RootsChat.Com

My 7xGreat Grandfather Richard Hunt (1615-1685) was born and died in Inkberrow, he was married to Joanne Ransley and his parents I believe were Rychard Hunt and Alyce/Alyse Farr who were married in Kington (near Inkberrow) in 1598.

I believe there were quite a lot of Hunts in Inkberrow and I was wondering whether anyone had any knowledge of them. Noakes guide to Worcestershire (1867) lists a Mr R. Hunt as a principal landowner although my own branch had long since moved away.

Enigmatically Noakes states that George Lench, Thomas Hunt, Arthur Bagshawe, Edmund Bearcroft, John Fincher, and Thomas Hames, or Haines, all esquires of Inkberrow, were among the Worcestershire gentlemen whom Charles I fined for not accepting the order of knighthood


On the face of it that sounds like they had declined a knighthood. It seems odd that so many should have been offered to Inkberrow men and bizarre that they would all have declined. Am I missing something here. Anyone got any ideas?  Thanks in advance for any information.

My grandfather Sidney Hunt was born in Birmingham 1886 and last heard of in 1933. He joined the Royal Horse and Field Artillery 34/36 Reserve Battery Feb. 1 1917 no. 213214 and is described as a baker, (news to me!)

He is described as deserted at Glasgow 6.8.1917 and declared a deserter 7.9.1917. He was arrested by the civil police for stealing a motorbike and sentenced to 12 months hard labour 26.11.1917. He returned to the army 5.6.18 but then court martialled for desertion but not until 24.12.1918 where he was sentenced to 56 days detention for being AWOL.

He is described as Class Z Army Reserve 21.10.1919 and demobbed 31.3.20.

He was later arrested and sentenced to 3 years for forgery in 1923. A letter from the Royal Artillery to the police at this time gives the above details but terminates, curiously, with a character assessment which is difficult to read but I believe is "fair".

Anyone with knowledge of military procedure any ideas about this which all seems a little odd? He seems to have been posted to France on 16.8.17 which gives a reason for deserting but on reflection I gain the impression that he would perhaps have welcomed a move to the front. Odd thing to say but he seems to have been moderately well educated; fairly resourceful and above all very plausible if resentful of authority and would, perhaps, have seen (probably criminal!) opportunities for himself in France. Why was he so leniently treated for desertion? Why was he retained in the army for more than a year after the end of the war? Would have thought they would have wanted rid of him ASAP!

After he "disappeared" in 1933 when my father would have been 18, there seems to have been a family pact never to talk of him again. Certainly my grandmother, who I've recently discovered knew exactly where he was, would never say a word if his name was mentioned.

One last comment he served time in Peterhead jail and Dartmoor. Must be something of a record for distance apart!

On the 2nd. Nov. 1867 my great grandparents Thomas Henry Whitehouse and Louisa "Knapman" were married in Battersea. Trouble is my mother is convinced her grandmother's maiden name was Louisa Satchell. There is no record of a Louisa Knapman anywhere else but a Louisa Satchell was born in Newport, Monmouthshire on the 18 July 1850. we know Louisa came from Newport and we know Louisa had a brother James Satchell who was later living in Battersea/Wandsworth.

There is no record of a Louisa Satchell either getting married or indeed doing anything after 1867.

My view is that she was married under an assumed name, presumably being only 17 this was because her parents objected. The marriage certificate gives her age as 18 and lists her as a spinster.

My question is: would this have been possible? Would she not have had to prove who she was before the marriage? Was the marriage actually legal? Or does anyone have anything else to say on this. My mother remembers her as a dear old lady who could not possibly have been involved in such subterfuge!

Many thanks.