1
Flintshire / Re: William Jones / Bagillt
« on: Monday 17 April 06 13:37 BST (UK) »
Many thanks for the quick reply and kind offer of help. Hopefully you will have spotted my typo - William/Llewellyn's birth year is estimated at 1805/6, not 1905/6 based on the age quoted in the 1841 census.
The only additional information I can offer is that Richard's marriage certificate Dec 1861 gives his father's name as William Jones (not shown as deceased though Elizabeth was a widow in the 1851 census therefore this is assumed). The two witnesses were Llewellyn Jones and Harriet Jones. In the 1861 census there is a record of Llewellyn Jones, coal miner and Harriet Jones his wife lodging in Darlaston, which is Richard's birthplace and very close to where the marriage took place. Intriguingly this Llewellyn Jones' birthplace is given as 'Flintshire NK'.
Not an ideal match with William's elder son as this Llewellyn's age is 3 years different and the 1841 census clearly gives a birthplace as Liverpool, however given the reliability of the records and the fact the whole family at the time were "making their mark" it seems far too good a clue to ignore. Especially if it helps recognise a connection . . . .
Thanks again.
The only additional information I can offer is that Richard's marriage certificate Dec 1861 gives his father's name as William Jones (not shown as deceased though Elizabeth was a widow in the 1851 census therefore this is assumed). The two witnesses were Llewellyn Jones and Harriet Jones. In the 1861 census there is a record of Llewellyn Jones, coal miner and Harriet Jones his wife lodging in Darlaston, which is Richard's birthplace and very close to where the marriage took place. Intriguingly this Llewellyn Jones' birthplace is given as 'Flintshire NK'.
Not an ideal match with William's elder son as this Llewellyn's age is 3 years different and the 1841 census clearly gives a birthplace as Liverpool, however given the reliability of the records and the fact the whole family at the time were "making their mark" it seems far too good a clue to ignore. Especially if it helps recognise a connection . . . .
Thanks again.