ½ Ling Bob. The plan never got off the ground. A ticket system was substituted particularly to try and satisfy the inhabitants of Stanbury. (http://www.valendale.co.uk/roads.html)

The same website also gives information about the old packhorse routes. For example:
'Newsholme was on a major packhorse route into Lancashire. A map from the collection of Dr Villy indicates that there was a Ford at Utley with a road up the hillside, by today’s Keighley Cemetery, to Braithwaite and Laycock. This increases the possibility that Dean Bridge in Newsholme, Dean is Roman in origin.'

There also appears to have been a second turnpike, running from Haworth to Two Laws, as seen on this map http://www.turnpikes.org.uk/map%20Yorkshire%20West%20turnpikes.jpg.

Two Laws might not have been so isolated then as it appears today!

And this, which I'm sure will interest Sally, given our shared links to Heptonstall :

'Haworth to Heptonstall and Hebden Bridge. This would have been a well traveled route,  Heptonstall had a Piece Hall  long before Halifax. A cloth hall was built at Heptonstall in 1545-1548 by the Waterhouse family of Shibden Hall and called Blackwell Hall after the London market of that name.  bbc.co.uk  calderdale.gov.uk 

It appears our ancestors had well travelled routes using trackways that would not occur to us today as being obvious routes between A and B. Did this route later become the Lees and Hebden Bridge turnpike Trust, running as it did from Keighley to Hebden Bridge?

 I've wondered if the house at Dangerous Corner was once the turnpike mentioned as being at Two Laws?

Incidentally William Mitchell married later to a different lady - Elizabeth Parker I think? Sorry but I'm working away ATM so can't check my records to be certain.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Wednesday 26 July 17 17:36 BST (UK)
Hi Sherry,

Really interesting info about the turnpikes - I have learned something this afternoon!

Also, apologies for not replying to your earlier post with the details about Norland Field Farm, somehow I missed that.

I agree with you that this may not be connected to "our" Butterfields...and yet I suppose that "in the mists of time" it might well be. However, it has prompted me to realise that I haven't spent a lot of time with any links to the Halifax area, so that's going on the "to do" list.

However, indirectly, this has lead me to a problem I have with some other Butterfield information in the 1841 census, and I wonder if you, or anyone seeing this, could help.

The census shows 3 Butterfield families living in Hope St (3), and another one in Back Hope Street.

I have traced 3 of these, but one of the Hope St families eludes me. This is Samuel Butterfield, 45 b 1796, married to "Elenor" Lambert, also shown as 45, with children Mary, Luke, Sarah, Elizabeth Susanna, Mark and Lambert.

I can trace this family forwards, but Samuel's parentage is missing in my records. I found a Samuel today born in Ovenden in 1799 (hence thinking about Halifax...) but he isn't the right one - wrong wife, wrong children etc, so I am stumped.

The odd thing is that the other three families here are traceable and broadly linked. It just seems strange that there were 4 families close by in that area....

Any thoughts, anyone?

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Wednesday 26 July 17 17:37 BST (UK)
Sorry, I should have said the 1841 census for Keighley.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Thursday 27 July 17 00:04 BST (UK)
Ive had a look at Sam, and see he married in Bingley and the witnesses surnames were Midgley and Hudson. Not sure if there's any clue there. Could he have been born there?

Also in the 1841 Census Sam was living a couple of doors from Tom Butterfield. Could they be related? Brothers?  I looked at the 1851 census and note Tom, aged  40, was still in Hope street with son James (18), daughter Sarah (11), and his mother Jane (66), all born in Keighley. Ann would have been born about 1785 which on the face of it means she might have been too young, but knowing how they could be out in ages, it wouldn't take much out for it to be a possibility. Just a thought.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 27 July 17 16:41 BST (UK)
Almost certainly related, I think....it seems highly unlikely to me that in 1841 you would have Butterfield families in the same street who were not. The question is how, and that has been my problem here.

