RootsChat.Com
Wales (Counties as in 1851-1901) => Wales => Flintshire => Topic started by: DINGinWALES on Tuesday 02 February 16 14:25 GMT (UK)
-
I am trying to find my 2x great grandfather John Williams. I have Marriage certificate for son Thomas so I know John was a Collier and he lived in Argoed. My problem is this. I do not know Thomas's mother's name and I am not sure of Thomas's date of birth. Looking at the census after Thomas was married (1860) he could have been born in 1836 1838 1839 1840 1841. I have two families which fit John and wife Ruth or John and wife Mary. Both live in the same place Buckley Square. Both have children called Thomas. Both John's are Colliers. Any thoughts on how I can decide which is the right family?
-
Did Thomas name any of his daughters Ruth or Mary?
-
Are witnesses at the marriage any help?
-
Thank you for your replies. Yes, He did name one of his daughter's Mary and none are Ruth. None of the witnesses are named Williams - one is Phillips (his wife's side) and the other is Hannah Hughes. In the family with Mary as wife he would have a sister called Hannah. I have searched to see if she married anyone called Hughes but so far have come up with nothing. My gut instinct is John and Mary as parents but...
-
Buckley I think would come under the Holywell registration district? There is a marriage of a Hannah Williams in Holywell in 1852 and on the same page a John Hughes. Would that be too early?
Marriages Dec 1852
Henry Mary Anne
Hughes John
Vickers John Harrison
Williams Hannah
Holywell 11b 505
-
Yes Buckley is under Holywell. It's possible. She would have been 16 or 17. :-\ I have Thomas and his wife Anne married on the 1861 census but I can't find definite entries for either John and Mary or John and Ruth at that time. I can't find John and Mary Hughes on the 1861 census either :(
-
I wonder if some kind soul (who is more experienced than me) could point me in the right direction as to what I might try to solve this. I have looked on several sites but keep coming back to the same problem. I favour John and Mary as Thomas's but I cannot see why they would put the wrong age for Thomas (either age 1 or 4) on the census. Ruth would give him the perfect age but there are no other Ruth's in the family. I don't know how to get beyond this. :-\ I have gone round in circles all year! :'(
-
We have been trying to help you, but there is not going to be a quick and easy answer.
So - you have two Thomas, born in the same place in the same year. One with parents John and Ruth, and one with parents John and Mary.
A Thomas with father John marries in 1860, and that is "your" one.
So - can you find what happened to the "other" one? Can you follow the two Thomases, through censuses, finding a marriage for the "other" one etc etc, up to two deaths? Hopefully something along the way might help rule one or the other in or out as being yours. It might mean thinking outside the box, e.g following up witnesses as we were trying to do with the Hannah. So you may want to try and find what other christenings there were for John and Mary and for John and Ruth, and see if following either group of siblings brings any clarity.
I've a feeling it will be a long hard road, but hopefully you may sort it eventually.
No-one ever said Family History was easy! Well, actually that's not true, a lot of people may say it is easy, but they are wrong!!!
-
Thanks!
Unfortunately, I've tried most of what you suggest and had no luck. Why would christenings give any clues???? ( not that I've found any :-[).
Sorry, I wasn't trying to suggest that you haven't offered any help. I just thought perhaps I wasn't searching the right areas.
-
For finding the siblings of each Thomas. So you have a full picture of all John and Ruths children and all John and Mary's, in the hope that one of them at some stage will have something that links them to your Thomas, or to rule out any link to your Thomas.
-
Thanks. I haven't been as thorough as I thought I'd been. I'll start again! :)
-
Hi,
Lizdbs suggestion of widening your search to other possible family members is an excellent one. Sometimes a sibling or other relative can be the key... perhaps listed with grandparents or aunts/uncles on a census etc.
Have you tried using the free GRO birth record search to establish the maiden names of both Ruth and Mary? You could look for all of the Thomas Williams births recorded between 1837 and 1841 on the index.... check Holywell and perhaps Great Boughton. You can look for the other siblings from each of the possible families you are considering. Hopefully, you can find the mothers maiden names for each family. Checking baptisms is also a good idea.
