RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Tephra on Tuesday 18 May 10 10:13 BST (UK)
-
Welcome to this weeks Scavenger Hunt and as you can see, it's a joint Hunt this week. Let's see if the two can be joined up.
Good Luck and Good Hunting
Barbara
*******************************
Here are the details for Royd's and my Scavenger Hunt. We'd really love to have some fresh eyes look at what we've found, and take us further.
This is a scavenger hunt for Royd’s ancestor Daniel Cork(e) and my ancestor Richard Cork(e).[The name is spelled both ways in various sources]
We think they are brothers, but haven’t been able to prove it despite lots of research and help from the Kent board. Fresh eyes much appreciated.
Both, on their marriage certificates, have father Richard Cork(e), labourer. Both lived in the same area of Kent.
Richard Cork jnr was baptised in Cudham, Kent, February 1840, son of Richard Cork and Jane. Richard snr is a labourer, and travelling in work – the first suggestion this is a travelling family.
1861: Richd Cork, 19, Ordinary Seaman 2nd class, born Goodham, Kent, on HMS Britannia, Portsmouth. Class/RG9 Piece/4483 Folio/23 Page/14
Naval records, show him born August 9th, 1841, Cudham, Kent.
Oct 1864, he marries my great great grandmother Eliza Miller (1846, Seal, Kent), in Sevenoaks, aged 23, as Richard Corke, occupation seaman, resident in Seal, father Richard Corke, labourer. Eliza is shown as aged 20, but she was only 17, and 3 months’ pregnant with my great grandmother.
1871: Richard Cork with another “wife”(Charlotte Jane [Tolhurst]) aged 30, born Cobham, farm labourer, Northfleet, Kent. Class/RG10 Piece/896 Folio/12 Page/15
(1871 Eliza Miller Cork is with another “husband”. All Eliza’s subsequent details are known).
Richard and Charlotte had daughter Charlotte in 1872, and son Arthur Friend Cork in 1873 in Chatham. Oct 1874 they marry, but since Richard is still married, he uses his mother’s name, Cooley.
The family all take that name, and he lives and works in Chatham till he dies in 1896 as Richard Cooley.
The Cooley connection helped us link Richard jnr to the correct family.
Father Richard Corke snr baptised in Stone, Kent, in 1812, son of Richard Corke, labourer, and Sarah.
In 1840 he’s at the baptism of son Richard jnr(as above), and Feb 23rd 1851 in Pyrford, Surrey at the baptism of his son Stephen.
He may be the Richard Corke sentenced in Oct 1849,Folkestone, to six months for two counts of fraud.
1861 in Seal, Kent, with wife Jane (c1820, Chertsey), and children Jane (1842, Ightham), James (1848, Reigate), Eliza (1853, Seal), Alice (1856, Seal), and Elizabeth (1859, Seal). Class/RG9 Piece/487 Folio/33 Page/4
Son Stephen is with his sister Sarah (1837, Seal) whose married name is Lowder/Louder, Wrotham. Class/RG9 Piece/ 486 Folio/102 Page/4. We have the details of Sarah's marriage to Peter Lowder, 1859, as Sarah Cooley.
Another child, Mary Ann (1862, Seal) was born before mother Jane’s death in 1867.
1871 widowed Richard is in Offham, Kent, with Stephen, Alice, Elizabeth and Mary Ann. Class/RG10 Piece/919 Folio/12 Page/16
1881 he is in Trottiscliffe, with another “wife”, and daughter Mary Ann with her illegitimate son. Class/RG11 Piece/903 Folio/28 Page/10
1891 he is living with “daughter” Sarah, (Sarah Lowder of the 1861), who may be his stepchild. She was baptised in Seal, in 1837, as Sarah Cooley, mother shown as Jane Cooley, traveller. She names Richard Cork as father on her second marriage to James Dalton, and in 1891 Richard is “father” living with her and James, Sundridge. Class/RG12 Piece/674 Folio/47 Page/2
Richard dies in 1891, in Otford.
The family used both Corke and Cooley names, probably because Richard Corke and Jane Cooley may not have married. Eg daughter Jane Cork, baptised Ightham Dec 1842 as daughter of Richard and Jane, is shown as Corke in the 1861. However, she is Jane Cooley as witness at her brother Richard’s bigamous marriage, 1874 Chatham, and marries 1878 Chatham as Jane Cooley to John Hedges, giving father Richard Cooley, basketmaker.
Now for Daniel (c1845, Chelsea)
1861 in Shoreham, Kent, he is Daniel Clarke, aged 16. We’re his place of birth is Chelsea, Mddx. Shoreham is about 4 miles from Seal, where the Corkes are living. Class/RG9 Piece/487 Folio/100 Page/8
He marries Olive Martin in April 1870, Maidstone. No family witnesses.
1871 in Offham, Kent, next door to Richard Corke snr (as above) and close to Richard’s son James Corke, married to Harriet Parris (cousin of Daniel’s wife Olive). Daniel is born Chelsea, Mddx. Class/RG10 Piece/919 Folio/12 Page/16
1881 Daniel is in Frindsbury, as is James Corke, a couple of doors away in Oak Street. Daniel born Chelsea, Surrey. Class/RG11 Piece/881 Folio/28 Page/ 12
1891 in Eynsford, in 1901 and 1911 in Queenborough, Isle of Sheppey. All these Censuses show pob Chelsea. James Corke is not next door, but not far away – in 1891 in Hoo, in 1901 back in Frindsbury, in 1911 in Wainscott.
