Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Ili1133

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
10
Lincolnshire / Re: Hester Wadkin acquitted of bigamy
« on: Tuesday 05 October 21 00:02 BST (UK)  »
Could this be Esther in Grantham in 1861?

Esther Taylor, lodger, married, b1826 (age 35) Barkston, Ag Labr's wife.

One of five lodgers at the Jobbers' Arms, 39 Castlegate, Grantham. The publican is a Thomas Taylor born Ancaster (coincidence or not??). There is no sign of Eliza.


11
Lincolnshire / Re: Hester Wadkin acquitted of bigamy
« on: Monday 04 October 21 16:24 BST (UK)  »
There may be a bit more to it than meets the eye. 1851 census has John Bescoby unmarried b1821 Kirkby la Thorpe working as a farm servant at Burton Pedwardine. It's likely to be the same John as
- there are no other baptisms for a John in the area for that period,
- Mary Bescoby (later Robinson) was baptised in the same church in Kirkby la Thorpe to George and Mary, the same parents as John, in 1822.

It would be fairly easy for the farmer - and the enumerator - to describe the servants on a largish farm as unmarried. So if John went to America after 1851, this could give William a basis for his warrant.

The Louth and North Lincolnshire Advertiser article states that John visited his sister in 1858 before going to America - is this a typo which should read 1848? Or does it contribute to William's deposition?

A John Bescoby aged 33 working at Howell, near Kirkby la Thorpe, was committed to two months imprisonment for larceny at Sleaford on 16 October 1851 - he is noted as 'of Scopwick' but worth looking into?

12
Lincolnshire Lookup Requests / Re: Baptism of Joseph Dickinson born between 1760 and 1792
« on: Saturday 11 September 21 10:21 BST (UK)  »
Mary's entry in the burial register says she was aged 65 at her death in 1791 - if that's right she can't be Joseph's mother. Could you tell us where the 3 April 1791 date comes from? Is it a birth or baptism? Could Joseph have been the child of Hugh and Mary's daughter Mary?

Apologies - misread your prepositions!

13
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: What is his job title please?
« on: Thursday 22 July 21 00:10 BST (UK)  »
Engine smith

14
I agree with David's reading of the 1861 census doc - Mary is recorded as coming from Bad(d)ingham, Suffolk. The 'where born' entry appears to have been given some attention i.e. it wasn't familiar to the enumerator, who appears to have checked the spelling (changed an 'e' to an 'a'), and reflected the pronunciation with a double 'd'.

If Mary was from Bedingham, Norfolk, there wouldn't be a need for amendment/annotation. Locals knew the parish - Bungay is the market town - and, by 1861, its accepted spelling. Because it's just off the well-used Norwich road they would know it's the other side of the river which forms the county boundary, and so in Norfolk rather than Suffolk.

That said, Badingham, Suffolk isn't really in the Bungay/Waveney valley orbit - it's much more Framlingham and even Woodbridge, and the main roads from that area lead south and west. But Mary Burrows married James Stone in Haddiscoe, which is actually 8-10 miles beyond Bungay and Mettingham, and not on an obvious route (you have to go either to Beccles or to Bungay to cross the river). As you say, horizons tend to be more limited. Work may have taken James and Mary from Haddiscoe to Mettingham after they married, but what took Mary to Haddiscoe in the first place? Family connections (particularly if her father died when she was a child, as the Badingham records suggest)? Is there any connection with the Burrows family in Haddiscoe at the time, and as David said, what happened to Mary's siblings? That's at least two more problems!

15
Suffolk / Re: Stone and Mayes in Flixton
« on: Thursday 24 June 21 00:53 BST (UK)  »
It sounds as if Mary was living with her son James at her death, doesn't it? You mentioned James had at least six children - I can see some of them (including a James and a Robert), but could you give the whole list of names to see if there are any other clues to who James and Mary's parents might be? The Ellingham baptism sounds like a possibility, but do the parents' names (Francis or Ann) show up in your tree?

Just to clarify - I was wondering if the Robert and Mary mentioned in the settlement/removal to Ditchingham might be one or both of Mary's parents, not Mary herself. As well as Suffolk, I'd keep looking at the Norfolk parishes on the other side of the Waveney like Ditchingham (where the Stones seem to have been well established).

16
Suffolk / Re: Stone and Mayes in Flixton
« on: Tuesday 22 June 21 00:49 BST (UK)  »

Flixton St Mary is just 'over the fields' from Homersfield, where plenty of Mayes crop up. Both churches served the same manor, and Simon Knott says on his Suffolk Churches website that Flixton St Mary's chancel was in ruin by the eighteenth century. My guess is that the church was only being used intermittently by the time James and Mary got married there, and Mary's home parish could have been either if her parents were involved with the estate in some way.

If Mary's home parish was Homersfield, there are a couple of settlement and removal orders in the Suffolk Archives which could help work out who her parents were. It looks as if a Mary Mayes was settled in Homersfield in 1755 and a Robert Mayes was removed from Homersfield to Ditchingham in 1756. You'd need to access the docs to find out if they were related/had family with them, but could Robert be Mary's father? It seems Robert was used as a family name further down the line. I couldn't locate Robert's burial however.

By the way, there is a Susannah Mayes born 10.1.1780 in Denton, Norfolk, just the other side of the river, to a Mary Mayes.

Hope this is some help with the Mayes family - the Stone family is a challenge!

17
Nottinghamshire Resources & Offers / Re: Offer: Notts Hearth Tax 1664 : 1674
« on: Friday 30 April 21 23:34 BST (UK)  »
Hi Alexander,

That explanation's very useful for analysing the entries further. One of the Francis Bacons was a blacksmith, so it sounds as if this may have exempted his forge from tax.

Helen

18
Nottinghamshire Resources & Offers / Re: Offer: Notts Hearth Tax 1664 : 1674
« on: Friday 30 April 21 00:04 BST (UK)  »
Many thanks Alexander,

It was great to hear from you so quickly and yes, it is helpful - and as interesting for what isn't there as for what is.

Just a question - given your familiarity with the data, would you be inclined to interpret

1674 Dunham
Francis Bacon, 2 hearths
Francis Bacon, 1 hearth (discharged by certificate)

as Francis senior and junior, or as a single Francis with some reason for exemption on one hearth?

Thanks again,

Helen

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5