RK
-
Thanks RK. I've set up two trees and I'm trying to find as much as I can on both families. I found the likely Thomas's within the age range on North Wales BMD but there were quite a few. This is how I managed to narrow it down to two possible mothers. Unfortunately, I haven't found any baptisms yet. Actually, I haven't found anything new for a year. I am grateful for the suggestions you've all given me and I'll just keep trying.
-
What is Thomas' address on his marriage certificate?
While both candidate families are in Buckley Square in 1841,in the 1851 census,John and Mary are still in Buckley Square,Argoed,but John and Ruth are listed under Buckley Road,Bistre.
Regards
Roger
-
Thanks for this, Roger.
The address on Thoas's marriage certificate (in 1860) is Argoed. I don't know where the division of Argoed and Bistre would have been but I think the addresses would have been very close. I hadn't considered it. I'll try and find a map. :)
-
Hi,
Have you checked newspapers? Perhaps there is an account of the marriage of your Thomas ... listing relatives and guests? How about funeral notices for your Thomas or the possible Johns?
Do you know where your Thomas is buried? Who is buried with him... or nearby in the same cemetery?
Did anyone leave a Will?
RK
-
Thanks for your suggestions RK. I really do appreciate your thoughts.
I haven't turned anything up so far. No birth certificates (not sure which one to send for and if I had one, I wouldn't know if it was my Thomas). No baptisms that fit. Nothing in newspapers. Not sure when he died but think it may be either 1901 and 1911. Wife, Ann also seems to have disappeared (died?) after 1901. I have searched (physically) all the graveyards in Buckley but can't find him.
I haven't been able to find any records on any of Thomas's possible siblings.
I can't find another marriage for the Thomas that isn't mine. I am well and truly muddled. :(
I will surely find something EVENTUALLY! :)
-
I hope I can help on the geography. Buckley didn't officially exist until 1897 when the parish of Buckley (Mold) was carved out of Mold Rural parish. However, there was also the parish of Buckley (Hawarden) which was created out of Hawarden parish then in Chester district. The whole of Buckley was donated to that district in 1902, but the Flintshire parishes were used to create Hawarden reg district the next year.
From old maps it seems that the boundary between the two Buckley parishes (and hence between Mold and Hawarden earlier) ran a little north of Mold Road in the west and then crossed the future A549 to run somewhat south of Chester Road in the east.
Buckley Square I remember from its post office which was to the west near Stanley Road and the pub (Hope and Anchor?) and west of Bistre Church, but it's possible that some of the Buckley Square area came under Hawarden. The boundary with Argoed must have been unofficial in those days but nowadays is the top of Pren Hill a little further west again.
There is a modern ward of Argoed consisting of Mynydd Isa, Bryn-y-Baal and New Brighton but that may not correspond to the original Argoed. The area was then much more rural. The nearest colliery would be in Buckley itself, I think - there was one at the Elm, though another at the Laurel in Sychtyn and others at Padeswood and Mold.
-
Thanks Chris,
Your geography certainly does clear some things up. I've lived in the area for 60 years and didn't know how the parishes were created. Do you happen to know where Buckley Road was? I'm not at all sure but I thought Argoed was part of Bistre. None of my Williams family seemed to have strayed much further than the common (later addresses are all The Mountain, Buckley Mountain, Ewloe Wood). I wonder if the area around The Square extended to the Common?
Of course, this doesn't get me any further but its all really interesting so thank you :)
-
You're welcome. I've never heard of Buckley Road. The Mountain, Ewloe Wood - those would be in Hawarden parish so in Chester district - earlier Great Boughton. Yet more places to look up those Wililams, I'm afraid
-
Having looked at the originals of the 1851 census,entries for Buckley Square and Buckley Road are intermingled.I haven't been able to find Buckley Road on an old map,I suspect it may be the current Mold Road.
Regards
Roger
-
Hi,
Looking at baptisms in Mold/Holywell/Buckley/Hawarden between 1836 and 1842... I found a few for Thomas Williams, father John.
