Dinah Hoodlass, born 1817 in Barton

[RobinRedBreast]

Hello there,
The above person was one of my 3x Great Grandmothers. This lady was apparently born in Barton around 1817. And most of the Census returns state that she was born there in that year, apart from the 1881 Census which the "transcription" has her year of birth down wrongly as 1837.               
Dinah Hoodlass Married John Hunter in Barrow, in January 1837; just a bit too early to get a Marriage Certificate for. According to "FreeReg" her abode at the time of the Marriage was Barrow. John Hunter died in Barrow, around 1859.

Then in 1869, Dinah Married Thomas Andrew, a Bricklayer.
According to "Family Search" the Father of Dinah, taken down from this 1869 Marriage, was a John Hoodlass. So I looked on "FreeReg" and found that there was a John Hoodlass, baptised in June 1780, in Barrow. This John Hoodlass, was the son of a Jonas, and Hannah Hoodlass.Elsewhere on the Internet, in Family trees that other people have done, it suggests that Rebecca Hoodlass (nee Cook), was the Mother of Dinah. And according to records, this John and Rebecca Married in Barrow.
But the problem is that I can find no record at all of the Christening of Dinah Hoodlass. "Family Search" shows all of what were probably Dinah's Siblings, and so does "FreeReg". But there is no record of a Dinah.
I wander if anyone has any suggestions please? Might it just have been a case that she probably just wasn't Christened?

Any information that anyone has would be gratefully accepted.

Thank you very much.

[Annette7]

I think this could be her, especially in view of the fact she continually states on the census that she was born at Barton:

Dinah Hansley bp.2/2/1815 St. Peter, Barton upon Humber, Lincolnshire, dau. of John and Rebecca.

I'm guessing the surname is somewhat difficult to read as it is also shown as Hansky and Hunsley on familysearch but just Hunsley on FreeReg!!

There doesn't seem to have been a John and Rebecca with such a surname/variations and no other children born with this surname in Barton either.

I feel sure this must be her and that the surname is simply difficult to read on original document.   I note her siblings were born in various places i.e. Hannah 1810 Thornton Curtis, John 1816 Worlaby by Brigg, Maria 1819 Barrow, Thomas 1821 Barrow.  So would seem that she was indeed born in Barton but in 1815 - 1841 census bc.1816, 1851 bc.1817, 1861 bc.1815.

Annette 

[Geoff-E]

I think this could be her, especially in view of the fact she continually states on the census that she was born at Barton:

Dinah Hansley bp.2/2/1815 St. Peter, Barton upon Humber, Lincolnshire, dau. of John and Rebecca.

Sixth one on the right http://www.lincstothepast.com/Baptisms--St-Peter-/514757.record?ImageId=40900&pt=T

[RobinRedBreast]

I think this could be her, especially in view of the fact she continually states on the census that she was born at Barton:

Dinah Hansley bp.2/2/1815 St. Peter, Barton upon Humber, Lincolnshire, dau. of John and Rebecca.

I'm guessing the surname is somewhat difficult to read as it is also shown as Hansky and Hunsley on familysearch but just Hunsley on FreeReg!!

There doesn't seem to have been a John and Rebecca with such a surname/variations and no other children born with this surname in Barton either.

I feel sure this must be her and that the surname is simply difficult to read on original document.   I note her siblings were born in various places i.e. Hannah 1810 Thornton Curtis, John 1816 Worlaby by Brigg, Maria 1819 Barrow, Thomas 1821 Barrow.  So would seem that she was indeed born in Barton but in 1815 - 1841 census bc.1816, 1851 bc.1817, 1861 bc.1815.

Annette

Thanks very much for this. This must be the right one then.

[RobinRedBreast]

I think this could be her, especially in view of the fact she continually states on the census that she was born at Barton:

Dinah Hansley bp.2/2/1815 St. Peter, Barton upon Humber, Lincolnshire, dau. of John and Rebecca.

Sixth one on the right http://www.lincstothepast.com/Baptisms--St-Peter-/514757.record?ImageId=40900&pt=T

Thank you.

[RobinRedBreast]

[quote author=Annette7 link=topic=759919.msg6107649#msg6107649 date=14798703

There doesn't seem to have been a John and Rebecca with such a surname/variations and no other children born with this surname in Barton either.


Annette
[/quote]
Hello,
I had a look on freereg, and there was a John Hunsley, who had children called Jane, and George, both baptised in Barton.George Hunsley was baptised/ died around 1812. Both Jane and George were buried extremely young, around this time in Barton. But this John's partners name was Ann, and not Rebecca. And there is no record on Freereg of a John Hunsley getting Married to a Rebecca, in the area.
The surname is extremely hard to read on the Parish baptism register for Dinah. It could even have read: "Hundles"- the "s" could have just looked like a "y" because they were running out of space. And I suppose "Hundles" would not be (pronounced anyway) too differently from "Hoodlass":
I have seen this surname written down/ transcribed with so many different variations:
"Hudlus" "Hudlas" "Hoodless" e.t.c.
Maybe John Hoodlass looked a lot like this John Hunsley, hahaha!
I have since seen a Family tree on the internet. And this tree has Dinah Hoodlass date of birth being 1815, in Barton which would correspond to the baptism record that you found.
The fact that John Hoodlass is named as the "Father of the Bride" in the record of Dinah's second Wedding to Thomas Andrew also gives greater weight to this baptism being correct.
Yes I believe this baptism is the correct one.

Thank you very much for looking for me.

Cheers.

[RobinRedBreast]

I feel sure this must be her and that the surname is simply difficult to read on original document.   I note her siblings were born in various places i.e. Hannah 1810 Thornton Curtis, John 1816 Worlaby by Brigg, Maria 1819 Barrow, Thomas 1821 Barrow.  So would seem that she was indeed born in Barton but in 1815 - 1841 census bc.1816, 1851 bc.1817, 1861 bc.1815.

Annette

And thanks for finding out where Dinah's siblings were born also. The last of the siblings, Thomas was born in Barrow. Barrow was down as Dinah's "Abode" at the time of her first Marriage in 1837, to John Hunter.

Cheers. 

[RobinRedBreast]

I went to the Library today and found a "Public Member Tree" on Ancestry for Dinah's Father John. This public member tree, had John as being born in 1785. I have got him down as being baptised on the 28th of June 1780. Anyway, it appeared that according to this Family tree, on the 24th of December 1816, they were removed from Worlaby by Brigg, to Barrow Workhouse:
"John, Wife Rebecca. children Hannah 7, Mary 5, Dinah 2, and John 8 weeks"
The above is from: "Lincolnshire Poor Law Removals 1665-1865 Transcription".
This must definitely be the same family: If Dinah was baptised at the beginning of February 1815, then this would have been about 1 year and 11 months from her baptism. It's about right for Hannah's age also. It is spot on for 8 week old John: he was baptised on the 20th of October, 1816, in Worlaby by Brigg. The only one I can't find is for a five year old Mary.
Also, the above is just a "transcription" does anyone please know if there is an "original image" to view anywhere please?

Thank you very much.

[Jomot]

I'm not aware of anything online but Lincolnshire Archives should have the original document:

http://www.lincstothepast.com/Removal-orders/569619.record?pt=T