RootsChat.Com

Hi Alan,

Thank you for having a look for me. I actually ended up getting the Dunwich Deanery Baptisms as well, and came up with the same thing.

What I know so far is that Betsy married William BUCKENHAM in Wenhaston in 1823. She lived until 1879, dying in Ketteringham, although she lived in Hethersett next door. All of her census's (apart from 1841 which doesn't give a place) have her born in Middleton, Suffolk, about 1795.

John Spatchett is the only Spatchett I can find in Middleton at this time - in 1798 Land tax Redemptions, PRs and Newspapers. His second marriage was to Elizabeth Burgess, who was born in Wenhaston. He had an illegitimate child with Elizabeth between his 2 children with his first wife Sarah (nee TILNEY).
Sarah was buried in November 1792, and John and Elizabeth got a License the 27th March 1793, marrying the following day in Kelsale, which leads me to believe it was a shotgun wedding.

The first baptism (for James) is in 1797, which makes me wonder if I'm missing 1 or even 2 children.

Elizabeth Spatchett (nee Burgess) died in 1835 in South Elmham - which was where Betsy and her husband William were living at the time. John had died many years earlier in 1805.

As another link in a circumstantial chain, William BUCKENHAM lived in Thorington, and his father farmed land in 1798 in Wenhaston, which bordered Thorington.

The Buckenhams of the previous generation were Dissenters, so perhaps the Spatchetts were also? Although I haven't been able to turn any up.

If her baptism doesn't turn up, do you think there are enough circumstantial links to think John SPATCHETT and Elizabeth BURGESS were Betsy's parents?

A big thank you to both of you.

I think you may be on the money about Sellman & Co. I'd made out a Co and thought I could see "man", but the eye of faith can see Sellman now that you've pointed it out.

Could the photos be earlier than Edwardian, do you think? Thomas would be pushing 70 if that was the case, and I don't think he looks that old in the picture. Mary would be about 60.

Hi Bluenails,

It could be a little arbitrary as to whether a former occupant was listed or not, and in this case, they don't seem to have listed any former occupants for any of the lands that bound the Messuage.

Rebecca is selling land that is "parcell of the lands and tenements appointed By the said Richard Page by his saide last will to bee Sold." So this is only part of the property to be sold.

The Messuage would be a house with the accompanying land within which it was enclosed, and Carter is buying an additional "one ffoote and a f..?? in bredth" at the Southern end, which is essentially just extending his property further south. Perhaps the "f...??" could be a furlong?

The Barn must stand immediately South of this additional land on the remainder of the Page family property.

It could be that this was an access way to the rear of the Messuage or to the Barn which was built on the plot of land to the South. Carter wishes to buy it and add it to his own plot, but as it is so near to both Barn and House, they have made an agreement to forestall any arguments over reasonable upkeep of the properties.

There may be more in a Manorial Record if they are extant, although there is no mention of whether the Land is Freehold or Copyhold, so Manor Courts might be a dead end.

I hope that someone out there can hep me with a conundrum.

I have two photographs old family photographs that were kept paired in a plush leather standing frame.

The card around them says the photograph comes from "James Porter," 80 Alexandra Road, Manchester." I had found that he seemed to begin his activity around 1900, which led me to believe that the couple in the photographs were my great grandfather's cousin and his wife - Thomas Austin Guerin (1853-1904) and Anna Milford (1846-1932) they had married in 1902. Thomas had been born in Manchester, but based in South Africa for the previous 20 years. His last 2 years were in London.

I looked at them more closely recently and saw that there was a blurred imprint of a photographer's details in the bottom right corner of the woman's photograph.

I can't make out the photographer's name, but underneath in all Caps it says "St Annes on the Sea," which is near Blackpool in Lancashire. Can anyone make out the name of the photographer?

I've had a look at the original today, and while it appears to be an imprint in my scan, the original is flat.

I believe these may have been rephotographed at Porter's (he was based a block from my great grandparents), but photographed earlier. MyHeritage's photo date AI says about 1882 for the man, and couldn't figure out the woman's date.

Could these be my Gr x2 grandparents instead?

Thomas Guerin (1833-1904) and Mary Ann Fitzpatrick (c1840-1909).

Their deaths were during the time that Porter was extant at that address, and it feels like it makes more sense that a parent or grandparent's photographs were kept in such a careful display case, as opposed to cousins who lived in London.

Does this seem feasible?