Butterfields of Haworth, Stanbury, Keighley and Bingley

[Cliffelinks65]

Hello sallyyorks again,

Thanks for your reply - I agree that Susanna looks to be illegitimate, as I have noticed that some of her children have baptism records with just her name. A number of other trees on Ancestry also record her as Susanna Butterfield (spinster).

At first I wondered if she was the child of one of Elijah's mother's sisters....I've noted your information about Eunice and Mary, and obviously she doesn't show up there.

 Looking back at other records I have, I can see I have recorded further possible children to Joseph and Mary, as well as Eunice, Martha and Mary, so I don't know whether you have that information as well. I'll be checking them out again later today. (I have 4 more names as possibles).

As regards Susanna herself, I'm leaning to her being the child of a Joseph Butterfield and Mary Hird, who married in 1791. These people lived at Lane Ends when their Susanna came along in 1795.  The downside to this is that they seem to be both over 40 when Susanna was born...their birthdates show up as 1753 at this stage, but I need to recheck all this. A second problem is that I then have further possible children for them, but born after Susanna, which would make them even older parents. All a bit doubtful I think....

However, to get back to the main point...I can't see an obvious relationship between Elijah and Susanna; if there is one it may be through the extended family, rather than direct cousins......and indeed Lane Ends may have been a bigger place than I imagine. Given the population of the Keighley area at that time (1841) - about 13000+ I think - it just seems likely to me that there is a connection. What do you think?

As far as Lane Ends is concerned...is that area still there? Am I right in thinking it is in Oakworth?

And talking of places in the valley, where is Deanfield?   I have found a farm and some preserved cottages off Dean Edge Road which seem to be in a heritage category. A number of Butterfields are shown as living there in the early 1800s.....but that's another task......!

On we go....
Cliffelinks65

 

[sallyyorks]

Yes sorry Cliffelinks , you are right it should read Deanfield for Micheal 1795 son of Martha in my previous post, not Throstles Nest then.
Deanfield was just to the left of Pitchers Clough . I remember looking it up on an old map. It is as Throstles Nest now on Googlemaps. Next to the Bronte Barn Cottage.

I found Elijahs death in the newspapers. He had an accident with his cart on the Colne road.

Have all my notes out again, so will have a look for any more clues

[sallyyorks]

Looking back at other records I have, I can see I have recorded further possible children to Joseph and Mary, as well as Eunice, Martha and Mary,
As regards Susanna herself, I'm leaning to her being the child of a Joseph Butterfield and Mary Hird, who married in 1791. These people lived at Lane Ends when their Susanna came along in 1795.  The downside to this is that they seem to be both over 40 when Susanna was born...their birthdates show up as 1753 at this stage, but I need to recheck all this. A second problem is that I then have further possible children for them, but born after Susanna, which would make them even older parents. All a bit doubtful I think....

However, to get back to the main point...I can't see an obvious relationship between Elijah and Susanna; if there is one it may be through the extended family, rather than direct cousins......and indeed Lane Ends may have been a bigger place than I imagine. Given the population of the Keighley area at that time (1841) - about 13000+ I think - it just seems likely to me that there is a connection. What do you think?

As far as Lane Ends is concerned...is that area still there? Am I right in thinking it is in Oakworth?


On we go....
Cliffelinks65

 

...something about Joseph and Mary (nee Hey) and their children puzzles me but I am not sure what it is. I agree there are probably more children. We know that Martha, Mary and Eunice had illegitimate children, illegitimacy seems to be a common thread with some of these families, and that Mary was probably the subject of a removal order "poor child age 4". A removal order that is to the north Yorkshire border of all places. Then there is the strange "mark of" by Joseph at his marriage to Mary Hey 1754, a circle instead of a cross. It is all so confusing.

I think Lane Ends was the Oakworth road area as it went more into Keighley. Between the two.  There was a workhouse on Oakworth road, just below Exley Head/Highfield. I think that is where Marthas daughter was. Maybe some children worked in the mills who were sent from the workhouse?

[Sherry10]

Hi, another cousin here, most likely descended from Elijah Butterfield and Ann, nee Hoyle, via their son, John Butterfield and Alice (Newell), and their daughter Sarah Ann, b c 1854 in Oakworth. However like the other twigs, mine is equally slippery. We have done so much original research, wading through the records, but still can't be positive.

My Sarah Ann appears to have never married ( so no marriage cert to confirm her father's name ) though she had one child,  an illegitimate daughter, Esther Alice, my ancestor.
We have no real idea who Esther's father was, the great aunt who was told all the information gave a vague hint, but otherwise refused to share it with anyone else.

We do know the family came from the Keighley / Haworth area, and that great aunt used to visit one of Esther's relatives in (probably) the 1920s or 30s, who lived over in that direction, and who was a painter and decorator. I also was recently given Sarah Ann's Bible, which said it was presented by Oakworth Sunday School to SarahAnn Butterfield, aged 10, so looked for a SarahAnn living there in about 1864.  SarahAnn ( which is how she always signed her name, running the two together) has led us a merry dance.  She seems to have been born about 1854. I first looked at the Sarah Ann at The Grouse Inn, bc 1861, d.o Joseph, but then found her marriage and death. Ditto for her cousin, the one at Ponden Mill, d.o Thomas, then Harehills.
There was another Sarahann, who ran her name together, up at Stanbury, but again she didn't seem to fit. The best match was that of John and Alice's daughter , they were in Oakworth in the right period, before going to Saltaire. There didn't seem to be a marriage or death entry anywhere for their Sarah Ann. Also given the name of Esther Alice, it appears the son - Sarahann's brother - married an Esther, and of course Alice would have been her mother's name, so makes sense for her to have called her child after them? The year of birth fits too. Esther Alice was born, and brought up in, Sowerby Bridge, near Halifax, and I'd love to know quite how and why SarahAnn ended up there, where indeed she spent the rest of her life. If anyone there has any info or suggestions that might help untangle this conundrum then I'd love to hear from you.