1837, John and Elizabeth of Argoed. John is a farmer
1837, John and Mary of Argoed. John is a collier (bapt date is May 13 1837)
1839, John and Mary of Broncord. John is a Bricklayer
1840, John and Mary of Mold. John is a Tailor
1842, John and Margaret of Mold. John is a Gardener.
I can see the 1841 census record with John and Ruth. Not seeing a baptism record for Thomas with mother Ruth?? Have you found a marriage for a John and Ruth that works??
RK
-
I have searched (physically) all the graveyards in Buckley but can't find him.
Have you checked the burial registers? Not all of the graves will have markers.
Sorry this is so difficult for you... I have a lot of family from this area too (first thing I did was to check and see if your Thomas was somewhere on my tree. No luck :'(). Keep at it. Hopefully something will turn up. :)
RK
-
There is some data that may partially reveal the "John and Ruth" family.
It starts with the 1851 census where there is a step-son John Ibal.
Ruth Rowland married Edward Ibal in 1815 and had children Robert(who died in infancy),John(1820),Sarah(1822),William(1824).I think these,with Sarah as Jane,are the first three children in the 1841 census(notorious for age inaccuracy even given the rounding).Edward dies in 1825.
A Ruth Ibal(widow) then marries a John Price in 1828,but I suspect he dies in 1830.
There is then a marriage of Ruth Rowland to a John Griffiths in 1836.(Perhaps she has reverted to her maiden name-I can only find one Ruth Rowland born in the area).There are two children born to John and Ruth Griffiths,Ann(1837),Thomas(1839).John is given s a collier from Argoed.This then matches the profile of the family in 1841,but why do they appear as Williams rather than Griffiths?
(I haven't yet checked to see if John Griffiths dies 1840 or 1841 and there is another marriage to John Williams!
Regards
Roger
-
RK you are such a star! Thank you.
Out of the list you posted only Thomas 1837 fits and this is the one I have been favouring. However, on the marriage certificate in 1860, Thomas is 19 and Anne 22 and this is why I carried on looking and turned up John and Ruth.
I turned my attention to Anne. On the 1841 census, it doesn't look as if Anne was born. She was 9 on the 1851 census. If there was a mistake and he was 22 and Anne 19 then John and Mary seem to fit perfectly.
If I could eliminate John and Ruth as parents (do I need to?), then I would be as certain as I can be that I've got the right family. I can't find a marriage for John and Ruth. I suspect she was married before (stepson John Iball).
Burial Registers??? I've looked at Flint Burials - no luck.
Thank you, Roger. Buckley Road/Mold Road would make sense.
-
:) :) :)Good gracious, Roger. Your information will keep me busy all day!
I can only marvel at the way you lot fit these things together.
Many, many thanks!!!!!
-
Wow Roger... that is certainly a fascinating possibility. If I read you correctly, that Thomas is actually born Thomas Griffiths, but then later would take the last name Williams (perhaps if Mom Ruth married again to a John Williams before the 1841 census).
Looks like you had better not count out Ruth and John as parents yet... still more checking to do!! :)
RK
-
Thomas being only given as 19 in 1860 is problematic(unless the Registrar transposed their ages!) Perhaps it is necessary to look for a third couple!
Regards
Roger
-
:o :o :o
-
Curiouser and curiouser..
There is an 1860 burial record for Ruth Griffiths,aged 60 of The Square,Bistre,wife of the late John Griffiths,sexton(i think that's what it says).
Regards
Roger
-
Without exception, on the census between 1861 and 1901, Thomas is older than Anne which surely suggests the ages are the wrong way round on the Marriage Cert....but where does that leave me?
-
I think the evidence on balance is in favour of Thomas being the son of John and Mary,but I can't find anything at the moment that provides incontrovertible proof.I suspect the Hannah Hughes,witness,is Hannah Philips(registered as "Anna" to William and Harriet in 1836) who married a Joseph Hughes( a "horse shoer") in 1st quarter 1860.
Regards
Roger
-
Thank you, Roger. I had hoped that Hannah was on the Williams side. :'( I hadn't found the Joseph Hughes marriage.
I will keep looking but I certainly haven't got your skills at turning up evidence.
I really appreciate the time you have taken to do this. :)