Daniel Craven of Eaton - Dead men can vote!

[craven481]

Daniel Craven, my three times great grandfather, was born in Cheshire c1794 based on his age listed in the 1841 census in Eaton, Tarporley.  I’m thinking he was the son of Thomas and Martha, baptised in 1794 at Tarporley but cannot prove this. (See my Cheshire Craven Tree on Ancestry)

My problem is in finding Daniel’s death.  The most likely candidate is the one buried at Whitegate on 22 January 1848, aged 53 but there is a Daniel listed in the Tarporley Polling District – Hundred of Eddisbury on Find My Past for the years 1845 to 1851 inclusive.  These are in the Bunbury township and list:
Voters Name, Daniel Craven,  abode Eaton, nature of qualification leasehold house, name of tenant George Brookes.  (I read this as Daniel was renting from George Brookes but how could he me eligible to vote for three years after he had died?  There wasn’t a son named Daniel.)

I can only find one Daniel (my Daniel) in Eaton in the 1841 census, and none at all in the Tarporley area in the 1851 census.  Nor can I find any other likely death in the area.

I have not yet obtained the death certificate of the one buried in 1848 as I am not sure this is him based on the voters lists which suggest he was still alive in 1851!

Any ideas please would be welcome.

[carol8353]

So your Daniel is the 45 in 1841 married to 50 year old Elizabeth?
Looks like daughter Martha is still at home with possibly her baby Henry aged 4 months.

Have you found her in 1851,is she described as widowed?

[rolnora]

Have you found her in 1851,is she described as widowed?

I can't see Elizabeth on the 1851 census but there is a possible burial for her...
21 April 1845 Eaton,Tarporley aged 48

[rolnora]

Voters Name, Daniel Craven,  abode Eaton, nature of qualification leasehold house, name of tenant George Brookes.  (I read this as Daniel was renting from George Brookes but how could he me eligible to vote for three years after he had died?  There wasn’t a son named Daniel.)

I'm reading this as George Brookes as the tenant and Daniel owning the freehold of the property.
Not that it helps because I don't know why it would still be in his name if he had died. 


Edit. I mistakenly posted freehold rather than leasehold.

[AdrianB38]

Two things occur to me:
1. I am not clear on the mechanism for keeping that Electoral Register up to date. In other words, it could be a mistake. No logging onto an internet service to report a death to umpteen people.

2. It could be that what is really meant was "The Estate of Daniel Craven" - although I can't see why that would appear in the ER either! "Estate of ..." is a formula I've often seen in land records because until the inheritance is sorted, that is who owns the property. But Electoral Registers?

There is certainly a distinct shortage of deaths of a Daniel Craven in Cheshire in the 1800s - in fact, there aren't that many of that name in Cheshire at all. Given that, sending for that DC is probably the only way to resolve whether it's him or not.

[craven481]

Many thanks for all your comments/suggestions.

Roinora: The property was leasehold so I think Brookes had the property and let it out to Daniel.  Daniel was always described as a labourer so unlikely he would own a property.
I would agree that the 1845 burial for Elizabeth looks right.

Adrian: Forgot to mention that in the burial register for Daniel in 1848 at Whitegate it says
"abode Marton".  Research shows his son Thomas (born Eaton 1821) got married at St Marys, Whitegate in 1845 and was living in Foxwis Green, Marton on the 1851 census so this points to the burial being the right one
Regarding the Electoral Roll - maybe like you suggest it was simply a mistake - nobody bothered to update the register!

Thanks again everyone for your input. Much appreciated.

Ken

[AdrianB38]

...
The property was leasehold so I think Brookes had the property and let it out to Daniel.  Daniel was always described as a labourer so unlikely he would own a property. ...

But the format seems quite clear to me - if you look at the column heading, the only format that fits is that George Brookes is the occupying tenant. Could it be after all that this elector is not your chap?

[mazi]

I see it as Daniel abode Eaton, qualifies to vote as he owns the lease of a property in bunbury, lockup house, which is where George Brookes is living in 1841.

Does not explain why he is still listed after his death, but I doubt very much if the voters list was updated very often, most likely is it was only revised when an election was imminent.

It must have been a property worth more than £10 a year in rent

Mike

[mazi]

Now I see a Daniel Craven in 1796 Cheshire land tax assessments in spurstow, near bunbury, is this your Daniels father, or a different Daniel?

Mike