Can anyone find the Corkes in 1851 which should have Richard Corke/Jane Cooley and many of their family, including Richard jnr and Daniel together? Can anyone find a baptism for Daniel Corke – all the rest of the family we have the records for. Was he really born in Chelsea?
Can anyone find the family in 1841?
Thank you!
-
Have you seen this Birth Reg from Freebmd:
Daniel Coolley - Jun 1845 Qtr Chertsey 4-79 (Chertsey could feasibly be misheard as Chelsea)
-
Hi Kanskar, I think that may be a new one to us.......so thank you very much. I did check for Corkes in Chertsey because I thought the same as you about mishearing the word Chelsea, but there were no Corkes registered. I don't think Daniel ever learned to write so it was all by word of mouth. By the way, I live in one of the areas you are interested in so will pm you to see if I can help you!
Very grateful for your time. R. :)
-
That's great, Kanskar, we hadn't come across that one before - I've just looked for it in An*****y, and on the actual listings for that quarter, the names go from Cooke to Coomb, with no Coolley, so perhaps there's a page missing.
Definitely worth a punt on the certificate, although it doesn't explain why all the other children (except Sarah in 1837) were baptised Cork. However, I've just theorised that although Richard snr and Jane were together for the births of the other children, perhaps Richard was away for this birth, and Jane had to register the birth, and couldn't lie to the registrar about being married.
Very much appreciated that you trawled through all the info. ;D
-
Well, I've sent for the Daniel Coolley certificate so we'll see what happens with that. I'm not that experienced at searching An*****y but I can't find anyone with that name on the 1851 when he would have been about 6 years old. Can anyone advise? Thanks. R.
-
You have Daniel down, as Daniel CLARKE...is this an error?
the marriage in 1870 to Olive Martin, he is listed as Daniel CORK
-
Hi Daisy, no it isn't an error on our part anyway! We are pretty sure it's 'our' Daniel but that he has been mistranscribed. On 1881 he is Daniell with two 'll's' and on another census the name (either Richard or Daniel, can't remember off the top of my head) Cork comes out as Cocke. Thanks for noticing though. Regards. R. :)
-
Have you seen the Richard Clark in 1841, in Cudham? - he is just 7 months old
-
Thanks Daisy...will take a look at that one. Richard is IgorStrav's 'baby' and Daniel is mine!! So no doubt she will be pouncing on that find tonight! Grateful for your time. R. :)
-
lol -you have probably seen it all...I have been looking at Daniel for a couple of hours this morning...and he really is an odd/hard one eh? ;D
I don't get the Chelsea bit at all...if Daniel & Richard were brothers, you would kind of expect them to be born around Kent surely? I can see why you are pulling your hair out!
-
My Daniel is one proverbial pain!! I have a picture of him so I know he existed but he is really proving to be hard work. When the 1911 census was released, IgorStrav rushed to check him just in case something different turned up.....what did we get? Chelsea of course! I still have the thing about Chertsey though, and the fact that they sound the same in a Kentish accent..lol
We have fathomed out that the family were probably travellers - hop picking through various areas which is why they are all over the place.
Daniel's children were all born in different places but at least I have them all sorted.
Once again, very grateful for your time. R. :)
-
Hi
I remember searching with you both on this one a long time ago ...I was also searching the HEDGES Brothers at the same time.
I have searched 1841 and 1851 for hours without finding them..... ::) They have to be somewhere!
deb
-
Hi Deb. Yes, I remember you joining in with us in 2008. Welcome. They have to be somewhere?? Tell me.....under a hedge maybe is my latest thought. However, the children were quite young so you would have thought that they were in a shelter of some sort. Thanks for joining in, we appreciate all the help people are giving us. R.
-
Thank you very much, Daisy, for the 1841 ref. As Royd says, as soon as I am at home I will have a look.
So excited to have the power of Rootschat helping, I am currently logged in on my blackberry on the train back from the office to catch up on any developments.
Thank you all! You. reassure Royd and me that we're not quite mad yet! :)
-
Hi again
Just a thought ..... enumerators sometimes couldn't be bothered writing down travellers names and so they may appear by just their initials, maybe an age and sometimes a POB. I have seen this ith my extended family.
Another thought I have had is that they were all enumerated under the "head of household's name" ie: not Corke or Cooley but maybe the surname of whoever they were staying with.
arrgghhh ...they are still proving elusive.
Will keep looking though. (even under the hedges LOL ) ;D
deb
-
I just wanted to advise that since we have the family in Pyrford on 23rd February 1851 for the baptism of Stephen, I have looked through the censuses in the local areas in the hope they'd not got far in just over a month. So any wonderful person trawling through does not need to look in 1851 in Pyrford, Wisley, Ockham, Byfleet, or Reigate Foreign because I've looked there and they're not present.
just off to look the 1841 in Cudham, although I've looked through the actual listings there before and not spotted anyone...................