However, it's funny that writing it down in my last post has made me revisit what I had...and today I have come up with the following theories (hope they makes sense!) :-

In the 1841 Census for Hope St, Keighley, I have the following -

In Back Hope Street, we have Martin b 1788 with his wife Jane b 1786, and a child James aged 6,born 1835.

I think that Martin was born to a Grace Butterfield b 1864 and documented with no named father.  Grace was a daughter of John Butterfield and Sarah Wadsworth and his wife was Jane Bottomley.

In Hope Street we have 3 families - Samuel's being one of them.  There is also Thomas b 1811 with wife Martha b 1807 and daughter Sarah b 1840.

I have Thomas as the son of Martin, and in the 1851 census this shows Jane as Thomas's mother, Martin having died about 1846 I think.

The third family is John b1801, with wife Ann b 1808, and children Hannah b 1834, Martha b 1837 and Sharp b 1839.

The 3 families in Hope Street are very near to each other on the census forms.  At first glance, John's family didn't "connect" either, but looking more closely, I think that John was born to Abraham Butterfield and Rachel Waddington, apparently their only child....

Now here's the thing...Abraham Butterfield was also born to John and Sarah Wadsworth, like Grace, Martin's mother.

So, if this is right, then we have three of the four families connected. What about Samuel then?  Two suggestions - I can find no baptism record at all for him, but I think he is either 1) another child of Abraham and Rachel, and therefore John's brother, or 2) he is another illegitimate child of Grace, which is also possible, although there is a bit of a gap in ages. 

Additionally, I now have a Susan, living alone in Back Hope Street aged 73 (new fact today, I had missed it earlier). This Susan seems to be the daughter of a Joseph Butterfield, married to Mary Hey. Joseph was a brother of the John Butterfield who was married to Sarah Wadsworth.

Instinct tells me that Samuel must therefore be related to the others, and I think these two theories could confirm it, so for the moment I am going with them until I can find documentation to prove otherwise.

Does all this make any sense??!

Cliffelinks65
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Thursday 27 July 17 17:56 BST (UK)
I should point out that Susan's record is from 1851 census, not 1841.  My omission from last post.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Sunday 30 July 17 11:06 BST (UK)
Hi Cliffelinks,
Sorry for not replying sooner. I am working on your queries but it's taking longer than expected. I'll answer them soon.

Here are a few pieces of information from my notes from 2005

At that time I was sent the following by the lovely guy who runs the Cliffe Castle / Butterfield website:

From an article on the Blue Bell Turnpike, that ran between Haworth and Toller Lane, Bradford:-
Tolls collected:
1776 150li to John Butterfield of Haworth, yeoman
1778 153li to John Butterfield and Jeremiah Smith of Two Laws
1780 140 li to John Butterfield of Haworth, whom it was directed that steps should be taken, and against Jeremiah Smith, for their arrears of tolls.
In 1782 the clerk was instructed to stop all proceedings against John Butterfield, then in gaol for non payment of rent.

I seem to recall that li means shillings - using those turnpikes wasn't cheap!

Makes you wonder doesn't it? Perhaps we should be looking at court cases!
It's a pity it's not clear who lives at Two Laws ( is that how it got its name? One law for them, one for the rest? Or because - as Sally pointed out - it's on the border between two parishes?(Keighley and Colne). Interesting either way)
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Sunday 30 July 17 11:20 BST (UK)
Sally also mentioned the workhouse up there. Where was it Sally? The only mention I can find on line is here
http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Keighley/
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Sunday 30 July 17 12:09 BST (UK)
Sally also mentioned the workhouse up there. Where was it Sally? The only mention I can find on line is here
http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Keighley/

I think on google maps it would be somewhere abouts the Keighley side of 'Occupation lane'
In the link, first paragraph.
'...Exley Head, to the south-west of the town on the Oakworth road'

