RootsChat.Com
Beginners => Family History Beginners Board => Topic started by: Brickwall Demolisher on Monday 01 January 18 22:19 GMT (UK)
-
Hi
Hoping someone can help with our family's brickwall that has been confusing the family's of in both England and the U.S.A. The brickwall concerns the birth registration of my Great Grandfather's brother. HENRY ( HARRY ) WENTZELL b 1854 ?. We have him on the census's of 1861, 1871, 1881. He then left his family in ENGLAND, ( Newington, Walworth, Southwark area ) and started a new family in America. Both he and my Great Grandfather, ALFRED WENTZELL b 1856 were born in the Wirral and Liverpool area's. Their Mother spent / lived her life otherwise always in the Walworth, Southwark area of London....... I / We have found birth certificate for ALFRED, but not HENRY ( HARRY ).
1854 & 1856, their birth years being in between the 1851 / 1861 Census's,.....records wise,..... seems to be the only time their Mother was ever away from the Walworth area.
The birth certificate of ALFRED, and also word of mouth passed down, shows name of father of ALFRED as a JAMES WENTZELL. We have two JAMES WENTZELL,s in the family one born 1816, the other born 1839, father & son.
We have also never found a marriage certificate for a JAMES WENTZELL & their Mother CHARLOTTE SADLER b 1836.
1861 census has only Mother & 2 boys
1871 census has Mother/2 boys & a ALBERT WENTZELL b1841 Head of Household.
ALBERT WENTZELL is JAMES WENTZELL b 1839 Brother
ALBERT WENTZELL (Stepfather/Stepbrother to the boys ????) Marries CHARLOTTE Sept Qtr 1871.
CHARLOTTE dies Sept Qtr 1882.
Our own sumise is the the marriage was a marriage of convenience for the WENTZELL name only.
ALBERT WENTZELL is a PAUPER on 1891,1901, and 1911 Census's and dies a PAUPER in 1916.
JAMES WENTZELL b 1816 dies Croydon, 1863
JAMES WENTZELL b 1841 has approx. 20 year army career beginning November 1857 ( INDIA )
Any help / info greatly appreciated, Best Regards J
-
Failure to register a birth only became a fineable offence in 1874. Many births prior to that date went unregistered. There was a small charge for registering a birth - a few old pence. However - that was a lot of money in those days so many parents chose to put food on the table rather than buy a "piece of paper".
Within my own FH I have some births registered and some not - all within the same family
-
HENRY ( HARRY ) WENTZELL b 1854
In 1861 - Harry is 5 so born 1855/56 Liverpool
-
There is also an entry in 1859 recording the reading of banns between Albert Wentzell and Charlotte Sadler November 27 December 4 & December 11 at All Saints Poplar.
Living in same street according to marriage register in 1871 Charlotte as a spinster.
James could well be the father but debunked to the military and his brother stepped in.
I have a similar in my family brother steps in and they marry quietly when the children are older.
Tazzie
-
A tree on Ancestry has his birth as October 25th 1854 in Liverpool as Harry James Wentzell Saddler
-
A tree on Ancestry has his birth as October 25th 1854 in Liverpool as Harry James Wentzell Saddler
The source relied on for this birthdate appears to be his Idaho death registration.
-
I notice from trees on Ancestry that none seemed to show the Wentzell family on 1841 Census. By this time James and wife Maria Roberts had 2 children:
James Thomas - registered as Wentzel in Dec.1837 St. Luke,Middx.
Albert Gottlieb Wentzell - registered Sept.1939 Shoreditch
In 1841 James 25, Engineer, is with son James 3 in Cripplegate, Middlesex living with his parents John and Hannah - transcribed on Ancestry as 'Wensill'.
Wife, Maria 25, is with the other son Albert 2 in her birthplace of Cardiff, Wales and transcribed as 'Mentzel'.
Annette
-
There was a small charge for registering a birth - a few old pence. However - that was a lot of money in those days so many parents chose to put food on the table rather than buy a "piece of paper".
