Author Topic: Groom's occupation at a Fleet (Clandestine) marriage of 1744.  (Read 1360 times)

Offline Jebber

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,385
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Groom's occupation at a Fleet (Clandestine) marriage of 1744.
« Reply #9 on: Friday 23 June 17 11:35 BST (UK) »
It is a tricky one, more of the page would help to compare the writing.
CHOULES All ,  COKER Harwich Essex & Rochester Kent 
COLE Gt. Oakley, & Lt. Oakley, Essex.
DUNCAN Kent
EVERITT Colchester,  Dovercourt & Harwich Essex
GULLIVER/GULLOFER Fifehead Magdalen Dorset
HORSCROFT Kent.
KING Sturminster Newton, Dorset. MONK Odiham Ham.
SCOTT Wrabness, Essex
WILKINS Stour Provost, Dorset.
WICKHAM All in North Essex.
WICKHAM Medway Towns, Kent from 1880
WICKHAM, Ipswich, Suffolk.

Offline The Geneal Geologist

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 729
    • View Profile
Re: Groom's occupation at a Fleet (Clandestine) marriage of 1744.
« Reply #10 on: Friday 23 June 17 11:36 BST (UK) »
Thanks, everyone. I think it is Gentleman's Servant. Glad that was cleared up. I had considered "Gent", but the text didn't quite match up and I wasn't sure the need for a Gentleman to use the services of a jailed clergyman at the Fleet prison.
For those pondering the remainder, it is St James Westminster (where he lived and had at least 2 children by Jane).
Much obliged for the input.

Offline a-l

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,681
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Groom's occupation at a Fleet (Clandestine) marriage of 1744.
« Reply #11 on: Friday 23 June 17 11:45 BST (UK) »
All I can see is West Guildford I can't find the occupation  ???

Offline arthurk

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,189
    • View Profile
Re: Groom's occupation at a Fleet (Clandestine) marriage of 1744.
« Reply #12 on: Friday 23 June 17 13:52 BST (UK) »
The Guildford suggestion is ingenious, but if the letter we have made out to be "S" (in Serv[an]t) were an "f", I'd expect it to look more like the "f" in "of" on the lines above and below - with a long descender and a crossing.

Moreover, checking out St Francis, Westborough, Guildford, it appears that the church was built in 1933 (see http://www.achurchnearyou.com/westborough-st-francis/), and I have a Crockford's Directory from the late 1950s which suggests that it wasn't a parish in its own right even by then. 19th century maps show that area as just countryside, with no development at all, so I think we can be confident that there was no such church or parish in 1744.
Researching among others:
Bartle, Bilton, Bingley, Campbell, Craven, Emmott, Harcourt, Hirst, Kellet(t), Kennedy,
Meaburn, Mennile/Meynell, Metcalf(e), Palliser, Robinson, Rutter, Shipley, Stow, Wilkinson

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,437
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Groom's occupation at a Fleet (Clandestine) marriage of 1744.
« Reply #13 on: Friday 23 June 17 13:54 BST (UK) »
Josey is correct in Reply #8.  It is a standard contracted form of Westminster.