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Sunday 30 July 17 12:56 BST (UK)
This is what I have for the Two Laws lot, which might be of interest :-
Thomas BUTTERFIELD (I believe he was baptised Keighley 1 Feb 1769, son of John BUTTERFIELD and Mary SHARP, but this is a guess. If right then at his baptism the family were described as being of 'Cowling Head' - which appears to be just behind Two Laws though I'm prepared to be corrected ). He married Elizabeth (either Tindell m Keighley 8 Nov 1791, or Sunderland, m Haworth 11 Jan 1787, either marriage would fit, though the Tindell one is most likely)
They had Sarah (b 30 Apr 1792, bap 4 Jun 1792), John (bap 4 Feb 1793 Haworth), Ann (b 25 Feb 1794, bap 13 Apr 1774), William (b 26 Jan 1796, bap 30 May 1796 ) Polly (b 18 Aug 1797 bap 8 Oct 1797). My only question over this is that only John was baptised at Haworth, the rest at Keighley, but otherwise it all fits.

NB There is also a William, baptised 31 Mar 1812 at Haworth, of 'Two Laws' , son of  Joseph and Sarah, aged 19 weeks, who I cannot place)

Of these above, John (1793) married Martha SHARP 30 Jul 1816 at Keighley. They lived at Two Laws. John was living with his daughter Betty at Laverack Hall in Oakworth when he was buried at Oakworth, 12 Jun 1872, aged 79. Ditto for Martha , 3 Aug 1878 aged 83.
They had the following children:
Joseph, bap 9 Nov 1817, Keighley. (He married Sarah Bancroft (bap 29 Apr 1827 at Haworth), and became landlord of the Grouse Inn. After his death Sarah moved in with her brother Stephen at Lobmill, Todmorden ( 1891 census). She died in Todmorden but was buried back in Oakworth 27 Mar 1896. Joseph and Sarah had Thomas, 1855, who was buried aged 4 on 13 Aug 1859 at Oakworth , and Sarah Ann, who married Joseph Briggs 1 May 1882.)
Isaac, bap 8 Nov 1818, Keighley
Betty, bap 11 Jan 1821 Keighley( married someone called Binns and they went to live at Laverack Hall with their children Martha,1854, Thomas, 1856, Mary Jane, 1858, Elizabeth, 1860, Rebecca, 1862 and William, 1864. Her parents moved in with her later)
Susanna, bap 28 Aug 1823, Keighley
Mary Ann, bap 9 May 1825, Keighley
Thomas, bap 8 May 1827, Keighley.( He became a farmer at Hilltop. He married Ann and they had 3 children, Sarah Ann, 1861, who was born at Ponden Mill, she later married James Heaton and she died in 1885; John in 1865,d 1928; and Joseph 1869.)
Sarah bap 10 Dec 1830, Keighley
Henry bap 29 Jul 1832, Keighley
Priscilla 1832 (Zillah on some census entries). (She was aged 20 when baptised at Oakworth Sept 8 1852, when her date of birth was given as 14 Dec 1832)
Ann 1837 ( had John Ellis Butterfield , baptised Oakworth, aged  2,May 1863 . He later married Elizabeth Ann Taylor DRIVER, May 19 1888 Oakworth, and was still of Two Laws then.
Jane bap 25 Jun 1837 Keighley
John bap 25 Jun 1837 Keighley. Possibly the one buried 29 March 1890, aged 50, at Oakworth.

As many of the dates are baptismal dates they may well have been older at the time of baptism, as you know, and as indeed Priscilla was.