There was never a charge for registering a birth, only for the certificate. The only time there was a financial penalty was if the birth was registered after 42 days in the 1836 act. Section 25 of the 1836 Act for registering Births, Deaths, and Marriages in England fixed the fee for a certified copy of an entry of a birth, marriage or death at 2s. 6d.
Under the 1836 Act If the birth was not registered within forty-two days there was a fee of two Shillings and Sixpence entitlement for the Superintendent Registrar, and five shillings for the registrar, Section XXII. There was a penalty for non-registration in the 1874 Act, but not for late registration. So between 1837 and 1874 there was a financial incentive to make sure the birth was registered within forty two days, either by the registrar or another responsible person.
The first Statistician of the GRO Dr. William Farr (1807–1883) estimated a 5% non-registration rate for births 1837-76, declining from 6.9% in 1841-50 to 1.8% in 1861-70.
Stan
-
It's quite possible he's registered under his mother's name as has been alluded to earlier.
If unmarried the mother couldn't name the father or give the father's surname to the child without his permission.
It may also be that James Wentzell wasn't the father but Harry was given his name on the census.
-
It's quite possible he's registered under his mother's name as has been alluded to earlier.
If unmarried the mother couldn't name the father or give the father's surname to the child without his permission.
Not so, between 1837 and 1874 if the mother informed a registrar of an illegitimate child's birth and also stated a father's name, the registrar could record him as the father, although he may not have actually been the father.
This applied until The Registration Act of 1874 which stated:
"The putative father of an illegitimate child cannot be required as father to give information respecting the birth. The name, surname and occupation of the putative father of an illegitimate child must not be entered except at the joint request of the father and mother; in which case both the father and mother must sign the entry as informants"
The Act came into force on 1st January 1875
Stan
-
Well, Thank you everyone for you taking the time to answer my enquiry. Apologies to everyone if I do not answer you all individually. I have only recently got back into the F / H after a six year break because of family illness and with myself suffering two strokes within the last three years. Family history research to some people may not seem to be the best therapy, but it certainly helps you to find out if you still have what's needed for it. As I've found with F / H you need mainly patience by the bucket load and more,..... also when you find that you have made error's, accepting them and find it in yourselves in getting back on the right track. I find that you cannot check the records enough to get / find the right result. We all individually find our own specific favoured sites for obtaining our ancestor's records but just bear in mind, I think what hinders us most when starting is mistranscription / missspelling of names, i.e ELLIOTT name for instance, one with one L and two T,s / also one T ..., two T's with one or two L's. Then we have the common names of the likes for JONES / DAVIES in WALES. Best known in their local areas as JONES the fish, or JONES the butcher but when you have unfortunately a collection of these names to contend with in your family, unless you have yourself something passed down in the family it can be really hard to get started. Then other things that you have to decide on is whether / who you inform of your findings of a wrong doer in your history because they tried to cover up and forget, move on, hoping that over time, the past will get forgotten, but because of what you have decided on doing your bringing it all back. You personally have to adjust as to what you find. There are the moments of finding that piece of record in your family history which is uplifting, and has given you pleasure in finding what you found and just pushes you on to getting back further evermore. With me it has / is becoming a bit of a obsession.
I only found / registered with Rootsweb just before Christmas, and cannot praise all of you on the site highly enough, your time and knowledge freely given, it's just unbelieveable.
On finding a new name, in my history, I came across on this site, one person who was doing a One Name Study into the name that I had found. On supplying him with the info. that I had, he has quickly now taken be into about the mid 1500's with the knowledge that he has. Just unbelieveable.
On another posting I have put on info regarding a Brickwall Syndrome that I have hit upon in my family, you people again should all congratulate yourselves, your response to it has amazed me, all of you. Those who gladly comment with all sorts of information. Information that comes from the board that will also be helpful for other's within their research.
From this enquiry came a result of findings that pulled down a semi brickwall scenario of the 1841 census resulting in the family being split. I had one half of the family in London, Father and one son, but had not been able to find the wife and another son, low and behold up comes the answer from you beautiful, helpful people again. Two posts, and two results what more could one ask for, Thank you all again for you hard work, much appreciated
Best Regards, HAPPY NEW YEAR to you all, J
-
Hi
Just a thank you for everyone regarding my request on my WENTZELL,s. Appreciate everyone's curiosity. What a good outcome. It always helps I believe to get other eye's looking at your findings. - quite often they find avenue's missed / open by ourselves.
