Author Topic: The elusive Michael Lee  (Read 7892 times)

Offline pomp

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #27 on: Saturday 24 February 18 10:21 GMT (UK) »

By Michael Lee's marriage certificate, his father is Timothy Lee. I'm not sure how to go about finding out whether these are the same Timothy Lee and frustratingly there are gaps.I've found:

1901 census
Inmate  workhouse Merthyr Tyfdil
Timothy Lee, widower, 61, b.1840, Ireland, general lab

1881 census
70 Gloster St, Aberdare, Merthyr Tydfil
Timothy Lee, Head, 49,  b. 1832, Cork Co Cork Ireland, Haulier
Margaret Lee, Wife, 62, b.1819, Cork Co Cork Ireland
John Coleman, Grandson, 7, 1874, Merthyr Tydfil
Daniel Ryan, Lodger Head, Married, 39, 1842, Ireland, Lab
Ann Ryan, Lodger wife, 25, 1856, Bridgend
Mary Ryan, Daughter, 2, 1879, Bridgend
Ellen Ryan, Daughter, 0, 1881, Aberdare

1871 Census
Pond St, Merthy Tydfil, Dowlais Ward
Timothy Lee, 44, 1827, Ireland (no occupation)
Margaret Lee, 43, 1828, Ireland


Offline pomp

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #28 on: Saturday 24 February 18 10:35 GMT (UK) »
What's also nibbling at me is Timothy Lee's address in the 1871 census, Pond St Merthyr Tydfil; and the address Michael Lee's, daughter's birth certificate: Pond Row Tredegar.

Probably just a coincidence?

Offline osprey

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,225
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #29 on: Wednesday 28 February 18 20:22 GMT (UK) »
1891 census doesn't make things much clearer

9 Bethesda Place, Cyfarthfa RG12/4440 folio 122 pg 14
James Coleman head mar 43 labourer in iron works b. Ireland, Cork
Mary wife 40
John son 20 labourer in iron works
Michael son 14 plasterer's labourer
Margaret dau 11
James C son 9
Daniel son 2
Timothy Lea father-in-law widower 50 labourer in ironworks b. Ireland

A 50 year old father-in-law seems slightly odd for a couple in their 40s. Mother's maiden name for the various Coleman births shows as Connors/O'Connor & variants, so marriage registered in dec qtr 1866 in Merthyr Tydfil of James Coleman & Mary Connors. 1851 census has a Mary Conner b. 1849 with mother Margaret. It's possible that Margaret is the wife with Timothy in 1871. Haven't spotted an obvious marriage as yet.

Timothy Lee was buried 20 Oct 1906 aged 63 St Mary Roman Catholic church in Merthyr Tydfil.
Cornwall: Allen, Bevan, Bosisto, Carnpezzack, Donithorn, Huddy, James, Retallack, Russell, Vincent, Yeoman
Cards: Thomas (Llanbadarn Fawr)
Glam: Bowler, Cram, Galloway, James, Thomas, Watkins
Lincs: Coupland, Cram
Mon: Cram, Gwyn, John, Philpot, Smart, Watkins
Pembs: Edwards (St. Dogmael's)
Yorks: Airey, Bowler, Elliott, Hare, Hewitt, Kellett, Kemp, Stephenson, Tebb

Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,784
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #30 on: Wednesday 28 February 18 20:47 GMT (UK) »
Hello,

I posted on the other thread researching Timothy Lee a couple of days ago.

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=788636.18

I will post what I found as it involves posts on here.
I apologise if I have repeated information. I think the OP has been online but not posted so don’t know what they think.

I will copy and paste the posts here.

I have gone over the various threads - I find them a bit confusing and I am not sure whether you have your Mary Ann in 1871 as a baby.
However, I will post this:

1871 5321/14/21
39 George Street, Tredegar
Margaret Leahy 20 yrs b Llanelly
Mary Ann Leahy 6 months b Tredegar

They are in the household of Rees and Mary Rees and children.

Rees Rees and Mary Gibbon are spouses on the same marriage page 1865

Heywood


I think I might have seen this on one of your other threads

1861 3998/40/15

Timothy and Mary Leahy with children including Michael aged 13 or 15 yrs.

Here is Timothy and Mary Leahy in 1871 5319/40/21

Transcribed as Lehary (Ancestry) or Lehay

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:V55C-TC9
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,784
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #31 on: Wednesday 28 February 18 20:47 GMT (UK) »
And here is the last post

To add to your confusion

If you think that Timothy Leahy might be your man, he looks to be at 1881 5243/5/4 as Leialy.

There is a death 1883 for Timothy Leahy, 55 yrs - age is out a bit but ...

There is a possible birth for Mary Leahy who is the youngest child in 1861 census.
1856 Mary Leary , Abergavenny (pre Bedwelty) mmn Forrest.

This would tie in with  births in Cork for some of the older children in 1861 census

Catherine 5th June 1840
https://registers.nli.ie/registers/vtls000633189#page/12/mode/1up

John 23rd March 1844
https://registers.nli.ie/registers/vtls000633189#page/20/mode/1up

Ellen 1st September 1849

These are in indexed on FindMyPast or Ancestry and are also unindexed at https://registers.nli.ie

I can’t find Ellen on nli site but she is indexed. :-\

There is also a Hannah 4th May 1852 and I can’t find her either on the site.

I can’t find Michael in indexes though which is more important.

The registers which are imaged on subscription sites sometimes are not quite the same as on the free site for some reason so I suppose he may be there somewhere.
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline osprey

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,225
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #32 on: Wednesday 28 February 18 21:13 GMT (UK) »
thanks for that. Didn't realise there had been another thread. Pretty sure the Timothy in Cyfarthfa isn't the right one anyway as he doesn't appear to have any children.

I'll repeat for the OP that the occupation is cinder filler, fitter makes no sense at all.
Cornwall: Allen, Bevan, Bosisto, Carnpezzack, Donithorn, Huddy, James, Retallack, Russell, Vincent, Yeoman
Cards: Thomas (Llanbadarn Fawr)
Glam: Bowler, Cram, Galloway, James, Thomas, Watkins
Lincs: Coupland, Cram
Mon: Cram, Gwyn, John, Philpot, Smart, Watkins
Pembs: Edwards (St. Dogmael's)
Yorks: Airey, Bowler, Elliott, Hare, Hewitt, Kellett, Kemp, Stephenson, Tebb

Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,784
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #33 on: Wednesday 28 February 18 21:20 GMT (UK) »
The other thread is on the Irish board tracing Timothy in Cork but for Timothy married to Margaret.

I think it quite likely that the other Timothy married to Mary is more likely and he also seemed to be from Cork.
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline pomp

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #34 on: Thursday 01 March 18 05:32 GMT (UK) »
Hi all

I think what I need to do is try and eliminate families by mapping out individual faillies across the census returns. Hopefully this will help confirm or eliminate different elements. I’m certainly confused.

As a teacher this is going to take time which I’m a little short of right now as we are in mock exam time. I will get to this though - I am determined

Thanks everyone fir everything

David

Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,784
    • View Profile
Re: The elusive Michael Lee
« Reply #35 on: Thursday 01 March 18 07:32 GMT (UK) »
I understand that ... lovely to be retired  ;)

I always think it good to map it out and I think osprey is right re the places.

I cannot say for certain that the Leahy family (with variations) that I have noted is your family but looking at streets and area, is more favourable than the one you originally researched.

Best wishes
Heywood
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk