All I have to resolve now is the ongoing problem of man of mystery Samuel Feecham - my grandmother wrote that the French family name was FeChamp - which ties in with Feecham, but I can't find any FeChamps around at that time (Samuel was a weaver so it probably follows he was Huguenot as he was connected with them and married one of the Deverduns).
Hello again Jenny
I have had a look at your mystery man Samuel Feecham.
His burial records his surname as 'Peacham'
12th November 1820 St Matthew Bethnal Green
" Samuel Peacham, aged 63 of Woods' Close"This is definitely him as we know this was the family adress, from his son James Feecham, who gave for his date and place of birth in his 1850's French Hospital petition as "January 6th, 1799, Wood's Close, Bethnal Green"
This then is almost certainly Samuel's baptism spelt similarly:
9th August 1752 St Mary Whitechapel
"Samuel Peacham, son of Ambrose and Elizabeth Peacham, Bell Yard"To confirm this the couple had a n elder son John baptised at same church a few years previous and did spell their name 'Feacham'
This variability of spelling was noted as late as the late 19th century by the French Hospital who remarked that due to illiteracy the family had spelt the surname three different ways Feecham/Feacham/Fetcham on the same single petition.
Samuel's father Ambrose does seem to have been baptised as "Fetcham":
Baptised 9th August 1719 St Leonard Shoreditch, Middlesex
"Ambrose Fetcham son of Ambrose Fetcham of Hollywell Lane"I see Valda had already found much of this info in a previous thread here:
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,518666.msg3741094.html#msg3741094I cannot find a baptism for Samuel's grandfather Ambrose Fetcham in London, though presumably he would have been born circa 1680-1700. It may well be he moved from elsewhere in England to find work in the East London weaving trade. (There is an 'Ambros Feachom, son of John Feachom', baptised 8 July 1689, Romsey, Hampshire which could well be him). I am fairly satisfied he was not Huguenot. There was just as many natives working in the industry as French at the time, and this also fits with all my prior research which as a general rule at this time saw the French weavers clustered in and around Spitalfields and Bethnal Green, whilst the English weavers tended to live together particularly in Hollywell Lane, and New Inn Yard in Shoreditch and the surrounding courts.
Nevertheless, I double checked anyway and no sign of Ambrose in the French churches, or even the surname (or any possible French deriviates such as FeChamp or Feauchamp) in use amongst the Huguenot refugees in London, who were fairly well documented at every turn by the support and church systems set up for them here and external sources such as the Royal Bounty records.
Certainly by the time Mary Deverdun married Samuel Feecham 1777, the French community had become very Anglicised, particularly second and third generation English born members such as Mary, and marriages with the outside community were increasingly common, probably even accounting for the majority of marriages by that point, whereas just a generation or so before 1730-50 this was by no means yet the case.
In fact logically the petition to the French Hospital of James Feecham alone itself indicates this as the case. The preferable way to trace your French heritage for admission to the Hospital was through the paternal line, and certainly if he had been French through both maternal and paternal lines he would have very much stated so, as it would have added considerable weight to his case for admission there. The fact he only claims through his mother's line and her decent from the Deverduns and Bacheliers, seems to confirm the above and that he himself was aware there was no French roots on his father's Feecham/Feacham/Peacham family.
The surname database appears to further confirm this with both Feacham and Peacham having native English origins:
http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Feachamhttp://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/PeachamHope that is of some help.
Best Regards
Richard