My first posting regarding the WENTZELL family and what else can I say but it's just brilliant to what info has come from my first posting.
Special thank you to TAZZIE & ANNETTE7.
Regards J
-
Thanks everyone for quick response,
Will hopefully eventually reply to you all. Did not quite expect as much. Doing family history whilst in post stroke recovery.I'm having / trying to contend with neuropathic pain at present, will get back to all as and when. Thanking you all for everything again. Happy Hunting
Regards Just J
-
We all share a very addictive little hobby. It's full of high and lows and we all love a challenge.
Hope you start to get back to your old self.
Best wishes for the new year.
Tazzie
-
There is also an entry in 1859 recording the reading of banns between Albert Wentzell and Charlotte Sadler November 27 December 4 & December 11 at All Saints Poplar.
Living in same street according to marriage register in 1871 Charlotte as a spinster.
James could well be the father but debunked to the military and his brother stepped in.
I have a similar in my family brother steps in and they marry quietly when the children are older.
Tazzie
n
Tazzie
Many thanks for your help on my request and for your concern.
Your banns finding look very interesting especially the 1859.
1861 census Charlotte at home with the 2 boys. I have a query with this entry no HEAD of household is shown, but Charlotte is entered as Wife and the boys as sons. Has the head of household been somehow missed / left off?? Surely CHARLOTTE should Head not Wife
1871 Census
ALBERT WENTZELL entered as Head
CHARLOTTE WENTZELL as Wife + the 2 boys
They eventually marry in JULY of that year
CHARLOTTE WENTZELL dies 1874
We have never been able to locate HARRY WENTZELL supposedly born 25/10/1854 birth certificate. From obituary on HARRY WENTZELL death Bonners Ferry,Ohio.1930
Your JAMES debunking into military is also a major possible reason that I have.
We have 2 in our thoughts JAMES JOHN b 1816 but dismiss him because of a approx 17 year age difference. His wife dies MARIA d 1855.
JAMES THOMAS b 1839 we also have, son of JAMES JOHN b1816
JAMES THOMAS enters Nov.1856/7 20th Regiment Hussars for approx. 20 year career mainly in India and is discharged Jan 1878 for health reasons.
The time line holds my questioning on both of them. JAMES JOHN was christened JOHN JAMES and then changed it around for whatever reason?? If JAMES JOHN had not made this change we would not be querying who was the Father.
JAMES THOMAS b 1839 Apr Marries 1876 Brentford
The boys birth year's supposedly between 1853 / 1857, both born in Liverpool area. This is the only time CHARLOTTE is out of the London. I am thinking it could be something connected if possible to JAMES THOMAS training ???? for his Army career but have yet to find where if any records are available
Regards Just J
-
An entry in 1859 recording the reading of banns between Albert Wentzell and Charlotte Sadler November 27 December 4 & December 11 at All Saints Poplar.
Hi everyone,
Thank you Tassie for supplying the above info previously.
Are you able or is anyone able to supply any further relevant information on the above Banns entry.
This find is a very interesting one as it is showing of the relationship between CHARLOTTE & ALBERT was there before our findings,... our earliest being 1871 Census.
ALBERT was not found around before the 1871 Census with CHARLOTTE.
Earlier we had CHARLOTTE with her family on the 1851 Census.
In between the 1851 & 1861 she has 2 sons, both born in Liverpool area, but is back in the area where she was born for the 1871 Census.
The query is why so long between 1859 and to when they got married in JULY 1871. As much info that is possible please.
Many thanks everyone for your interest and time,
Regards JUST J.
-
Just to pick up this, you have put:
'1861 census Charlotte at home with the 2 boys. I have a query with this entry no HEAD of household is shown, but Charlotte is entered as Wife and the boys as sons. Has the head of household been somehow missed / left off?? Surely CHARLOTTE should Head not Wife'
Surely it just means that the Head of household is absent on the census date, and so Charlotte is regarded as wife to the absent Head?