George Rose born 29/1/1868 St Lukes Workhouse

[Nigel Porter]

Hi,

I have the birth certificate for George Rose who was born on January 29th 1868 in the St Lukes workhouse, son of John Rose (shoe maker) and Mary Sidwell.  I also have his wedding certificate, but in between he seems to disappear, as do his parents? 

I have a likely suspect, with siblings, in the Mitcham Industrial school on the 1871 census, but at three years old would he have been sent there?  Are there records for the St Lukes workhouse for 1868 which may give more details of his parents?  On his BC his mother is listed as Mary Rose formerly Sidwell, so I assume his parents married, but I can find no record of the marriage and I can't see them on the 1871 census?

Lot's of questions and I'm only asking as short of a visit toLondon I think I've exhausted my remore lines of enquiry.

Thanks

[jorose]

The workhouse records should be at the LMA.  Some of these records have been put up on A*****y.
http://www.workhouses.org.uk/index.html?StLuke/StLuke.shtml

For the 1871 census, that George Rose in Mitcham definitely appears to be aged "5" to me.
How about the one b. St. George E, aged 2, living as a nurse child in West Ham?

[Nigel Porter]

Thanks for this reply and I subscribe to Ancestry and can't understand how I missed the link to the St Lukes records!  What is a nurse child?  The reason I suspected the Mitcham workhouse was that having failed to find parents in 1871 I assumed they may have been orphaned.

I'll let you know what I find in the workhouse records.

[jorose]

I don't know if the St Lukes ones have been put up on Ancestry yet, but I do know that some London workhouse records have been. I think they're listed under "Poor Law Records" or something of the sort.

A nurse child was like a foster child; the people looking after him would have been paid a small fee for looking after him (by the authorities, not by his parents). It was quite possible for a child to be taken into care even if one or both parents were alive; say his father died, or was hospitalised/in prison/left the family, his mother may have had several children and not been able to afford to keep them all with her.

[Valda]

Hi

The poor law union records on Ancestry so far (all unindexed) are

London, England, Poor Law Records, 1834-1940

Edmonton
Hampstead
Holborn
Islington
Lambeth
Paddington
Poplar
St Marylebone
St Pancras
Southwark
Stepney
Wandsworth
Westminster
Woolwich

St Lukes poor law union was added to Holborn poor law union in 1869 and in 1915 became part of the newly created Finsbury poor law union. As far as I can tell Ancestry has put the St Luke records under Holborn.

Admission and Discharge registers for City Road Workhouse - Saint Luke's Workhouse. Surviving records begin in 1860.


There is a John Rose in St Lukes parish on the 1861 census a bootmaker married to Caroline with children. She is still there is 1871 but a widow.

Unfortunately a legitimate birth certificate is no real proof of a legitimate birth. It may just mean the mother bluffed it out with the registrar. I know of a whole family of 6 in the 1930s all registered legitimately but their parents never married. It isn't really until the second half of the C20th the system began to tighten up and more paperwork was needed to back up what people claimed.


The child in Mitcham Industrial school is the likeliest candidate for your George Rose on the 1871 census as Mitcham School was an institution associated with Holborn poor law union (it purchased the school in 1870 from St George the Marty Southwark poor law union). The surviving registers don't start until 1894 but the creed registers go back to 1869 (on Ancestry). The registers of children go back to 1872.

'Creed Register
From 1869, the workhouse master had to record the religious creed of each new inmate so that appropriate arrangements could be made in respect of their education (in the case of children), serious illness, or death.'

http://www.workhouses.org.uk/index.html?glossary/glossary.shtml


Information about Mitcham Industrial School

http://www.workhouses.org.uk/index.html?Holborn/Holborn.shtml

http://www.workhouses.org.uk/index.html?Southwark/Southwark.shtml



Regards

Valda

[Nigel Porter]

A year on and I've made it to the LMA where I found the records for the admission to St. Luke's workhouse of Mary Rose age 37, Daniel Rose age 7 and Robert Rose age 4 on 16/12/1867, with pregnancy as reason for admission.  George Rose was born on 29/1/1868 and the whole family were discharged on 14/2/1868.  Then my problems begin!  I'm fairly sure the children are the one's in the Mitcham Industrial School in 1871, but then nothing until George's marriage in 1887, where Daniel is a witness and his father is listed as deceased.

I've checked the 1881 census for any of the family, but I can't see any of them for sure, although there is a possibility of John and Mary in Croydon.  Also on George's BC his mother is listed as Rose formerly Sidwell and I know this is no proof of marriage, but again I've looked in vain for a John Rose/Mary Sidwell marriage.

Any help with these brickwalls gratefully received?

[Valda]

Hi

11th October 1886 St Thomas, Bethnal Green
Robert Rose 24 Bachelor French polisher 7 Diss Road John Rose Shoemaker
Eliza Underwood 21 Spinster Shirt ironer 2 Diss Road Frederick Underwood Labourer
Both signed
Witnesses John Davis? and Susannah Moyes?

George was also a french polisher and married in the same church a year later.


1891 census RG12 249 folio 108
83 St Johns Road Shoreditch
Mary Rose 61 Head Widow Supported by son Nuneaton Warwickshire
Daniel Rose 29 Son Single French polisher Sheffield

1861 census RG9 3373 folio 35
5 Pheasant Street Leeds Yorkshire
John Rose 40 Head Married Cordwainer Northampton Northamptonshire
Mary Rose 30 Wife Married Shoebinder Nuneaton Warwickshire
Fanny Rose 2 Daughter Sheffield Yorkshire
Daniel Rose 3 Months Son Sheffield Yorkshire

Births Dec 1858  Rose  Fanny     Sheffield  9c 313
Births Dec 1860   ROSE  Daniel    Ecclesall B  9c 208

Which tends to make the 1871 census in Croydon a much more likelier pairing

1871 censu RG10 841 folio 84
75 Church Street West Croydon Surrey
John Rose 49 Head Married Lodger Boot and shoemaker Northampton
Mary Rose 41 Wife Married Lodger Northampton


Irritating as that is it means the family is missing from one census - 1881 but found on others.


Regards

Valda

[Nigel Porter]

Hi Valda,  Thanks for all this information and it does look like it's the family I'm after.  I've found Daniel in 1901, with his wife and no sign of his mother, so I assume she's died.  I also think I've found a suitable Mary Sidwell near Nuneaton in 1851, but I've tried Ancestry and The Genealogist to no avail in finding the family in 1881.  I'll have to keep looking, but your information will be a great help.

Nigel