BURROWS Which Couple is Most Likely to be Correct

[BUZZ]

I have been trying to find the correct parents for an Ancestor whose name was William Burrows but have a few contenders.

From the 1841-51-61 census with his Wife Rachel, William states that he was born in St. Pancras about 1800.

I have not found a birth in St. Pancras, the nearest I have found are a William Burrows Christened 4/3/1798 St. Giles Cripplegate whose Parents were John and Jane.  This is significant as William and Rachel named their first two children Jane and John.

A William Burrows born 26/5/1799 in Marylebone, Parents are James  and Elizabeth.

A William  Burrows born 11/1/1801 in Marylebone, Parents William and Ann.

I found a Marriage in St. Pancras of a William Burrows and Alice Jackson 2/9/1787 but no son named William from that Marriage. 

William and Rachel's other children's names are Charles, William, Archibald or George and Frederick.

I would welcome any views on the above marriages.

Buzz

[Redroger]

Personally Iwould go with the Cripplegate couple if I had any evidence that the family followed this type of naming practice. It is quite possible that in the 19th century he did not know where he was born, had probably been told his parents married in St. Pancras, and then made the assumption he was born there.

[Nick29]

One avenue you might try is to locate likely siblings of William (sometimes you can, if the family all reside in the same area), and then check for baptisms of these children.   If you are very lucky, you may find a common denominator.

[johnxyz]

A number of comments:

You need to bear in mind another possibility - "none of the above" - ie you have not yet found the right William. One way to get a handle on this is to look at all William Burrows in the 1851 and 1861 census, born London between say 1797 and 1803. This approach can be extremely tedious, but it doesn't look as if there are too many possibles.

The traditional naming pattern is eldest daughter after maternal grandmother, rather than paternal. What evidence do you have on Rachel's parents? If her mother is not Jane, it strengthens your case.

A quick scan of IGI for possible siblings of William showa a few, but doesn't seem to bring up any of the names you give fpr the other children of William & Rachel.   I'd want to see  evidence on Rachel's siblings as well.

The problem, as I think you have recognised, is moving from something that is a possible soultion, to something that is demonstrably the right solution.

John

[Redroger]

The eldest daughter after maternal grandmother, also applies on the male side, i.e. eldest son after paternal grandfather etc.etc.Some families followed the pattern, more I think did not. So if you have evidence they did it is worth a shot.

[BUZZ]

Thank you all for your replies.

I have very little information on William except what I have gathered from the census.

William and Rachel Married on the 9/10/1818 at West Kilbride Scotland, Rachel was born there on the 20/11/1796 her parents names were John and Janet her siblings that I know of were Mary,Janet,Jean,Margaret and Elizabeth.

Buzz

[Slinger]

Hi Buzz,
I've recently re-visited William's baptism.

There are a couple of mistakes in your comments here about William.

In 1851 he was indeed with Rachel, (albeit named as Fredk) born about 1800, Middx, St Pancras.
However in 1861 he was a widower living with his son Archibald George, born about 1800, Middx, Bloomsbury.
Also according to the IGI his first daughter was Jean (named after Rachel's sister?) not Jane.

It is my experience that when censuses give different birthplaces, the one to put least faith in is the "default" of being born in the same place as the census was taken - in this case St Pancras.
In 1861 he specifically named Bloomsbury, not St Pancras, as his birthplace!

So I  favour a birth & baptism in Bloomsbury. 
I've many times previously looked on Ancestry and found nothing obvious, but very recently I came across a baptism at St Giles in the Fields, which is close to the southern edge of Bloomsbury.  I think this church's records are a very new addition to Ancestry and only cover baptisms 1800 - 1812 so I was lucky to find:-

2nd May 1800           William Burrows  of  William & Jane

The location is OK for Bloomsbury & the date is spot on  - I dont think we will find a better candidate.   (Pity about the Jane connection)

I also found a sister of William, same church,
7 Apr 1803      Jane Elizabeth Burrows  of  William & Jane

Regards,
Brian

[BUZZ]

Hello Brian,

Thank you for all the information.

You are correct about their daughter's name being Jean not Jane. And I had completely overlooked the birthplace for William in the 1861 census.

Jean born 26/4/1819, and their second child John born about 1821, were both born in West Kilbride, the next child I know of is Charles who was born 4/4/1829 at the Lying in Hospital, Endell St., Holborn, and was Baptised there on the 8/4/1829.

Jean married John Brett 16/12/1846 St Pancras.
Charles married Elizabeth Wardle 23/9/1849 St George's, Hanover Sq.,

Anyone  who has any facts on William and Rachel or any of their children or descendants or ancestors is welcome to enter it on this page.

Regards Buzz

[Redroger]

I believe that all these London parishes are close together which can only complicate matters.