*COMPLETED* Henry Layton hit by a train

[LaytonLily]

I have this record :
Henry Layton 32yrs.  single.  Died June 1901.  Killed by PJR? train

I think this was in Clarke township, Durham

Can someone advise where I might find more information please.  A newspaper perhaps or an inquest report ?   I would like to know whose son or husband he was as well.   What was a PJR train ? (not sure of the correct letters)

[RunKitty]

Small piece in the Toronto Star on Monday June 24, 1901 page 03. 

Title of the Article is:
Death 'Neath a Flyer
Harry Layton Drawn Under a Train at Port Hope by the Suction

The article is really hard to read because of the poor quality of the scan.  I think the byline is "Bowmanville , Ont. June 23".  From what I can make out, the gist of what the article says is that Harry Layton died on Sunday June 23rd, 1901.   He was struck by the "flyer" train of the Grand Trunk Railway Line at a crossing.  The train was coming east from Montreal.  It is believed he was drawn under the train by the suction it created as it passed.  He had been working for John Galbraith of Darlington.  His family was from Clarke Township near Orono. 

Perhaps you could contact a library in Durham County.  I expect the accident was written up locally.  There might be more information about the family -- or, at least the article might be easier to read!!

If the library will do lookups, you can ask for the 23rd or 24th. 

You could check Port Hope (as this is where the accident happened)
http://phpl.ca

Here is a list of Durham area libraries
http://www.picnet.org/localinfo/durhamlibraries

You should probably start with the Clarington one.  It covers Bowmanville and Clarke Township.  Here is a list of some of their holdings.  It looks like they have newspapers on microfilm.

http://www.clarington.net/htdocs/heritage/pdfs/library%20local%20history%20collection.pdf

If the byline does say Bowmanville, then I expect the original article was in the Bowmanville paper.   

RK

[RunKitty]

Familysearch has this death record.  Must be him.  I don't have a sub to Ancestry, so I can't check to see if parents or wife is listed.  Perhaps someone else can??  Or maybe your local library has a subscription to the free Ancestry Library Edition?  It is an excellent resource.

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/JK83-Z4S

RK

[polarbear]

The death record indicates Harry was single. There is no mention of parents in the record but, given his age and location, I would suspect he was the son of William and Jane.

There is a tree on An****y that has the death attached to a Henry Hugh Layton b. 1864, the son of Edwin and Jabesa but that would have made him 37 when he died, not 32. Difficult to know for sure without the parents on the death record. Hopefully you will find a good writeup with mention of Harry's parents.

The tree also has a St Georges Cemetery Card photo that says Henry Hugh Layton age 32 was killed in a railway accident 23 Jun 1901. A second date of 25 Jun 1901 would presumably be the burial date? Again, no mention of parents.

As mentioned by RunKitty, you might want to check if your local public library subscribes to Ancestry Library Edition. This would give you access to the Canadian records, including images of the BMDs.

PB

[LaytonLily]

Thank you   -  yet again - for such prompt and helpful information.   I did find this death entry on A******y.com.  A friend has it though i do not.     I also think it is probably the son of William and Jane.

Family Search used to be so great to use, it gave lots of additional information and I have found some amazing details using it in the past.   I used to know my way round the website so well but it has changed since I used it last and doesn't give as much information and often leads you to a site which needs payment.

I will check the various website you suggest.

[polarbear]

About Edwin and Jabesh Layton and the potential problem with online trees ....

After looking further into the records I would like to make the following comments.

It appears from census and death records that Edwin never married.

In the 1881 census Jabesh has a 'W' in the column for marital status. This does not stand for wife as in wife of Edwin. It means widowed. His wife Maria died in childbirth in 1874. His young son Jabesh b. 1874 is also in the household plus the sister Charlotte. And Jabesh Sr is also a male.

In the 1881 census married couples have an 'M' in the marital status column.

So I don't think Harry could be the son of Edwin and Jabesh.

About the 'Hugh' ....

I wonder if when the cemetery was given Harry's info they were told Henry 'U' and interpreted it as Hugh? Assuming he is William's son (and it looks like he probably is), Henry is with his parents in the 1901 census as Henry U. I expect the U is for the usual Unett used so frequently in this family.

Anyway, food for thought.

Polarbear

[RunKitty]

Hi,

About Edwin etc -- he is also in St. George's cemetery.  In fact, quite a few of your Laytons are.

http://www.ogs.on.ca/durham/cemeteries/stgeon-a.htm

Harry/Henry isn't on this list, but there is a burial card for him from this cemetery (in your earlier post), so he must be here. 

Perhaps the inscriptions on the stones or the ownership etc information of the plots can give more information about the relationships in this family.   

This cemetery is now run by the Municipality.  Contact information is available here

http://www.clarington.net/htdocs/clerks_cemetery_info.html

The Durham Region branch of the Ontario Genealogical Society will do lookups for a small fee.  They have a transcript of the monumental inscriptions for this cemetery (looks like it is quite inexpensive)

http://durham.ogs.on.ca/index.htm

The libraries mentioned in my previous post might also have access to information about this cemetery.

RK

[LaytonLily]

Thank you for your further thoughts on this.  The more I explore the Laytons in Canada, the more confused I get and the more questions it throws up !   I think I will give up on them !
I too had thought about the Hugh / U being a mistake made at the time of writing down the details.  FH research is  much about knowing the background and the way things  were dealt with and therefore recorded.   

As far as Edwin not being married - I thought he was.  On the 1891 Census he is shown with his son Henry aged 17yrs and then in 1899 his death entry says Widow.   But do not find it easy to read / understand the writing on the Canadian census entries.   I find the names Jabesh - Jabez - Jabesa totally confusing, not being sure how it has been spelt on the census nor knowing if they are male or female ! 

I am in regular contact with a lady who lives in Ontario and whose direct family this is, but she is   unable to help with any FH at the moment - perhaps when she does, all will be revealed !

[Jacquie in Canada]

As far as Edwin not being married - I thought he was.  On the 1891 Census he is shown with his son Henry aged 17yrs and then in 1899 his death entry says Widow.   

You have misread the death registration entry for Edwin. The form has a line for occupation and under that asks if married or single. Edwin's indicates he was a farmer and single. The entry below his has widow listed in the occupation space.

I finally found Edwin/Edward on the 1891 census and I believe the enumerator made an error when listing Henry as a son. On the 1881 census there is a Jabesh Layton who was 7 so it's possible the enumerator put his name and relationship to the head of household incorrectly or his name was Henry Jabez/Jabez Henry and the enumerator listed his relationship incorrectly. He would appear to have been the son of Jabesh Layton.

Jacquie