George Crouch and family 1841 Census

[LizzieL]

That's a brilliant find - never throw anything away, no matter how small and insignificant it may look. The dates of birth fit perfectly with baptisms at 3 to 4 weeks old.

Poor Priscilla must have been perpetually pregnant.

[NDRFT]

Hi everyone

This seems to be playing out really well and the booklet you found Sharon gives, as Lizzie says such valuable information.

Sharon when you are ready if you need another look up just let me know.

Nigel

[Ann0ra]

Thanks Nigel, I will.

I've went through all of the information on chat and took out what belongs to my family. 
I have great information on where the children were born, baptised and where some were buried. 

There are a lot of Crouches there and I know some are siblings, aunts, uncles, etc.  I'll be working on those later.

Thank you all again,  I have some great information.

Sharon

[Anitamae]

Oh my goodness... I just about fell out of my chair. I was doing yet another search for George Crouch & Pricilla Camm and found this thread. Back in 1976 when I married my husband he took me to visit his family in North Gwillimbury, York County, Ontario.

His aunt gave me this information orally so this is what I wrote in our family history book, "George Cruntch & Pricilla Camm emigrated from Oxford Shear, England to Montreal, PQ in 1850 on the ship, "ALFRED", along with their 8 children, leaving 4 small graves behind."

It wasn't until we joined Ancestry, however, that we really started digging into the Nelson family history and discovered the East Gwillimbury Croutch family and followed the Nelson family down to Iowa. Soon after, we ran into Sharon. (Waving to Sharon in California). Sharon's generosity was such a tremendous blessing because she shared images of Eliza Crouch and Henry Nelson - my husband's 2x great grandparents, and the rest of the Nelson family. My husband (also called Nelson) just stared and stared at the images Sharon sent us. It was a very moving experience.

Yet I couldn't find any records of a ship Alfred coming to Canada as the Alfred seemed to make her runs to Austrailia. And the growth of our tree stopped at George and Priscilla because we couldn't confirm her maiden name - until now. Valerie, we are indebted to you and the rest of the team here that helped us solve this roadblock.

As for clarification of the T in Crouch... I was contacted through the genealogy blog on my website by a woman who lives in the East Gwillimbury area and she said:
"My ggggrandfather was Francis Croutch of the Sharon area of Ontario. I am trying to find out what his roots are. My father had a family story.The story relates that the T was placed in the name of a child to distinguish the child of a first marriage. Somewhere around 1812. So that a Crouch from England married a lady who already had a child."

Upon researching Francis Croutch here in Ontario, I found the marriage record for Francis Croutch and Elizabeth Smith who married 7 Mar 1853 in Pickering Township, Ontario. (Pickering is southeast of East Gwillimbury Township).

However, although I haven't found a birth record for their 1st child - Thomas Smith Croutch - indications point that he may not have been the son of Francis:

1. His middle name is Smith which in Ontario records often means it was an illegitimate child therefore bore the name of the mother.

2. He appears to have been born in 1852 or 53 since he is not shown on the 1851 Canada census which was actually taken in January 1852. Here are his Canada census records although I realize dates can be a year or two off:
- 1861 shows age 8 transcribed as 1853
- 1871       "        18        "            1853
- 1881       "        28        "            1853
- 1891       "        38        "            1853   
- 1901                49         "           1851
- 1911       "        58         "           1853
- 1872 marriage record shows age 20 transcribed as 1852
- 1916 death record where it shows he died on May 18, 1916 at 63 yrs, 8 mos, 24 dys which would put his birth in Aug 1953 according to my dismal math.

Yet, Francis Croutch and Elizabeth Smith married 7 Mar 1853. That still leaves the question whether Francis was the actual father.

No, it doesn't explain why Francis uses a T in Croutch when he married Elizabeth, but my Crouch contact doesn't use the T and says it's because she is not descended from Thomas Smith Croutch, but one of his brothers.

And now instead of working/writing, I will email my Crouch contact and share my good news - but first, I'm going to dance around the living room.

 

Anitamae

[Anitamae]

   Whoops... after all that, I went back and double checked and my Croutch source DOES have a T in her name.

All I can say in my defence is that I've just returned from a trip to York County where I attended the Ontario Genealogical Conference and then spent 35 days meeting cousins and tramping around libraries, museums, and cemeteries in York and Simcoe Counties and I guess my information is a bit jumbled. Humbling to admit, but true.

Yes, I'm still dancing around the living room, albeit subdued.

Anitamae.

[Designer Jeans]

Hello Anitamae

As you say, Rootschat, and the people on it are amazing, and you are very welcome.

Valerie

[sugarfizzle]

I have just been alerted to this thread by Anitamae.