-
Yes, just found Daniel Clark aged 7 months. I just think that his mother seems so clearly to be Mahala Clark, and the other children are Susan, George and Edward, that it CAN'T be connected to our Richard and Jane Cork, with Sarah and any other children there at the time.
onwards and upwards ;)
-
Igor/royd - Have you noted that Pyrford is in Chertsey Reg Dist ?
-
Thanks, Kanskar, for that one - I am halfway through the Chertsey images for 1851. No sign as yet, but not given up hope.
I will also have a look to see where Peter Louder/Lowder was in the 1851. He was the man that Sarah Cooley (eldest daughter) married in late 1850's, and given the family's tendency to live with their partners for some years before marriage (if they every married ;)) I'm just wondering if they could have been in the neighbourhood.....
or perhaps under a hedge >:(
-
not in Chertsey in 1851, or, at least, not enumerated there. >:(
-
Just to follow up Sarah Cooley's first husband, can anyone find him or his family earlier than the 1861?
Just to recap, he is
Peter Louder or Lowder
(1861 census
Class/RG9 Piece/486 Folio/102 Page/4)
shows him as born c 1827 in Slafham Sussex.
He is a Marine Store Dealer (itinerant occupation)
Father James Louder, widower, born c 1797 in Hawkhurst, Kent, an Ag Lab.
There are other Lowders in the 1861, born Hawkhurst and still living there - Thomas, born c 1793, a widower, and his son William, aged 17.
Just with the thought that it might be worth pinning down Peter Louder/Lowder in the 1851?
-
Anyone interested in trying the Louder/Lowder angle should know that the Sussex board say it's Slaugham (pronounced Slaffham), and there's a Louder family there in the 1841, but no Peter.
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=457695.new;topicseen#new
I'm going to show the Sussex board this link, just in case they'd like to help here!! Fingers crossed ;D
-
Everything crossed ;D R.
-
I am afraid to report that the Lowder/Louder family are just as resistant to being found in the 1851 as the rest of our wretched Corks/Cooleys.
I have Peter born as noted above in 1827 in Slaugham, Sussex: I have his father, James, born in Hawkhurst, Kent in about 1792 (according to the 1861). I have a marriage for a James Louder and Elizabeth Kemings in 1816 in Balcombe, (which the Sussex board assure me is close to Slaugham), and I have an Ambrose Louder born to a James and Elizabeth in 1821 in Slaugham.
None of these people seem to appear anywhere else (other than Peter and James in the 1861, and Peter's marriage).
There are some Lowder families in Hawkhurst in the 1841, but nobody linking to what we've got.
I am just about to embark on the census images for Slaugham in the 1841, as nobody is jumping out of the transcriptions
Anybody any ideas, please? Or shall Royd and I just curse a bit (privately) and give up?
-
Hi
I too searched for the Louder/Lowders in 1851 with absolutely no results .... :(
curse (loudly privately) all you want but never give up!!! ;D 8)
deb
-
Were they at a Lowder/Cork traveller's convention perhaps ;D
Don't know what I'm grinning about - this lot are driving me nuts. :(
R.
-
Just wanted to tell you that having failed miserably with the Louder/Lowders, I looked all through the Bletchingley 1851 images just in case Sarah was close to her SECOND husband, James Dalton (because he was there, aged 12, with his family in the 1851). But none of the Corkes/Cooleys are in Bletchingley, either.
I really am beginning to think they weren't enumerated. If they were, then surely a Daniel or a Richard would pop out in one of the single name searches I keep doing?
-
R
All I can think is that they have been transcribed under another surname. ::)
It's really cra**y when you are relying on the 1851 for important info. I know the feeling. >:(
Have they ever been transcribed as living in caravans/tents etc? Or were they always home dwellers?
deb
oo red post ...
if Daniel was bc 1840 something there has to be a birth reg. Maybe if they were travelling he may have been registered in another area.
-
Deb, we have them in the 1861 onwards, and they are always in houses from then on.
However, Jane Cooley (Richard snr's "wife") was described as a traveller on her daughter Sarah Cooley's baptism record in Seal, and we have various members of the family marrying into travelling families (for example Peter Louder is a marine stores dealer, and Jane Corke married into the Hedges family, and her father in law was a chair bottomer).
And the various birthplaces of the children - Sarah in Seal, Richard in Cudham,Jane in Ightham, (Daniel in Chelsea? Chelsham?), James in Reigate, Stephen in Wisley seem to indicate travelling. From 1853 on, I think the family were in Seal, Kent, as that is where the other children are baptised.
But they don't seem to be there in the 1851, which is not surprising as they were in Wisley/Pyrford on 23rd February that year, and Seal is 40 miles away and they only had a month to do it in. Possible, I suppose, but I have been through the Seal census before.......
-
A few, probably irrelevant, thoughts on hop-picking if you think they were involved in this. A lot of itinerant workers followed a fairy definite schedule moving around. First job in the year in spring would be training hops onto the strings. Then they could move almost anywhere, then back to Kent for cherry/apple/strawberry/blackcurrant etc picking in summer, hop picking in September and then on to potato picking in autumn/winter. They would follow a fairly regular circuit, going back to the same area, often the same farm, for a particular job year after year. So is their a pattern as to where people are at a particular time of year?
