May Barcham...Bareham...Burcham...Barham...?

[Girl Guide]

In case you haven't looked at the Ancestry baptisms the children listed are:-

Ethel, Lily, Arthur & William Herbert bapt. 1886, Alice bapt. 1887, Mabel bapt. 1889, Albert bapt. 1890, Ernest Henry bapt. 1893, Louisa bapt. 1895, Bert bapt. 1896, Harry bapt. 1897, Frederick George bapt. 1898 and Edith bapt. 1899.

All have William and May in the relatives column.

[PurpleOwl333]

The marriage certificate that you have, 1880, can you please list all the information about William, and about May, and their fathers, also addresses and occupations.....also witnesses names, and the Church.

William New, 23, Bachelor, Labourer, 116 Bramby Road (? not very clear)
Father: Henry New, Labourer

May Bareham (transcribed as Barcham), 22, Spinster, 41 Talbot Grove
Father: George, Labourer

Witnesses: Henry & Mary Pearce

Church: Parish Church, St Mark, Notting Hill

[PurpleOwl333]

Aha!  I found one that can be removed...

The last one on your spreadsheet, Albert John R, born kensington 1901.  His baptism puts his father as Albert New and mother Hannah.   Albert New married Hannah BURNHAM in 1884 (from freebmd).

Brilliant, thanks! 

[PurpleOwl333]

In case you haven't looked at the Ancestry baptisms the children listed are:-

Ethel, Lily, Arthur & William Herbert bapt. 1886, Alice bapt. 1887, Mabel bapt. 1889, Albert bapt. 1890, Ernest Henry bapt. 1893, Louisa bapt. 1895, Bert bapt. 1896, Harry bapt. 1897, Frederick George bapt. 1898 and Edith bapt. 1899.

All have William and May in the relatives column.

Great help, thanks very much for that. I've updated all the info now. I also modified the search to remove the location in the hope I could find Elizabeth who was on the census and GRO have an Elizabeth Louisa reg at Fulham. Unfortunately no joy re baptism and I can't place them there, yet.

[bbart]

William and May were married 07 June 1880..... nine months later son William was born 28 Mar 1881.  So Elizabeth must have been an "oops" of May's (or William and May) prior to marriage or another relative's child that they took in?

Correction..... William was born 07 Sept 1881.   Still not enough time to fit one more child in.

[PurpleOwl333]

William and May were married 07 June 1880..... nine months later son William was born 28 Mar 1881.  So Elizabeth must have been an "oops" of May's (or William and May) prior to marriage or another relative's child that they took in?

Perhaps, yeah. Interestingly on the 1891 census it has daughter Elizabeth as being 11 and William & Lily (Lillie) as 9 implying they were twins.

[bbart]

. Interestingly on the 1891 census it has daughter Elizabeth as being 11 and William & Lily (Lillie) as 9 implying they were twins.

With that many kids, I doubt I could keep the names straight, let alone their ages!

Has this family been found on the 1881 census?  I am not having any luck locating it. 

[bbart]

Please note the correction on Reply 22.... I posted the wrong birthdate for son William, but it doesn't help fit Elizabeth in, unless she was born within a few months of the marriage, which would all work out fine.

[PurpleOwl333]

. Interestingly on the 1891 census it has daughter Elizabeth as being 11 and William & Lily (Lillie) as 9 implying they were twins.

With that many kids, I doubt I could keep the names straight, let alone their ages!

Has this family been found on the 1881 census?  I am not having any luck locating it. 

  I remember getting raised eyebrows having 4 let alone this little lot! 

No, the 1881 census is hiding from me also