Hope this helps. I've written it all out because there are a pile of public tree on Ancestry, where absolutely everyone gives that John (1793) is 'of Thwaites' and his father is Peter, but I've spent years on this, done all the legwork and research, and am pretty sure that is wrong. I believe the entries entries support this as being correct. What do you think?
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: dave the tyke on Monday 31 July 17 12:53 BST (UK)
From my notes:-
On the 26 June 1753 the Trust ordered a bar to be erected at the bottom of Steeton Bank. Evasion was soon a major problem. Travelers evaded by going thro' Steeton Ings." September 1756 the Collector at Steeton brought a complaint against John Scot of Keighley, who unloaded his cart before passing the bar in order to reduce the toll. December 1757 John Crossley was summoned for putting up the Side Bar and William Smith for breaking open the main bar at Steeton. Perhaps the most significant prosecution was that of Mr. Jefferson, the Officer of the Excise, in January 1758, for riding through the fields to avoid paying toll at the bar.
Colne Turnpike. The positioning of the gate at Two Laws caused endless debate. Before the construction of the road through Ingrow the main route from Keighley to Colne lay through Oakworth and along Harehill edge to join the Bradford-Colne turnpike at Two Laws. If the gate were positioned on the Stanbury side, traffic from Keighley to Colne would be able to evade payment. If the gate were on the Colne side, traffic from Haworth and Stanbury to Keighley could avoid tolls by using the track through Pitcher Clough and Oldfield which rejoined the Harehill road at Pickles Hill. The Trustees tried to solve this problem by setting up an additional gate in Stanbury. The villagers accused the toll collectors of charging people for using the village street and driving their cattle to the fields.
Haworth presented similar problems. The game of moving the toll gate must have assumed the proportions of a major entertainment. In 1759 a toll gate was erected in West Lane. By 1763 we know it had migrated to opposite the Black Bull in Main Street because under the date of the 7 December of that year there is a resolution in the minute book for its removal and re-erection "at some convenient place between that place and Hall Green End." Later in the century the gate was moved back to West Lane.

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 31 July 17 15:21 BST (UK)
Lots to catch up on here.....

The Turnpike information is mostly new to me, and is therefore much appreciated.

One thing that bothers me is "li" - I thought that was an alternative abbreviation of the pound sign £, from the Latin "libra"?  Surely they can't have been expected to pay that amount in pounds??????
Back to the reference books on that one.....

As regards the Two Laws lot, I have more or less the same information for John Butterfield (1793) married to Martha Sharp.

I have his Father as Thomas, married to Elizabeth Sunderland....but with different children....so I am going back to look more closely at this.

I also agree that Thomas was son of John Butterfield and Mary Sharp, and that it is a best guess.

As regards John and Martha's children, I have the same information for the ones you have...but I don't have Henry, Jane or John in my file.

However, I do have a Phillis, born in 1846 and showing on the 1851 census for this family.   So another thing to look at....

I have marriages for Mary Ann, Sarah and Priscilla as well. Do you have these?

I agree with you about all the info on Ancestry about John of Thwaites with a father Peter.....I have this John as a different individual altogether, and not the one we are talking about.

So, altogether, more investigation required here.....
Back soon.....



Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Monday 31 July 17 16:45 BST (UK)
Hi 

Oops - seems I've made an error in typing things up. Several in fact. I'm honestly not sure about li, so am happy to go with pounds.  It does make more sense. The trouble with the rest is that I'm working away and using photos of handwritten notes to piece things together, plus a partly done Ancestry tree. Looking again at my notes I can see  at some point I crossed out Betty Tindell, and substituted Elizabeth Sunderland, so my error, it should be Sunderland.

And the Henry , Jane and John were the children of a John and Martha, but the John and Martha living in Keighley, so you can ignore them too.

I have that Betty married John Binns of Laverack Hall
Mary Ann married Samuel Wallbank
Priscilla married Ellison Lund

Hope these are right.

Also that Isaac married Sarah (Sally) Sunderland and they moved into Haworth parish and had 5 children. His gravestone is listed in the Haworth churchyard lists, along with that of Sally and their son Frank.

Phyllis is down as a granddaughter of John and Martha in the 1851 census, but I've no idea who her parents are - or indeed if she is another illegitimate child. Any ideas?

Hope this clarifies a few bits.

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Monday 31 July 17 16:48 BST (UK)
Hi Sherry,

Really interesting info about the turnpikes - I have learned something this afternoon!

Also, apologies for not replying to your earlier post with the details about Norland Field Farm, somehow I missed that.