Robert
-
Thank you for your comments, Robbo, I will have a look at the seasons of the various births and see if any of that makes sense.
Given that we want the 1851 census as a first step, we know the family were definitely in Pyrford on 23rd February. So I am assuming that this would be just ahead of training the hops on to the strings, and therefore the likelihood is that they would be back on the way to Kent.
I am seriously thinking of drawing circles on the map and assessing how far the family would have got in 5 weeks, probably, as you suggest, moving Kentwards.
What do you think they would be living/travelling in? Family of two adults, girl of 14, boy of 10, girl of 8, boy of 5, boy of 3, newborn baby? I hadn't been imagining a Romany caravan because of of course they weren't Romany.
Any thoughts, anyone?
-
Following up Robbo's suggestion, I've had another look at the births and I don't know that it does actually assist in terms of a routine of travelling - see what you think
The children are baptised/presumably born as follows (leaving out Daniel, for whom we have no baptism/birth records confirmed as yet)
Sarah, baptism April 16th 1837, Seal, Kent
Richard, baptism Feb 16th 1840, Cudham, Kent
Jane, baptism Dec 11th 1842, Ightham, Kent
James, baptism Mar 19th, Reigate, Surrey
Stephen, baptism Feb 23rd, Pyrford, Surrey
then
Eliza, baptism Dec 11th 1853, Seal, Kent
Alice, baptism Oct 12th 1856, Seal, Kent
Elizabeth, no baptism found, but birth March qtr 1859
Mary Ann, baptism Feb 16th 1862, Seal, Kent
So, with the exception of Alice, all the children are baptised/presumably born in the period December to April.
It looks like the family were based in and around Kent for the first few years, and then in Surrey, and finally back to Kent.
I don't know if anyone can deduce anything else from this?
-
hi all
I looked again this morning (for a long long time :)) and still cannot see them...Daniel certainly fits in between Sarah and Stephen's birth.
does anyone have Family search...eeekkk it's family something ...I think thats what it's called as I (well , actually not me, my cousin) have found various family members that are transcribed there but not on Ancestry.
I will try to ask my cousin to take a look...
deb
-
It's time for this weeks Scavenger Hunt and here it is.
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,458145.0.html
Good Luck and Good Hunting
Barbara
As usual, this Hunt will remain open for any further information which may come in.
-
Royd... Re: Daniel
The marriage to Olive in 1870...I'm assuming that you have the cert? and he lists his father as Richard Corke?
What was the occupation of Richard?
Just to clarify another point, Richard Senior, b.1812 in Stone...you are hoping to prove that he is Daniel's father, right?
I am intrigued by this family, mainly because I grew up in Dartford, and many of these place names like Eynesford, Shorham etc are very familier to me! I don't know how much help I will be, if any...but I am kind of starting from the beginning...working back from the 1901 census...you never know, a pair of fresh eyes and all that!
-
Hi Daisy Loo, you are more than welcome to join in this hunt - fresh eyes are what we are always hoping for.
Okay, yes, I have Daniel's marriage certificate: 11th June, 1870 at Zion chapel, Brewer Street, Maidstone. He was a labourer and his father Richard Cork, was down as a Farm labourer. At the time of the marriage, his residence was Offham, Kent whilst Olive's was 21 Bownys (?) Court, King Street, Maidstone. Her father James, was also a Farm labourer. Daniel has signed with his mark X. Olive was able to write. The witnesses were Thomas South (no idea as yet about him but may pursue) and Alice Martin who, I think, was Olive's sister.
It is hoped to prove that Daniel was Richard's son and brother to Richard jnr. I have seen Richard senior's baptism at Stone on Medway City Ark. Maybe it is time I trawled through all the parishes listed on there to see if there is a baptism for Daniel!!
Many thanks. R :)
-
Okay. The certificate of Daniel Coolley has arrived!
Mother - Jane Coolley - the C is quite curly which makes me wonder if it is Colley. No father. Place of birth Union Workhouse, Chertsey. Date April 1845.
Our Jane?
Another Jane?
Was Daniel Jane's but not Richard's?
Questions. Questions. Questions. R :-\
Pondering. Back tonight.
-
Hi
What was happening in 1845 in Richard and Jane's lives?
Jane was b 1842, Kent, then James in 1848, Surrey.
There is space to fit Daniel in ... would they have been travelling and Jane snr. had to pop into the Workhouse to have her baby for some reason?
Coincidence that this Daniel had a mother named Jane?
BUT ...why no father named?
:-\
-
I have theorised, Deb, that possibly Richard was away - in prison, maybe? - and Jane had to have the baby in the workhouse. Unable to prove she was married, because she wasn't, and because the father wasn't present, she had to register the baby under her own name. (as has been said before, the family did use both names - my great great grandfather, Richard jnr, married bigamously under that name).
We did find a possible criminal record for Richard at Folkestone Borough Court 9th October 1849, when a Richard Corke was sentenced to 3 months each for 2 convictions for fraud. So if that was him, it's possible he was in prison earlier.
I have told Royd that I think the mother's name Jane, the location Chertsey (which has family connections) and the roughly correct dob is quite persuasive. Are there any other possible Jane Cooleys in the vicinity at the time?
