RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Cumberland => Topic started by: Razzy on Wednesday 24 March 10 02:49 GMT (UK)
-
Hi,
I am told that some parts of the 1841 Eaglesfield census did not survive.
I can order this census FHL BRITISH Film 241276.
But am not sure it is money well spent.
At least it could clear up a puzzle that I cannot solve.
Does anyone know what parts of this census did survive?
I am looking for a Graham family that had a minimum of three children.
George and Margaret had a son Thomas in 1813 (firstborn, u/k), then William was baptized in 1817, followed by Eleanor in 1819.
Before 1813 and after 1819, I have no history on this family.
George was a husbandman.
George and Margaret were not married within the Brigham parish.
So for the Eaglesfield 1841 census, If I order it, is it just a crapshoot whether I find this family?
Razzy
-
You might find these GRAHAMs in Eaglesfield in 1841-
Margt GRAHAM 66 AgLab
Jane 33 AgLab
Eleanor 21
George 5
Wm 2
John 35 AgLab
Elizabeth 30
John 12
Arthur 9
Robt 7
Chistopher 5
Agnes 3
Thomas 1
Joseph YOUART 77 AgLab
Mally/Molly GRAHAM 70 Grocer
In 1851, this could be them-
Sand Lane, Cockermouth
Margret GRAHAM (wid) 77 Harrington
Jane (unm dau) 42 Cockermouth
William 12 Cockermouth
Margaret 6 Cockermouth
Jane 2 Cockermouth
Was this your George's burial? - obviously quite a bit older
11 Dec 1833 Brigham, George GRAHAM (75)
My Brigham burials cover 1817-37 only.
The IGI has baptisms for extra children of George and Margaret-
1805 Ann
1808 Jane
-
Thank you,
The Margaret and the deceased George really interest me. Also where Margaret says she was born. I have somewhere to look now for a marriage.
I can look to see if Thomas (born 1813) was baptized there.
Razzy
-
I can look to see if Thomas (born 1813) was baptized there.
I think Thomas just fits between other baps at Brigham doesn't he? As I may have remarked before, the IGI batches for Brigham have only one baptism between 1808 and 1813, so I don't think you'll find him online.
You'll have to decide if you think the 1800 marriage at Crosscanonby might be relevant ... I can't see any obvious children from it ... except (perhaps) those at Brigham. The marriage didn't take place at Harrington.
-
Well the 1851 census mentions that Margaret is from Harrington.
Maybe Thomas and possibly others were baptized there following the custom of daughters returning to their mothers place to have some of their children, or baptizing them there.
I will have to think which FHL microfilm of Harrington to order.
Razzy
-
I forgot, I have traced thru the Brigham parish FHL #0090572 and 00905573 as well as Crosscanonby #1472080 with no success for marriages other than the 1800 where Margaret was from Crosscanonby. However she could easily have moved by herself or with family from Harrington to Crosscanonby.
Going thru my 0090572 Brigham records I do have a John Graham (mariner?) from Harrington marrying Ann Messenger of Eaglesfield in Brigham on Dec 30th, 1771.
Razzy
-
Bearing in mind that the IGI is missing 1809-12 baptisms at Brigham, I don't think my first line of attack would be to look at Harrington baptisms for someone who claimed to have been born 1812 Eaglesfield.
I had ancestors who married at Harrington and moved to Crosscanonby/Maryport.
I can e-mail you Harrington marriage transcriptions if you wish.
-
Hi Geoff,
Would you send the marriages of Harrington to me please?
I am not educated in genealogy, would it be within reason if Thomas was born in 1813 in Eaglesfield as he says in later census', but if his mother (assuming Margaret) was from Harrington, she may have returned to Harrington to have Thomas baptized there?
Possibly George Graham married her there in Harrington or possibly the 1800 marriage of George and Margaret is the same couple I am looking for as I have just found out today that there were earlier siblings thanks to your help.
You might find these GRAHAMs in Eaglesfield in 1841-
Margt GRAHAM 66 AgLab
Jane 33 AgLab
Eleanor 21
George 5
Wm 2
In 1851, this could be them-
Sand Lane, Cockermouth
Margret GRAHAM (wid) 77 Harrington
Jane (unm dau) 42 Cockermouth
William 12 Cockermouth
Margaret 6 Cockermouth
Jane 2 Cockermouth
Was this your George's burial? - obviously quite a bit older
11 Dec 1833 Brigham, George GRAHAM (75)
My Brigham burials cover 1817-37 only.
The IGI has baptisms for extra children of George and Margaret-
1805 Ann
1808 Jane
Razzy
By the way -George was 27 yrs older than Margaret, possibly it is his second wife; or like his son Thomas, (born 1813) was a bachelor and 17yrs older than his wife Eleanor.
Maybe it is a gene inheritance?
-
I'm sorry Geoff,
You already said that the marriage did not take place in Harrington. So please disregard my request to have the marriages of Harrington sent to me, sorry.
I will see about ordering the Harrington baptisms instead to search for both Margaret and Thomas.
Razzy
-
I will see about ordering the Harrington baptisms instead to search for both Margaret and Thomas.
Razzy
There is an obvious candidate for Margaret (if the 1800 marriage is correct) http://tinyurl.com/ycolumd
I think the chances of finding Thomas bap at Harrington are practically zero. :( She doesn't seem to have married there and at least five children were christened at Brigham so I consider a "random" return to Harrington unlikely - obviously it's not impossible ;)
If Marg's father was John, this could go some way towards explaining the presence of a possible son John in Eaglesfield in 1841.
-
Ordering microfilm costs me $6.00 plus waiting for delivery. Are you able to beat that?, I am pleased to have you help me, however I do not want to encumber you.
I followed some Margarets of Croscanonby in the FHL #1472080 that could have married this George Graham (assuming her maiden name was not Graham).
Margaret d/o John Clarkof Crosby baptised Feb 25th, 1777
Margaret d/o ? Thompson of Birkley baptised June 14th, 1778
There is a Margaret d/o William Atkin of Crosby baptised Jan 30th, 1780 -however this Margaret would have been a minor if she married George Graham and that is not stated in the parish records (that she is a minor). Margaret d/o John Hetherington of Birkley baptised March 6th, 1788; this Margaret was baptised after another Margaret who was baptised in 1785 from the same father.
The clerk of the parish did not mention that either Margaret was of a certain age (like 4 or 5 yrs old) at the time of baptism which then would make her 'of age' at time of marriage (1800).
A couple of other Margarets (d/o Richard Johnston and John Armstrong) were buried before the marriage in 1800.
Genealogy sure is tricky!
Razzy
-
I followed some Margarets of Croscanonby in the FHL #1472080 that could have married this George Graham (assuming her maiden name was not Graham).
I would assume her maiden name was GRAHAM from the information given in the transcript.
-
ok,
I have come across at times where the bride in giving her signature wrote her new married name where she should have signed with her maiden name. Usually this is corrected by the clerk writing 'late...'.
Razzy
-
ok,
I have come across at times where the bride in giving her signature wrote her new married name where she should have signed with her maiden name. Usually this is corrected by the clerk writing 'late...'.
Razzy
It's not as simple as that ... I have one that says
Agnes BELL late STEPHENSON her X mark,
so it was all the vicar's handiwork :)
There were a lot of GRAHAMs in Cumberland of course.