FORSTER - Somerford Booths - late 1700s to mid 1800s

[Rowan Tree]

Hi All,

Found an interesting little puzzle in my tree and would love to get a fresh view on what I've found.

I'll try and keep this concise (and not too rambling or confusing - lol).

My main questions are: Was Margaret FORSTER ever really married and who was George FORSTER?

Here we go....

St. Mary, Astbury (BT off Find my Past - doesn't look like FindMyPast have the PR)
Bapt. 10/05/1812
Mary daughter of Margaret FORSTER, Somerford Booths

Mary's recorded age at burial, 58, gives a birth year of c. 1811 and her age on the 1851 and 1861 censuses give a birth year of c. 1812. These ages/aprox. birth years plus the fact that Margaret FORSTER lives next-door but one, on the 1841 Somerford Booths census, to her now married daughter, Mary ROBINSON, makes me think the above baptism is a good fit.

I've not found any siblings who look like a match for the above Mary and I've not found a marriage for Margaret FORSTER either before or after the baptism of her daughter.

I'd originally thought that Mary FORSTER was an illegitimate and only child.

Mary FORSTER goes on to marry Peter ROBINSON (31/12/1832 St. Mary, Astbury). Mary and Peter live their whole lives in Somerford Booths. Mary dies 1869 and is buried at St. Mary, Astbury.

I found Margaret FOSTER's burial as follows;
St. Mary, Astbury
02/05/1847
Margaret FORSTER, Somerford Booths, age 70

As I know so little about Margaret I decided to buy her death certificate (and this is where it gets puzzling).

For the most part the death cert. is pretty standard. For example, the death was registered by Margaret's son-in-law, Peter ROBINSON, which is what I would have expected. There is a slight anomaly in that both place of death and resident of informant is recorded as Congleton (both addresses should have been correctly recorded as either Newsbank, Somerford Booths or just plain old Somerford Booths). I believe the recording of 'Congleton' was the registrar being a bit lazy and simply entering the reg. district. Where the death cert. really sparks my interest is column 5 (occupation). Margaret FORSTER's occupation is recorded as; "Widow of George FORSTER, labourer".

If no father is recorded with Mary's baptism (not even posthumously) and if I can't find any marriage of a George FORSTER to a Margaret in the right time-frame, then who was the George FORSTER on Margaret's death cert. and was she ever really married?

I've looked through the local PR's for any likely suspects for George FORSTER and the only George I can find (who is old enough to be Mary's father) is the following;

St. Mary, Astbury
Burial 06/04/1828
George FORSTER, Lockbrook (or Lochbrook also known as Loachbrook), age 37 (so born c. 1791 making him around 21 at the time of Mary's birth).

There is a lady named Sue with a thread on RootsChat trying to find out more about the above George FORSTER. Sue is descended from a legitimate child of George's born through his marriage to Jane Bebington/Bebbington (George and Jane married 01/07/1816).

Any thoughts on this would be very much appreciated.

Many thanks, Rowan Tree 


 

[joboy]

I have a 'loose' George Foster/Forster in my tree .... of course it is a common name which makes it difficult however here's what I have;
'The following information was provided by Joan Quinlan from documents I have not yet seen.
According to his convict record he was convicted on 10 Jul 1820 at Berks. Assizes and sentenced to 7 years. His description was: 5' 81/2" tall, complexion pale, sall., black hair and grey eyes - age 31 and occupation plough and milkman.
According to his Certificate of Freedom (27/1051 of 30 November 1827) , his year of birth was 1791. He had been assigned to Mr James A. Hassall/Haysall.  [HASSALL is correct.]
His dob  corroborated by his marriage record from 1833 when he is described as 42 yrs old.
George died at Burraja near Corowa 10 Sept 1886 - age stated as 100 years.'

Even though he was convicted at Berks Assizes there is no evidence as to his place of birth.
Hope I have'nt led you up a gum tree.
Joe

[Rowan Tree]

Hi Joe,

Thanks for your reply - it makes for an interesting read.

I'm trying not to make any assumptions about my mysterious George FORSTER. I'm not even 100% sure he ever even existed, but, if he did exist I'm more than happy to keep an open mind and cast a wide net.

However (sorry - lol)  if the George FORSTER mentioned on Margaret FORSTER's death certificate was an actual real man (and not a figment of imagination to "legitimize" Mary FORSTER's birth), then it appears he pre-deceased Margaret who died 28/04/1847. This would mean the George I'm looking for had died at least 39 years before the death of the George you mention.