-
And perhaps I should add that if it WAS Richard sent away to prison for six months in October 1849, he was back in April 1850, just in time to get Jane pregnant again for Stephen to be born and baptised the following February 1851.
You can get carried away, theorising, can't you..... :o
-
I have spent last night and tonight trawling through Daniel's born between 1840-1850 ish, with various combos - Jane as mother, Richard as father...etc...nothing :-\ - then I tried Richard snr and Jane various options...nada ??? and then lastly, thought I'd have a look for the siblings of Richard, Jane (b.1842) and James (b.1848)...but nothing, nothing.
I'd hate to think how frustrated you guys must be...no sign of ANY of them for 1841 or 1851 - yet you have nearly all the rest of the info. I wish I had more to offer :'(
-
Thanks for your efforts Daisy Loo. Soooo infuriating isn't it? This birth certificate I have received seems to be the only 'near miss' we can come up with. :'(
Is it worth asking on the Surrey board if anyone has any info on Chertsey Union workhouse? I have googled it and there is a list of inmates from c1894 but couldn't see anything earlier. What does anyone think?
-
Thank you for just looking. It is so much appreciated. Neither Royd nor I can believe that the final clue isn't out there somewhere, if we only know where to look.
They are quite a fascinating family - you see that Royd and I are convinced that Daniel's part of it - and I don't think any better than they should be...... ;)
-
Oh, and by the way, I can't see any likely Jane Cooleys in the area to be Daniel's mother, other than ours, at a first sweep past.
-
Hi all :)
nice to see you here Daisy!
do you think this is your Richard's docs?
from NA:
Admiralty: Royal Navy, Royal Marines, Coastguard ADM 29/36/271
Original pg number: 271 Richard COOLEY, Born: (Not Given)
Age on entry: 14
Dates served: 28 January 1834-28 October 1842
Type of Application: Admiralty 31 January 1846 .
Date: 1845 - 1846
-
Ooh, that's interesting, Deb.
Not sure if that's Richard snr, though - apart from the name, he's shown as aged 14 on entry, and I think our Richard Corke is quite firmly the one baptised in Stone in 1812 (records from MedwayArk), as that's what he says all through the censuses we have him in. So if this man enlisted in 1834, our Richard would be 22 rather than 14, which sounds a bit unlikely.
Richard's son, Richard junior was definitely in the navy though....I have his NA records.
-
I looked for Daniel with mother Jane in 1851 and nothing showed up for Colley/Cooley either.
I don't think it a far stretch that Jane could have been visiting family, and ended up having the baby in a workhouse - and the theory that she registered it alone under her name could fit too...trouble is, could and possible, and maybe don't make fact :( sadly!
Funny enough, I receievd just yesterday records of a sister of an ancestor, who gave birth to her baby boy in Gravesend Workhouse...and they didn't help much...the only thing it gave me that I didn't already know, was a better estimate for the dob of the mother. Having said that, you could strike lucky, and find records where someone has written notes down. So no avenue should be overlooked.
(Thanks Deb...you are much better at this than I!)
-
Just had a thought whilst opening a bottle of wine ;D
Maybe we should search the 1851 for Daniels b 1845 with mother Jane in Chertsey ... if there are none ....welllllll....errrrr maybe he could be YOURS!!!!!
also check for deaths of a young Daniel Cooley in that area just in case ....
deb :)
Umm I was also wondering about the DOB on the Naval records....
red post ...That's the 2nd SNAP we have had today Daisy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
-
I hope you are intending on sharing a glass or three... :P
Royd & Igor...have you considered seperating your hunt? Or have you already done that? I am just a little surprised that more have not come on board? Or perhaps they have/are and are working behind the scenes...
-
I wondered if not so many people had come on board because there was so much information we'd already found.....
Another couple of thoughts. Interesting that the Daniel Cooley birth in Chertsey is ANOTHER April birth. Is this significant of anything, and if so, what?
And secondly, just to advise Royd that I have looked through all the Chertsey 1851 census images, including the workhouse, and none of the Corkes are there, unless they've changed their first names as well as surname. :D
-
I did actually wonder at the age gaps...almost regular 3 years in Richard & Jane's children...did they know a secret or two about birth control...or were there times that they were actually apart?
-
Goodness knows what Richard got up to.
I did have a look through the Ancestry Criminal registers for people called Richard and/or Corke and/or Cooley in Kent and in Surrey, but only the one in 1849 popped up. But there seem to be criminal records for other members of the family and people they married, and families of the people they married too.
Royd and I could tell you a story or two, but it'll take your mind off the job in hand! ;)
-
I am one of the invisible people who have been following this thread and looking for all and sundry on 1851 census....to no avail :D
I think travellers did avoid officialdom and I think this family managed to evade the enumerator in 1851. One wonders how hard the enumerator tried to get info from this group of people, too :-\
Have you found any births registered for the children? (you only mention baptism records). If there are no birth certs, maybe that suggests they didn't accept the need to respect the census either.
Also have you access to Chertsey parish registers and was that Daniel Cooley christened in or shortly after 1845?
