RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => London and Middlesex => Topic started by: boscoe on Monday 04 September 17 04:33 BST (UK)
-
In the 1870s, if one registered to vote, how long did that registration last before being officially eliminated? This person moved to Battersea sometime between 1873-1881 and registered to vote.
[Electoral Registers, Surrey, England, 1832-1962] has him registered in Battersea in 1881. The 1881 Census had him living in Southampton in 1881, as he does until his death in 1890. That is, could he have registered in the 1870s and still be left on the records not removed by 1881?
-
Electoral Registers were compiled annually from 1832.
Because of the time taken to (manually) produce these registers, they were usually a year out of date?
-
Is it possible to be three years out of date? Name cited: Portsmouth, Evening News, May 11, 1878.
I recognize that I am asking for a personal opinion and not a legal opinion.
And, many thanks for your kind assistance.
-
You have to look at who was entitled to vote, and why, and on which Electoral Register they were.
And also whether he was a Borough voter or a County voter.
The Representation of the People Act 1832 introduced certain rules. In the case of Borough voters, men were eligible to vote if they were owners of property worth £10 a year. In the case of County voters, men were eligible if they either owned freehold property worth 40 shillings a year, were £10 copyholders (holding land from a manor), £10 leaseholders (as long as the lease was for 60 years or more) or were £50 tenants.
The 1867 Representation of the People Act extended the right to vote for borough voters to include all men who were owners or tenants of any dwelling house or were lodgers paying £10 for unfurnished rooms, as long as they had been within the borough during the whole of the preceding twelve months. This extended the vote to about 1.5 million men.
I believe it was possible to be on an Electoral Register on the basis of owning property, and on another Electoral Register on the basis of residency?
You need to study the Electoral Registers, and take note of ALL the information it contains. ::)
-
This person moved to Battersea sometime between 1873-1881 and registered to vote.
[Electoral Registers, Surrey, England, 1832-1962] has him registered in Battersea in 1881.
Codes alongside the entry sometimes give a clue as to their eligibility - who are you referring to :-\
-
Israel Wickens at 112 Grant Road [is the citation sent to me].
Since he worked as a rail guard, is Grant near Clapham Junction?
-
Since he worked as a rail guard, is Grant near Clapham Junction?
Online Maps show Grant Road is right next to Clapham Junction
-
He appears to live close to work. In 1871 he was close to Kingston Station.
The 1881 electoral register for Grant Road where he is showing covered the period 31 December 1880 to 1st January 1882. This register would have been compiled in the months leading up to 31 December 1880. The 1881 Southampton census would have been where he was resident 30th March 1881. He appears to have moved late 1880/early 1881 unless you have found registers in Battersea after this date.
Until recently English registers were compiled from information gathered in September /October and valid from the following February. Nowadays they can be amended throughout the year though still canvassed around September
-
Many thanks for your help. My correspondent sent me a copy of the register and says Israel was absent in 1880 and 1882 as "occupation of tenement." I just wonder if he was in Grant St. for only a few months. Newly married [1866], by 1867-8 he lived about 2 blocks away from the station [my 1985 walk] in Kingston as a "guard," undefined, 1871. I suspect a station goods guard. Next, he's in Southampton in 1881. I'm trying to figure out when he moved. Three facts: his son's 2-year photo was made in Battersea, meaning 1874. L&SW purchased the Southampton docks in 1775. Now, new, his 1880 voting registration. BUT...he gives court testimony [The Evening News, Southampton, May 11, 1778] about the Bishopstoke-to-Portsmouth train run as a "train guard."
Rosie, is there anything for Kingston like I found once in Southampton City Library, called: Kelly, Directory of Southampton, 1850-1974? He was there yearly from 1881 onward.
-
Rosie, is there anything for Kingston like I found once in Southampton City Library, called: Kelly, Directory of Southampton, 1850-1974? He was there yearly from 1881 onward.
The University of Leicester, Special Collections, has a whole host of Trade Directories ;D
Kelley's and others!
http://specialcollections.le.ac.uk/cdm/landingpage/collection/p16445coll4
-
Just wondered if you'd seen the record of Israel Wickens' very brief time as a policeman in Gloucestershire in 1859 https://goo.gl/jS9kbK
-
Unbelievable. What a find! And the details of someone unknown even to my father, now long deceased and who would have been fascinated. I really thank you.