I agree with you that this may not be connected to "our" Butterfields...and yet I suppose that "in the mists of time" it might well be. However, it has prompted me to realise that I haven't spent a lot of time with any links to the Halifax area, so that's going on the "to do" list.

However, indirectly, this has lead me to a problem I have with some other Butterfield information in the 1841 census, and I wonder if you, or anyone seeing this, could help.

The census shows 3 Butterfield families living in Hope St (3), and another one in Back Hope Street.

I have traced 3 of these, but one of the Hope St families eludes me. This is Samuel Butterfield, 45 b 1796, married to "Elenor" Lambert, also shown as 45, with children Mary, Luke, Sarah, Elizabeth Susanna, Mark and Lambert.

I can trace this family forwards, but Samuel's parentage is missing in my records. I found a Samuel today born in Ovenden in 1799 (hence thinking about Halifax...) but he isn't the right one - wrong wife, wrong children etc, so I am stumped.

The odd thing is that the other three families here are traceable and broadly linked. It just seems strange that there were 4 families close by in that area....

Any thoughts, anyone?

Cliffelinks65

I agree with you Cliffelinks - Samuel  is hard to find. I've tried.
He seems to have been buried in Keighley 1 Mar 1843 aged 47, and was then living at New Road.


We can rule out the Ovenden one as you say as he emigrated to the USA and there is a lot on line about him.

Another missing baptism?
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Cliffelinks65 on Monday 31 July 17 18:05 BST (UK)
Hi Sherry,

I have the same marriages for Isaac, Betty, Mary Ann and Priscilla.....and some follow up with their children too.  I also have a possible marriage for Sarah, baptised Dec 1830, to a John Pickles.

Phillis is a bit of an enigma - she shows in 1841 as a daughter, and then in 1851 as a granddaughter. In that census record there are also several other grandchildren - James Bancroft aged 20, Samuel Wallbank 9, and another Butterfield, Ellen 2.  I also have Phillis, later in life, married to a William Smith.  All a bit confusing, isn't it - no wonder we make errors in this activity!


I agree that Samuel also looks like a missing baptism...so I'm recording him with the theories I put forward as to his birth. I'm pretty sure he is part of those 4 families in Hope St.......

Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Thursday 03 August 17 15:49 BST (UK)
Some Butterfield Y haplo DNA results from two different projects. Not sure what it all means, but might be some help along the way.

Butterfield DNA Project
https://www.worldfamilies.net/surnames/butterfield/results

and

University of Leicester
'We analysed the Y chromosomes of 1678 men carrying 40 British surnames...'
http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/genetics/people/king/surnames-and-the-y-chromosome
http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/genetics/people/king/images-and-networks/butterfield
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Friday 04 August 17 07:16 BST (UK)
Thank you Sally for pointing this out - it looks such an interesting study. I wrote to them to ask for more details, as I have the DNA results from my Butterfield line, and permission to use them, but the mail bounced back - 'Email address not recognised.' Pity.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Friday 04 August 17 07:22 BST (UK)
Found a more updated email address so have got a message through. Will update you on any developments.
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Saturday 25 November 17 11:10 GMT (UK)
Hi Sally, sorry I’ve  been so long getting back to you. I’ve heard from the lady who ran the study but the DNA didn’t match any tested. I’ve now ordered a test from Ancestry for my brother and myself so let’s see if we can get any further,
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: sallyyorks on Saturday 25 November 17 11:20 GMT (UK)
Hi Sally, sorry I’ve  been so long getting back to you. I’ve heard from the lady who ran the study but the DNA didn’t match any tested. I’ve now ordered a test from Ancestry for my brother and myself so let’s see if we can get any further,

Thanks for getting back. That's interesting Sherry.
Am I right in thinking this might be connected to all the illegitimacy in the records? What do you think?
Title: Re: Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley
Post by: Sherry10 on Sunday 26 November 17 09:39 GMT (UK)
Could be. Fingers crossed! There is some useful info about using DNA to knock down brick walls on Peter Calver’s (free) lost cousin website:
https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/latenov17news.htm