I have also looked on Gale newspaper archive and there seem to be some hits for Richard Cork in the SE from 1845-55, but i'm having difficulty downloading the articles (computer having a flaky moment). If no-one else looks first, I'll try again tomorow.
-
Hi again
I have many missing censuses for my Gypsy family ..The Penfold/Orchard/James clans
It is very frustrating to say the least.
What I have found out after years of searching for them, is that they are usually transcribed on last page of the enumeration district in areas that Travellers roamed. Sometimes they are enumerated with initials and ages only POB unknown...and states they are camping/living in tents/caravans etc.
Just a thought ..... enumerators sometimes couldn't be bothered writing down travellers names and so they may appear by just their initials, maybe an age and sometimes a POB. I have seen this with my extended family.
Another thought I have had is that they were all enumerated under the "head of household's name" ie: not Corke or Cooley but maybe the surname of whoever they were staying with.
Will keep looking though. (even under the hedges LOL ) ;D
deb
-
Thanks Alpinecottage for your interest, the help and suggestions from everyone is much appreciated.
We do have SOME birth refs but not all, and we have baptisms for all except Daniel and, I think, without checking back, Elizabeth. One of the later daughters, anyway.
I had a look in Gale, but some time ago, and would be fascinated to see if there is anything.
-
Hi all,
I have bee away for a few months and came back to see this thread.
I think that travellers were often missed in official documentation of any kind.
I too have family I have been unable to find anycensus, birth or baptismal records for c1808-1850 apart from marraiges after 1837 and then not births of chhildren until 1850.
If we hadn't found a 70 year old handwritten family tree with dates etc we would be no further forward. We are accepting the data in the tree as correct as everything from 1837 till 1930 when it was written has been verified. So we accept that the inforamtion before 1837 may well be corect too if not yet verifiable.
Thre is a travellers thread on this site which may be useful. BUt travellers fall into many categories, occupations and areas.
Sorry I can't be of more help, Just keeping my fingers crossed that something will turn up for you.
Robyn
-
Welcome back Robyn...... I wondered where you'd got to :D
-
Thanks Tephra
good to be back
Robyn
-
tanhs tephra been to England Scotland Ireland and PAris just being a tourist next time will be beter organised and more specifica about locations and research etc. Enjoyd myself immensley
Robyn
I'm jealous...........green in fact ;D
-
Well Tephra,
It was my 60th birthday present to myself, my kids chipped in with helping pay for some of my tours.
Robyn
-
Hi Igor and Royd,
Have been following the thread with interest and having a look to see if I could find anything to help and upto now didn't have anything new but I have just discovered that 6 miles from Cudham was a place called Chelsfield,
Not sure if it still is or if it has been swallowed up into Orpington but I thought I would mention it. Certainly closer in sound to Chelsea :)
-
I had a look in Gale, but some time ago, and would be fascinated to see if there is anything.
I was able to have a quick look on Gale this morning, but the hits were mostly Sir Richard from Cork....I think we can conclude he isn't yours!
However, if you can wait up to 10 years, there is a plan to put more provincial newspapers online........
-
Hi Teaurn, thanks for joining in. I have a feeling we have been down the Chelsfield road before but am always willing to check! This family is such a pain!!
R.
-
The months of March and April were generally chosen because this was considered to be the cross-over point between maximum daylight and minimal residential mobility. Any earlier in the year and there would not have been enough daylight for the enumerator to carry out his rounds; any later in the year and many people would have been absent from their homes for various reasons, including harvesting and holidaying.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/08rn/
Stanmapstone has just posted the most interesting information about the timing of the census on another thread in the Common room about travelling families.
So logical, but I'd never thought about it before.
I'm still trying to make sense of why most of the Cork children were born in the first quarter of the year, though. Not the product of long dark nights with nothing much to do but try and keep warm, then ;)
-
You may have seen this site probably doesn't give you any more info but does list some of the Corkes in Reading
http://theweald.mobi/area.asp?Pid=PK.S.oaks&t=1&y=11&p=0
And in Tonbridge
http://sussexweald.org/area.asp?Pid=PK.T.bridge&t=2&y=13&p=0
-
And this family tree where a Mary Ann Corke daughter of Richard Corke married a Vant
http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=REG&db=757369&id=I3862
-
On GR in 2008 there was a query pretty much the same as this on but concentrating on Daniel and Jane and one of the comments was this
"Sorry Jill, you must have posted whilst I was typing. I think her name was Apps. Somewhere the name Cooley comes into it as well.....what I need is his birth cert!!!!! Arghhhh! Thank you."
Cynthia (who posted the thread) obviously feels the same as you.
The only Daniel Apps on BMD is with a family in 1851 that bears no resemblence to what we are looking for :'(
-
And I have no idea what this is I will put a link to the page as well but it is a register from St Stephens, it does seem strange that it mentions both the Apps and Corke names ??? Not sure if I am finding anything of use to you but that my lot for night :)
1845
Jan. 2 Richard Corke, full, b., draper, ."^, Walbrook ; Benjamin Corke, farmer,
& Mary Johnson, full, s., 3|, Walbrook ; George Johnson, farmer.