My Cruch/Crutch/Crouch family is the one mentioned previously on Page 5 of this thread by Valerie.

Chearsley
29/3/1812 Rosetta illeg dau of Mary Crutch
14/5/1815 Mary illeg dau of Mary Cruch (mar James Piddington)
17/8/1834 George illeg son of Mary Crutch of Chearsley

I have only recently found out that Mary Crutch senior born c 1785 was born in Ascott nr Great Milton rather than Asket, nr Princes Risborough, thanks to another thread

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=783975.0

Valerie, you also say -

Children of Thomas and Mary Crutch of Ascot
Martha 1781 (?) (son William chimney sweep)
Martin 2/10/1785 mar Sarah Higgins
**Mary 1786 (spinster)
George 25/5/1790 mar Priscilla Cam
Richard 12/1/1794
John 27/5/1798

I can find no baptism for Mary in Great Milton records, am I looking in the wrong place 

Regards Margaret

[NDRFT]

Margaret
This is an excerpt from the British History on line which goes a small way to describing what was the hamlet of Ascott Near Great Milton in Oxfordshire. I think you are looking the correct place by all the information presented on this and other threads but it is quite complicated.

Of Milton's other hamlets Ascot once had a large manor-house, a medieval chapel, and at least three farmhouses. (fn. 81) Little is left now except Ascot Farm, an L-shaped, half-timbered and brick house, dating from the 16th and 17th centuries, and a few other survivals of the great house and its appendages. Ascot was the home for several generations of various members of the Great Milton branch of the Dormer family: Sir Michael Dormer acquired it in 1518, and it passed to his son Ambrose (d. 1566). (fn. 82) Ambrose's widow Jane, who had a life-interest in the house, (fn. 83) took as her second husband William Hawtrey, a London merchant and an original member of the Muscovy company. (fn. 84) In her will made in 1581, Jane speaks of her plate and household stuff at 'my mansion house and grounds called Ascott', (fn. 85) and it seems probable that the Hawtreys lived at Ascot. There were at least four other Dormer-Hawtrey marriages and William Hawtrey's younger brother Thomas, also a merchant of the Muscovy Company, (fn. 86) appears to have stayed in the Ascot house at the end of his life. He made his will there, left a bequest of 10s. to the Vicar of Milton, and was buried in Great Milton church. (fn. 87) Some details about the building in the time of Sir Michael Dormer, Ambrose's son, have survived. There were at least twelve bed-chambers, including a gate-house chamber, and a long gallery is also mentioned. (fn. 88) It is likely that the house suffered from Hampden's raid on Ascot in 1642 (fn. 89) when he demanded its surrender; it was in any case rebuilt by Sir William Dormer in the 1660's. He was known as William 'the Splendid' and it is evident that his mansion was planned on a large scale, but it was accidentally damaged by fire in 1662 before its completion. (fn. 90) It is said that it was 'burnt down', (fn. 91) but either some of it was left or it was rebuilt, for William Dormer paid tax on twelve hearths for this house in 1665, and Plot shows it as a four-chimneyed house on his map of 1697. (fn. 92) It was evidently used as a dower house until at least 1728. (fn. 93) Davis shows a house there in 1797; he also shows the park, the formal inclosed garden, and a chapel in the grounds. (fn. 94) Nothing is left now of the house or its outbuildings except for a 17th-century dove-house, granary, and summer-house. The dove-cot has wall faces of vitreous and red brick, with diamond, chevron, and chequer patterns; the eaves string is arched and cusped. The brick granary is octagonal and has a vaulted cellar. The summer-house is built of rubble with ashlar dressings; it is of two stories and has a hipped roof. It is now a dwelling house called Piccadilly Cottage and has been added to and modernized. Seventeenth-century walls of terraces and the gate-posts of the main entrance to the grounds survive. The last have stone piers, cornice heads, and ball finials, and are flanked by avenues of lime trees. A wrought-iron gate of 18th-century date and an early 17th-century gateway of stone, once in the park, are now in the Victoria and Albert Museum. (fn. 95)

The chapel, a private one attached to the manorhouse, was built probably soon after 1200 and remained until 1823, when it was pulled down. (fn. 96) It consisted of chancel and nave, with a central bellcot over the chancel-arch; both nave and chancel were originally lighted by lancet windows, but two of these on the south side were replaced by twolight Decorated windows in the 14th century. When Powell visited it in 1805 he found it 'in ruins'. There were wall paintings in red in the nave depicting the passion of Christ, scourging, crucifixion, descent into hell, and appearance to Mary Magdalen. (fn. 97) A drawing of the chapel from the south was made in 1811 when the building was still entire. (fn. 98) Another of 1813 shows it roofless. (fn. 99)

Hope this helps
Nigel