SCUTT. born, Patching / Clapham. 1851 Census & Marriage lookups Sussex.

[RGS]

of this parish, both of this parish, with consent of parents - so one of them must have been under age.

1851 HO107 1651 180 9     4 Rob Roy Square Broadwater Worthing
Sarah Burfield Hd Widow 60 pauper
John Scutt son 40 married ag lab
Robert grandson 14 ag lab
Susan grandaughter 12 scholar all b Patcham

There are a lot of Scutt families so it is confusing.
Andrea

Hello again Andrea,

Just going over your info It's a bit strange the mother Burfield 1851 having a different surname to son and grandchildren SCUTT, I suppose she could of remarried.

If it is my John which is possible (except for the Susan). That throws my theory on the parentage for John out.

I had previously found a Sarah Scutt no husband, bapt a John 8/12/1805 and Robert 2/1/1808 both Patching.

john's age is out by 6 yrs though.

I'll see if Burfield or Sarah takes me anywhere.

thanks,

Robert 

[RGS]

Hi Andrea,

Just had a look at 1841 census for sarah Burfield 50 with a william Burfield 40. Field Row Broadwater Worthing.

Also a marriage of a Sarah Scutt to a William Burfield 17/4/1817, Broadwater Worthing.

It's possibly that it could be the same Burfield as your 1851 find.

Have you been able to see if the Susan was a mis-transcription of Sarah.

With my slow typing and the leads you gave me I still haven't had a chance to look at those sites.

It's off to bed for me now, but I will be checking them out 1st thing tomorrow.

Robert

[sillgen]

Hi,
I had to go to work so have only just spotted your reply.   It did say Susan, not Sarah but of course there is always a possibility of enumerator error.
You can cut and paste your own work in by using the control key.  ctrl c to copy and ctrl v to paste.
It will be worth trying to look at the original marriage to William Burfield to see if Sarah is shown as a widow.   However if the baptisms only show her and not a husband it looks as if the children were illegitimate.  People often made up a father for the marriage certificate in those circumstances.
Eliza Lillywhite being a daughter in law is interesting.  In those days that sometimes meant step daughter.
Andrea

[RGS]

Hi Andrea,
Thanks for that hint.

With the mistranscription i was wondering if the original 1851 census document of john Robert & susan with Sarah Burfield showed susan or sarah.

In my search for a connection I found Sarah (no father) bapt a:
John Scutt             Robert Scutt
Male                     Male
8 Dec 1805            2 Jan 1808

So your theory of illegitimate children could be on the money, also Robert & John is a recurring family name.

I found a burial for a sarah but little detail:

Sarah Burfield, Female, 18 Dec 1855, Heene, Sussex, England

Sarah was recorded in the 51 and not the 61 census so the timeing is right.

By the way i had a look at those sites today I'm looking at joining the Sussex group, what I could glean from their web site it looks promising.

Robert
 

[RGS]

1851 HO107 1651 180 9     4 Rob Roy Square Broadwater Worthing
Sarah Burfield Hd Widow 60 pauper
John Scutt son 40 married ag lab
Robert grandson 14 ag lab
Susan grandaughter 12 scholar all b Patcham - should be Patching.  My error!

Hi Andrea,

I noticed that you have them all born of Patcham, a quick look via familysearch index, has them bo Patching is there an error?

Also in FS index under 1851 I found 2 Caroline Scutts 1 of Patching 1 of Clapham which are less than a mile apart but there occupations are recorded differently.

Caroline Scutt, 12, F, Patching, Sussex, Daughter, Household

Caroline Scutt, 12, F, Clapham, Sussex, Servant, Household

in the 41 census Caroline,3, bo Patching

in 61 census I couln't find a caroline bo Patching , but following the Chappell lead from Mary Ann's family group and grandaughter, I found a Caroline Chapell 23, ladies maid bo Clapham.

She also appears in the 81 census as Caroline Chappell, Widow, 42, laundress, bo Clapham.

If you are doing a lookup in the 1851 census would you be kind enough to do a cross check on the similarities to ensure I'm on the right track.
 
I also I want to again thank you for all of your help and those little tips are a godsend for a 1 finger typist.

Robert

[sillgen]

The second Caroline, born Clapham, in 1851 is a servant in the household of Joseph Wills at 2 Marine Parade Broadwater.  I can't find her in 1841.
Just as a matter of interest in 1841 there is a another Scutt entry in Patching for George and Mary, both age 45, a couple of households away from John and family.

In 1861 the Caroline Chappell you have found is age 23 and married.  A ladies' maid and working in a hotel at 2 Albermarle Street Westminster.  Can't find her marriage on www.freebmd.org.uk at the moment, nor a birth for the 2 year old though there are two possible Caroline Scutt births around that time in Sussex.

In 1871 RG10 1075 98 19 Park Place Brighton we have a Caroline Chappell 32 wid born Patching, laundress with son Samuel age 8 b Brighton and also a lodger, Frederick Gardner age 30.  Again I can't find a birth registration for Samuel.  In 1881 Samuel is still with her.
Andrea

[RGS]

Thanks Andrea,

The Chappell, name appears in Mary Ann's household in 1861, so the house maid would be her daughter.

Thinking out aloud, as the two carolines only appear in the 1851 census I wonder if it was a double recording of the same 12 year old.

Re: Eliza Lillywhite 25 daughter inlaw of Mary Ann Scutt in the 1861 census, she eventually married Robert Scutt in Dec 1865, so she could not be a daughter inlaw in the true sense.

So I chased your thoughts on her being a step daughter, I found her parents William and Harriett Lillywhite, they were still living together in the 1871 census and had Robert Scutt and Eliza with 2 grandchildren aged 10 & 4, living with them.

She must of been called a daughter inlaw to save face as 10 from 1871 doesn't make 1866, she was 3mths pregnant at the time of the census,  alice's bapt date in familysearch is 15/09/61.

Regards Robert