* by F. W. J. V. Wit. : George Johnson, Eliz*'' Johnson
Feb. 2-i Edward Richard Corke, full, b., brewer, ?)l, Walbrook ; James Corke,
trunkmaker, & Jane Apps, full, s. ; Richard Apps, glazier. * by
F. W. J. V. Wit.: Richard Apps, Mary Ann Corke
http://www.ebooksread.com/authors-eng/walbrook-london-st-stephens/the-registers-of-st-stephens-walbrook-and-of-st-benet-sherehog-london-vol-dno/page-13-the-registers-of-st-stephens-walbrook-and-of-st-benet-sherehog-london-vol-dno.shtml
-
Here's a shorter version of the link...... ;D
http://www.rootschat.com/links/08rp/
-
My goodness Teaurn, how busy you have been. I remember we went down the possible Apps line on our big thread on here about 2 years ago but it was, eventually, discounted. I also think we got tangled with some Corkes from Seal (? Igorstrav may remember), who had a Benjamin in there somewhere but they weren't ours unfortunately. The Reading and Sussex links are interesting so I will go down those paths, likewise the Vant marriage because that sounds useful.
Please keep looking as you seem to have an 'eye' for Corkes!!
Many thanks. R. :)
-
Hi, just to say swiftly that the Vant connection is not likely to be correct. I have seen the Ancestry tree and it has Mary Ann born in 1830 (earlier than all the other children) and married in the US.
I think it was someone just adding the name in because it matched, with no supporting sources.
Wild goose chase.
-
Oh Well :'( I'll keep looking though :)
-
Just thinking about all the births being around the same time of year.
Richard was a traveller so could he have been travelling around different areas and was in Cudnam to coincide with the times mentioned and the method of birth control was "he wasn't there" at other times ???
If that makes sense ::)
-
Glad I caught IgorStrav's post - I have just found time to go Vant hunting!!! Saves me the effort! I think I get the drift of your thoughts Teaurn!!! ;)
So, back to the proverbial drawing board. I am on GR and trying every contact I can to see if anyone has any knowledge but it's like a no-go zone! I can get contacts with people the Corks married but not with the Corks. :'(
Onwards and upwards.....R.
-
Did you try Corke I have found two on GR with Daniel born Chelsea and 11 with a Daniel born in a place called West Hoathley East Sussex.
-
Hi Teaurn, I went scurrying off to check! The two with Chelsea are in my contacts but they are only distantly related and don't seem that interested in the Cork(e)s anyway sadly. I remember getting all excited about the Hoathley one when the big thread started but it was disproved because he was followed through the various census as a different person. I still wonder if there is a vague link there with the family somehow though, but it's probably too vague a connection to help us out :'(
I will pm you with my name on GR so that you don't get confused. Thanks. R.
-
I am sure it is something you have already looked at but have you investigated any wills that may have been written by the Corkes or Cooleys
-
Hi Teaurn, I haven't but not sure about IgorStrav. Did wonder about getting Daniels but wasn't sure what it would show. Have never applied for one before but am willing to try. R
-
have found a two generation tree at the following link - no Daniel :(
But it does have a Richard and Jane with a wedding date but in Cowden ???
http://sussexweald.org.uk/N10p.asp?NId=4221775&noh=1
-
Hi Teaurn, thanks for all your interest and the research!
I haven't investigated any wills left by any of the Corkes or Cooleys.
I don't think that Richard Corke will have left a will - we have details of his death, still working at the age of 79 as a farm labourer, he was sleeping in a barn, and sadly set himself alight smoking whilst sleeping in the straw and died of his burns. He and all the family were definitely poor.
The Richard and Jane Corke in Cowden are another family - they have a number of children which are shown on IGI firmly in Cowden (for which many thanks, as it allows us to rule them out).
Royd, didn't know Daniel left a will? I don't know how to get hold of wills, perhaps Teaurn (or one of the other marvellous Rootschatters) will advise us
I know I haven't been on the thread for a little time, but I'm steadily going through the 1851 census images. Halfway through Leatherhead, currently.....
-
The Corkes are not in Leatherhead in 1851 >:(
-
Where will you look next, perhaps I can cover one or two for you :)
With regard to wills not sure how other counties work but in Cambridge, they have a book that lists all the wills they had by surname, and I was able to view the will I was interested in on microfilm. I could have ordered it over the phone for a charge.
-
Teaurn, that would be great if you could spare any time for looking at the images.
I started in Wisley and Pyrford, Surrey, which is where we KNOW the family were on 23rd February 1851, for the baptism of their son, Stephen.
I have looked at the images for the following places, and they're not in any of them
Pyrford
Ockham,
Byfleet
Reigate Foreign
Chertsey
Bletchingley
Leatherhead
I am really operating by looking at the map and trying to find censuses for all the places within a reasonable circumference. But I'm hampered by the fact that I have no idea if they would be travelling (after all, February/March isn't likely to be great weather, with a family of six children under 14), or what, indeed, if they WERE travelling, what they were travelling IN.
Or where they might be going. ???
The family don't seem to have ventured outside the borders of Kent/Surrey, but of course we only have snapshots of time when the children were born/baptised, and they could have gone further afield in the times in between.
By December 1853, two and a half years later, they're back in Seal, Kent, for the baptism of the next child, Eliza.
