RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Norfolk => Topic started by: Spidermonkey on Friday 26 February 16 12:30 GMT (UK)
-
Hello all, I would be very grateful for any assistance that people can give in sorting out my Cracknell/Otway muddles.
The bit that I am sure of - on Sept 20th 1868 at the parish church of Heigham, Norfolk. Henry Reeve married Emily Cracknell, details thus:
Henry Reeve aged 28 Bachelor Miller Residence of Heigham father Robert Reeve, farmer
Emily Cracknell aged 31 Spinster Residence of Heigham father John Cracknell, weaver
witnesses were Margaret Cracknell and Anthony Mills.
I then have Emily through the censuses up to her death in 1906. Aged stays more or less consistent, working out as having been born around 1837, and is always born in Norwich with the 1891 census saying St Giles St.
It is going back in time that the waters become a little muddied.
I think that I have the right Emily Cracknell on the 1861:
Coburgh St, St Peter Mancroft
John Cracknell H M 53 silk weaver Norwich
Mary W M 59 ? servant Norfolk
John S 21 cordwainer Norwich
Emily D m 24 boot binder Norwich
Robert Slater Gson 7 Norwich
George Cracknell Gson 4 Norwich
but this census suggests that she is married :o (although retaining her maiden name :-\)
I can't find her on the 1851 census, so I would be grateful for help there.
I have a baptism for Emily in Sept 1837 at St Giles, parents John and Mary Cracknell, and a marriage between John Cracknell and Mary Otway (widow) at St Giles, 1830.
-
I would also like to establish the connection between the Mary Kiddle who married Charles Ottaway on 20th Oct 1823 with 'my' Mary Otway (widow who married John Cracknell). I think they are one and the same. Mary and Charles had a daughter called Mary Ann/Marian Otway/Ottaway who married Edward Henry Page-Turner at Holy Trinity, Brompton. I am curious as to how one half sister ends up marrying minor aristocracy, and how the other half sister ends up marrying a miller from Heigham!
-
yes it certainly looks like married for Emily in 1861.
who do the grandsons Robert Slater age 7 and George Cracknell 4 belong to? they are down as sons of Emily but :-\
I don't suppose this Emily could be a daughter in law married to one of the sons instead of being your single Emily?
-
If Henry and Emily married in 1868 how come they have an 18 year old son Joseph in 1881 - Joseph born 1863 - doesn't quite add up does it if they were bachelor and spinster when they married.
-
I think George Cracknell belongs to Emily - he appears on the 1871 census with Emily, and is enumerated with the surname Reeve.
Robert Slater is a bit of a mystery, but on the 1871 census, there is a Robert Cracknell, of the right age, so perhaps he is the son of Margaret Cracknell :-\
1871 Census: 8 Gladstone St, Heigham
Mary Ann Cracknell W 68 No occupation ?, Norfolk
Margaret Cracknell Dau U 39 " Norwich
John Chas Cracknell Gson 14 Carpenter & Wheelwright Bayswater
Robert Cracknell Gson 16 Weaver Norwich
-
If Henry and Emily married in 1868 how come they have an 18 year old son Joseph in 1881 - Joseph born 1863 - doesn't quite add up does it if they were bachelor and spinster when they married.
No, it is all just slightly off!
-
I was just looking at the 1871 with son George born 1857......as you say all just slightly off!
I wonder where young Joseph was in 1871 age 8. Quite a tangle you have there!
-
I think on the 1871 census, Joseph is being known as Edward ::) On subsequent censuses, he likes to mix things up a little and call himself Edward, whilst on his license for the pub that he ran he was named a Joseph Edward Reeve.
As for a birth record for him - nowt for Joseph Cracknell or Reeve, but there is a record for an Edward Reeve, so I might have to bite the bullet and go for that one to rule him in or out!
-
Right I see it Edward Reeve. It's tricky because he was born before they married but I suppose could still have Henry's surname if they were together as a couple by then.
I don't envy you having to sort out this family :(
-
;D Thanks for the support Milliepede! At least I wont get bored..........
I have been mooching around freebmd and found a marriage for an Emily Cracknell in Mar qtr 1860 to either Richard William Herbert Froggatt or Oscar Thomas Osborne. I think that I have married off Oscar to the other female on the index (Ann Roe), which leaves me with a Cracknell/Froggatt marriage.
I would be very grateful for any evidence that could rule out this Emily Cracknell as belonging to me (cos stranger things have happened!)
-
I think on the 1871 census, Joseph is being known as Edward ::) On subsequent censuses, he likes to mix things up a little and call himself Edward, whilst on his license for the pub that he ran he was named a Joseph Edward Reeve.
As for a birth record for him - nowt for Joseph Cracknell or Reeve, but there is a record for an Edward Reeve, so I might have to bite the bullet and go for that one to rule him in or out!
Did bite the bullet and bought the cert for Edward Reeve Sept qtr 1862 Norwich, but alas and alack it is not the right person.
So, hello drawing board, I'm back to you!
-
And 9 months later, I am still at the same place.
I would really appreciate fresh eyes having a look through this, because I can't seem to make sense of Emily's early life!
-
who do the grandsons Robert Slater age 7 and George Cracknell 4 belong to? they are down as sons of Emily but :-\
I don't suppose this Emily could be a daughter in law married to one of the sons instead of being your single Emily?
Using the GRO index, the most likely Robert Slater is the one bn in Mar qtr 1855. He has a MMN of "-" ::)
The most likely George Cracknell is listed as George Edward Baldry Cracknell in Dec qtr 1856. He too has a MMN of "-" :D
-
George Cracknell/Reeve (on 1891 and 1911 census as Reeve) marries Frances Jane Croft as a Cracknell (4 Dec 1875). He gives his father's name as George Cracknell, profession Gentleman :D
John Charles Cracknell and Harriet Scarlett are witnesses.
Really need a 'fairy story' emoticon!!