Israel's height is my height when young, and well above all his descendants. My recent children's birthday gift of a DNA test noted Neanderthal #5, meaning height of 1 inch or above normal, and I figured it came from my mother. Both parents being British born and small. Maybe not.
Shaun: Do you think "dismissed" means he was fired for poor quality work? He seems to have thrived as a train guard for the London &SW, respected enough to represent them in two newspaper cited criminal accounts as a witness. And, he got my grandfather a job with them before his emigration to Canada.
-
He was dismissed from the police within 4 days of joining so something must have gone wrong very quickly.
-
You're right. And, I wonder if my assumption is also right. Going down the list quickly I saw no one under age 21, none. Israel lied about his age. He was 17, born in 1841. They must have found out. Also, they paid him for those days of work. Among those also leaving are citations of drunkenness, refusal to work nights, death, etc. some with citations of no pay. Israel is simply dismissed, meaning paid for those days of work.
I looked up Gloucestershire and there are many towns there. Unfortunately the record does not say where Israel worked. The place is so foreign to my genealogy.
So he must have boarded a train afterwards that went to London. He lived near Waterloo Station in 1861 and married a girl living on Waterloo Road 5 years later at St. Johns across the street from Waterloo. I do appreciate your finding, Shaun. It's a belly laugh.
-
Well, I did find a forgotten connection, Israel's brother, the last born, #11 Henry, for some unknown reason was born in Hempsted, Glouc. in 1853. His mother was b. in Oxfordshire 1809 and m. in Woolhampton, Berk., 1832, living for decades across from Aldermaston manor where the father Joseph was the gardener. They left in the 1860s for Hant 1871 and Surrey 1881, 1891, dying there.
Who or what took them to Glouc.? There's no way to see residents from 1852-1860, is there? The idea being that before venturing to Haunts 1871 and after 1861 Berk they went to Glouc.
-
Here's a mention of Joseph Wickens, gardener at Newark House, in the Gloucester Journal of 15 January 1853.
There's a Newark House at Hempsted, Gloucester.
-
You're remarkable, Shaun. Decades ago in Westminster when I read the Censuses of 1851 and 1861 they had Joseph at Aldermaston, but in 61 he was an undergardener. I wrote in my genealogy that "life must have slowed down for Joseph, now age 55." Not until the computer age did it reveal where they went afterward. But, you show that he had left earlier. So, it looks like he quit Aldermaston about 1852, was offered a good job at Hampsted, and for some reason left there and returned to Aldermaston. By the way, Henry was a 7-year-old school boy. I'm really impressed that both my mother and father's predecessors went to school years before the school reforms. I have a Derbyshire grd.mother in the 1840s who obviously could read and write. And Joseph's son, Israel, clearly had read the classics. His eldest son's middle name was Horace, probably the only one in England! But that name, for the most difficult person ever to follow, was the key to finding him after decades of looking. He as sick 1904 and died 1906 in South Africa.
-
He's a copy of what I have found recently related to your 1853 ad sent to Gloucestershire.
Reading Wikipedia, it become clear why Joseph went there. [The typed manuscript in Reading Library that I read years ago had many errors, based on the writer's memory]. Aldermaston changed hands. The new owner's middle name is Higford. Joseph went to Hempstead to help let [rent] 218 acres after a Higford died. He must have gained employment at Newark there and then. He was forced back to Aldermaston in 1860-61 when Newark was let for a school. Now an undergardener, 1861, sometime afterward they moved to Hants, he as a laborer, 1871, and to Surrey, again as a gardener, 1881, 1891, before dying there.
I still hope to find out who this Richard Phillipps is, cited in the 1853 ad.
Many thanks to all for helping me fill in the spaces. Especially, you, Shaun.
-
Not wanting to disillusion you about the name of Horace, but it was very common as both a first name and middle name - hundreds born each year. (Just try a quick search in free bmd)
-
Good to know. Thanks. None I've ever seen in my family genealogical searches.