Looking at it another way, given the children are generally born/baptised December-April, the family are in Kent for Sarah, Richard and Jane. Then in Surrey for Daniel (?), James, Stephen. Then back in Kent for Eliza and the rest.
I will have another look at what Ag Labs would be doing in terms of jobs during the first quarter of the year.....
-
I will be going to work soon but after today have four days off so should have a bit of time to have a look.
If Steven was baptized at the end Feb 1851 theory ::) ::) says they cannot have gone two far in 5 weeks as the 1851 census was taken on the 30 march :-\
-
I know, Teaurn, such a short gap between last sighting and the census, which makes it so INFURIATING!
And of course they might not have set off travelling immediately after 23rd February......the journey time to consider could be anything between five complete weeks and a day.....
If they did start to travel, I would have thought that four miles a day in a cart would be about the amount covered. Anyone any views?
I might post this question on the Travellers' Board to ask for opinions :)
-
Have found this and although it is talking about Wiltshire I am sure the conditions and pay would have been similar. I know in Norfolk this was the case.
http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/LIN/wiltshire.txt
-
Found this at the start of the chelsfield pages. The small numbers hand written at the side could they be the ages of the people ???
-
Boats! We hadn't thought about boats!! Different! Amazing how so many missed being counted through the outdoor life though. It had to be ours didn't it?? ::) R.
-
Teaurn, thank you very much for the article about Wiltshire.
Its description of the struggles and hardships which common ag labs - from which so many of us are descended - is heartrending. >:(
I do hope that Richard Corke and his family managed to earn slightly more for their labour. To think that a researcher could not make out how a man's wages could possibly support a family.... :o
-
Have to admit it puts all our struggles today into perspective. :-[
I had ag labs that left norfolk and went upto Durham for mining :'(
-
And there is this one is Sanderstead. It gives us a comparison.
Alot of the ones I have looked at were blank, but I think this one confirms that the numbers at the side are the ages :)
-
Sorry thats a bit small ::) ::)
-
If the written numbers at the side of the columns are ages then the ones in Chelsfield cannot be our family.
The strange thing about FindMyPast when using the next and previous on the census orginals if you go backwards this page doesn't come up but if you then move forward it does ???
I'll keep looking :)
-
Teaurn, have you had a look at the census images for Pyrford to see if you can see these extra numerical notes?
I didn't come across them when I was looking - on A*****y.
Because of course it is most likely that if they were there on February 23rd, they were STILL there five weeks later.
-
I am looking but they seem to be numbered strangely. All the others where I have the first page its page 0 but there doesn't at first appear to be a sheet for Pyrford. Have just found Walton on Thames (on page 5 ) ::) which is showing none. Back to it then :D
-
All the villages seem to be mixed up and pages all over the place. So although I have checked lots of pages not having any success. :'(
-
I have had some very interesting advice from the Travellers' Board which suggests that the family would most likely have stayed put in the Pyrford locality in the period from the baptism to the census date.
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,459424.0.html
Am having a very good look at a detailed map to see where the other locations are, close to Wisley/Pyrford (Stephen quotes his birthplace as Wisley on subsequent censuses) so as to do a complete trawl of all the images in the locality.......
-
Have checked alot of the villages around Guildford Chertsey and Reigate but I am unable to find any of the front pages for the census return. :'( :'(
Typed in unknown and five came up but all adults.
So do have to consider that Surrey were not as efficient as Kent at recording numbers outside of the village houses ???
-
Teaurn, you are a hero!
Thank you so much for your interest and help.
Very very very much appreciated.
-
Hi Igor,
I can really understand your frustration. The answer must be there somewhere but it is very well hidden.
sorry I couldn't do more ???
Found a few Woolgars while I was looking for your Richard they were from East Grinstead ;D ;D
TU :-*
-
A FEW Woolgars? They seemed to be about the only family in Wisley when I was looking........
obviously had lots of children ;)
-
;D ;D ;D ;D there is a one name study for them.
Now I was giving up and then found this, but as the pages are all over the place couldn't look at the original transcript
1851 census transcription details for: Pyrford
RG number: HO107 Piece: 1593 Folio: 127 Page: 7
HOPKINS, John Head Agricultural Labourer Pyrford Surrey
HOPKINS, Ammelia Wife Horsell Surrey
M 0 1851
M 0 1851
M 0 1851
M 0 1851
M 0 1851
-
Sorry couldn't add to that it was disappearing off the page.
Seems to me that there were five people there perhaps on the land somewhere and they couldn't get the names or they moved off too early. Not the right number but maybe they didn't count or didn't see the smaller members of the family. And it is in Pyrford :)
-
I'm on A*****y and I can see the image, and sadly it's the Hopkins family....
John Hopkins 36
Spouse Annmelia
Pyrford, Surrey, England
John Hopkins 36
Annmelia Hopkins 37
John F Hopkins 16
Ellen Hopkins 11
Rosenia Hopkins 7
George Hopkins 3 Mo
Ellen Fisher 0
It's so frustrating, thank you so much for keeping looking... :)
-
Got quite excited then. :o ::) They must have been hiding in a barn ;D ;D
-
Hi Teaurn, would like to add my thanks too. You've been very diligent on our behalf and it's really appreciated. ;D R.