[Cliffelinks65]

Hello Sherry10,

I have been looking at my information with regard to the Sarahann/Sarah Anns...Like you I have several which could fit!

Before going into this more deeply, can you confirm that Esther Alice married a Henry Stark?  I have looked at the 1911 census and have seen an Esther Alice married to Henry Stark in Halifax, with children William, Herbert, Harold, John and and Marian. The same address shows Sarah Ann Butterfield as mother in law, but also with a George Henry Butterfield as son.

I am on the case, but it would be helpful to know if these are the right people?   

Regards,
Cliffelinks65

[Sherry10]

Hi Cliffe,

You are correct. Esther married Henry Stark, the boy next door (and another nightmare family to research!). She was only 16 when she and Henry asked their respective parents if they could be married, and were told no, they were too young. As a result, George Henry was born illegitimate, and was raised by his grandmother SarahAnn. Esther and Henry threatened that if they couldn't be married they'd 'do it again', and with news of the impending arrival of William, the parents finally agreed to the marriage. Henry and Esther moved into a cottage nearby and raised their family. There were a couple more girls as well as Marian - Rosilea, Gladys, and Edith, who died when she was a baby. Henry begged his eldest son George to join them, and to change his surname to Stark (something a change in law by then permitted, if the parents of an illegitimate child subsequently married). However George was having a wonderful time on his own with his grandmother, who by all accounts spoilt him rotten, and refused to go. He didn't join the rest of his family until they all moved in together ( I get the feeling that SarahAnn was failing by then)  and even then he insisted on continuing to use her surname as a tribute to her. There was never any doubt whatsoever of his parentage though. This explains why in the census Henry has George down as his son, and SarahAnn as his mother in law.

Hope this helps. Regards, Sherry.

[Cliffelinks65]

Hi again,

Thanks for this - an interesting story!

.....and it explains George Henry being on the 1911 census. I have him with Sarah Ann on the 1901 Census, at Norland Hall, Sowerby, where Sarah Ann was employed as a housekeeper. There are several others at that address, and I wonder if it was a large farmhouse - maybe you know of this place.

In the 1891 census, Sarah is with Esther and shown as a boarder, with the occupation of housekeeper to one John Smith, a labourer.   This is at Nether Royd, Soyland (?), Sowerby.

Prior to this, she shows up on the 1861, 1871 and 1881 census forms as being with her family in Shipley.

  I found a baptism at Oakworth for 25 December 1851 for Sarah Ann, daughter of John and Alice. This was a "batch" of baptisms, as their sons Thomas and Elijah were baptised on the same day.  In fact the Oakworth records show a number of Butterfield "batches" being baptised at that time, with different parents, so I will be following these up next.

All these records point to the same Sarah Ann...except that the recorded ages for her differ a bit, particularly on the 1911 census. I would have her older than the age shown there(which is 54), and would say she should be about 61 at that time.  I have also found a death for a Sarah Ann Butterfield, in Halifax in 1918, where she is shown as 67.  I don't know if this helps or not?

Incidentally, all this has resulted in some additions to my own tree!

Regards,
Cliffelinks65

[Sherry10]

Yes, I have copies of the census entries, and also of Esther's birth certificate. SA was indeed housekeeper to John Smith and in my early research days put 2 and 2 together to get 5, as I assumed 'housekeeper' was a euphemism, and that John Smith ( a striking man, according to his photo) might well  have been Esther's father. Not so, came the barrage of protest from all the great aunts and uncles. She was it seems just the housekeeper. The family said she was able to stay relatively independent because she received an allowance from Esther's father ( who may, or may not, have had the surname of Thornber), and explains why she was a 'boarder'.

With regard to the discrepancy of ages, I'm still recovering from one who was aged 100 in the 1871 census - and still 100 in the 1881! It would seem maths wasn't always a strong point, and the further away from their birth the more unreliable it became. A couple of years out appears almost the norm. It just makes it harder for our searches.

Norland Hall was an interesting place. I've heard a lot about it though there's been nothing left now for generations. By the time SA and co lived there it was divided into 3 , with SarahAnn  (SA) in one, and the Starks next door (and was also haunted according to family legend). It was hit by lightning at some point and became ruinous, before being bought Randolph Hearst, the newspaper magnate, who had it taken down stone by numbered stone and shipped to the USA to be rebuilt. However it seemed something happened and it was never rebuilt but left in its crates. You can read more here:http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/lifestyle/nostalgia/tycoon-who-bought-norland-hall-1-1929574

And there's a photo of it at
https://www.calderdale.gov.uk/wtw/search/controlservlet?PageId=Detail&DocId=102275

There's nothing left on the site now bar a couple of stones
In the end the stones shipped to the USA were reused in the building of a church out there. I have the details and a photo somewhere.

Thank you for looking at your records. I've done quite a bit myself over the years too. Just wish I could confirm it all.
Sherry

 

[Cliffelinks65]

Thank you also for this additional information.

I note you said in your previous post that you thought Sarah Ann was failing round about the 1911 census - this might confirm a death in 1918 I suppose.

It seems to me that you have quite a lot of substantiated facts now - I have re-checked what I have and can't find anymore.

I have a lot of further information about Elijah and Ann, their children,  and the extended family - please let me know if you have any questions and I'll try to help.

Regards,
Cliffelinks65