19
Gloucestershire / Re: Wall & Browne, Stay Makers, Taylors and Habit Makers
« on: Tuesday 08 August 23 13:15 BST (UK) »
Two of the deeeds involving "John Wall, tea-dealer" are dated 1820 and 1821, so it looks unlikely that he died in 1817.
https://archives.bristol.gov.uk/search/all:records/0_50/all/score_desc/%22John%20Wall%22%20tea
Unless that's the son J B Wall. He would have finished his apprenticeship in about 1817. He called himself an accountant when he became a burgess in 1818 and an auctioneer later on, but perhaps he tried to continue his father's tea business for a few years.
The earliest is dated 1786, so he was in Bristol by then.
I would guess that tea dealing was always his main occupation
If you search the Bristol Archives for "John Wall" - without the "tea" - and ignore the socialist poet, there are more deeds. Some are fairly certainly for a different person. One in 1782 might be him. Two in 1823 with "John Wall, gentleman" involve the same properties as some with the tea-dealer. The change to "gentleman" suggests retirement and that this is not the son. ... although his partner changes from "Thomas Pope, carpenter" to "Thomas Pope, architect" to "John Pope, gentleman". If John P is a son of Thomas P but calls himself gentleman, I suppose so could John Wall junior. You might have to look at the actual documents to resolve that.
They certainly are a hard lot to pin down!
David
https://archives.bristol.gov.uk/search/all:records/0_50/all/score_desc/%22John%20Wall%22%20tea
Unless that's the son J B Wall. He would have finished his apprenticeship in about 1817. He called himself an accountant when he became a burgess in 1818 and an auctioneer later on, but perhaps he tried to continue his father's tea business for a few years.
The earliest is dated 1786, so he was in Bristol by then.
I would guess that tea dealing was always his main occupation
If you search the Bristol Archives for "John Wall" - without the "tea" - and ignore the socialist poet, there are more deeds. Some are fairly certainly for a different person. One in 1782 might be him. Two in 1823 with "John Wall, gentleman" involve the same properties as some with the tea-dealer. The change to "gentleman" suggests retirement and that this is not the son. ... although his partner changes from "Thomas Pope, carpenter" to "Thomas Pope, architect" to "John Pope, gentleman". If John P is a son of Thomas P but calls himself gentleman, I suppose so could John Wall junior. You might have to look at the actual documents to resolve that.
They certainly are a hard lot to pin down!
David