Henry PATEMAN b 1840

[CaroleW]

The Charles Pateman aged 4 on the 1841 census was not born b Herts - only William James Briers was b Herts

[AussieKate]

yeah that is right Kezia was born in Langford, Beds

[CaroleW]

DUH - it's me.  How could the IGI entries I showed be the 1841 Charles - the IGI Charles was dead by 1841!!!!

I have deleted that part of the entry to avoid any more confusion than I have already caused - apologies

[AussieKate]

don't worry this Pateman Family is confusing me aswell

[CaroleW]

In 1851 Charles Pateman aged 13 b Langford Beds is a servant in Herts

[AussieKate]

interesting, do you have the reference no. for that

[CaroleW]

HO107 Piece 1709 Folio 237 Page 27

[bedfordshire boy]

This has all been covered in the other threads http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?action=post;topic=432910.0;num_replies=13 and http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,432902.0.html   . Having two too many threads on the same topic makes it too easy to miss vital pieces of information.

Charles age 4 was Kezia's illegitimate son. I gave you details of his baptism on the other thread. Kezia's parents married in 1803, and her mother was baptised in 1781. Charles born 1837 couldn't possibly have been their son, Kezia's brother.

James 20 was Kezia's brother, Mary was his wife Mary (Franklin), and Henry was their son. They married on 12 Feb 1839 at Langford

In 1841 ages over 15 should have been rounded down to the nearest 5 below. So James who was 24 and Mary 23 were correctly enumerated as 20.

The issue of Kezia's name has also been dealt with on the other thread. It wasn't a nickname. It was a real name. Just that she wasn't baptised as such.

David

[bedfordshire boy]

1851 for Stotfold Beds shows

James Pateman 33 costermonger b Landford Beds
Mary 32 b Landford Beds
Henry 10 b Landford Beds
John 7 b Stotfold
Charles 3 (presume the 1841 Charles died) b Stotfold
HO107 Piece 1753 Folio 339 Page 3

No, the 1841 Charles, son of Kezia, was still alive in Stevenage in 1851. He was the cousin of the Charles, son of James and Mary above. Ambly on the other thread shows him in all censuses apart from 1851.

Three or more threads on the same family with different people answering on each, and duplicating each others' efforts, is beginning to do my head in!