But I'm still thankful for your input - thanks again Joe 

P.S. Here is a link to the other Roots thread that mentions (possibly the same) George FORSTER;
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=566754.0

[elzabels]

You say that the baptisms from the BT's on FindMyPast, have you looked at the original entry in the Parish Registers?

With regard to the death certificate, hte information is only as good as the informant knows, therefore if the son in law was led to believe that the late George FORSTER was the father of his wife, then that is what he would have given the Registrar!

[Rowan Tree]

You say that the baptisms from the BT's on FindMyPast, have you looked at the original entry in the Parish Registers?

With regard to the death cert., the information is only as good as the informant knows, therefore if the son in law was led to believe that the late George FORSTER was the father of his wife, then that is what he would have given the Registrar!

Hi elzabels,

Thanks for your post.

I'm planning on viewing Astbury PR's on microfilm at Manchester Library in the (hopefully) not to distant future. I don't know if there will be a discrepancy between the BTs and the PRs but I'm eager to find out.

Re. information only being as good as the informant. I totally agree. Mary ROBINSON nee FORSTER could have been raised on stories of her "father George Forster" but that doesn't mean there ever was a Mr Forster. Obviously someone had to have been Mary's father but that doesn't mean Margaret was ever married. It would be very interesting if I found the PR made some reference to Mary being the illegitimate daughter of (rather than just the daughter of) Margaret FORSTER. And it would be equally interesting if a father was mentioned.

It's all just so very tantalising. Was George FORSTER a "made-up" husband and father or did Mary really have a relationship with a man named George FORSTER?

I'm wondering if I've missed any angles here? Any avenues I've not thought of exploring?

Something has just occurred to me.
Wondering what y'all think? Going off Margaret's age at death (and, yeah, I know until I find a baptism that age is only as good as the informant) she would have been around 35 when Mary was born. If Mary was an only child (and I still haven't found any siblings) does 35 seem to be an unusual age for a woman in 1812 to be having her only child? Hmmm....

Cheers for reading, Rowan Tree 

[elzabels]

I'm planning on viewing Astbury PR's on microfilm at Manchester Library in the (hopefully) not to distant future. I don't know if there will be a discrepancy between the BTs and the PRs but I'm eager to find out.

Note you state Manchester, why not Cheshire RO?

I have a Parish register entry that states the 'spurious name of the father is!' interestingly enough it is the name that also appear as the father of the bride, the parents didnot marry!

Try looking for parish relief or bastardy orders

[elzabels]

I have just looked at the BT burial information and note hat older females have relict of???or wife of???so I was thinking that maybe Margaret hadn't married.

I then looked at 1841 census & note that the word widow is crossed out, also that Margaret was born 'out of the county' Conclusion her marriage could be in another county!

Have you looked at William HACKNEY aged 9 possible grandchild?

[Rowan Tree]

Note you state Manchester, why not Cheshire RO?

I have a Parish register entry that states the 'spurious name of the father is!' interestingly enough it is the name that also appear as the father of the bride, the parents didnot marry!

Try looking for parish relief or bastardy orders

Hi elzabels,

Manchester rather than Chester because I'm hoping my husband will be able to pop into the library for me as he works across the road (and if that doesn't work out I'd like to visit Manchester library myself as I'm curious to see the new up-to-date archive & local history department - I haven't been since before the re-vamp).

Spurious! You've got to laugh. I swear you can still detect the indignation and horror in the handwriting of the rectors who had to enter an illegitimate birth into their registers. I noticed one baptism once that left me feeling kind of scared and certainly sorry for the mother of the babe in question. The priest had clearly been extremely offended at having to baptise a baby born out of wedlock and had virtually torn through the page of the register with the violent strokes of his pen as he scored the word bastard on to the page.

I've looked for orders of filiation and maintenance (and similar) and haven't turned anything up yet. It did occur to me that FORSTER wasn't actually Margaret's name and I could be missing any documents because I'm not searching under the right name. One other thing occurred to me re. maintenance orders; there just doesn't seem to be that many of them for this part of Cheshire (Somerford Booths, Swettenham and the surrounding area). I don't know if this was simply because of a small populace or for another reason. Then again, Cheshire might not even be the right county 

Rowan Tree 

[Rowan Tree]

I have just looked at the BT burial information and note hat older females have relict of???or wife of???so I was thinking that maybe Margaret hadn't married.

I then looked at 1841 census & note that the word widow is crossed out, also that Margaret was born 'out of the county' Conclusion her marriage could be in another county!

Have you looked at William HACKNEY aged 9 possible grandchild?

Thanks elzabels,

I keep forgetting Margaret was born out of county (I really needed that reminder). I need to stick a post-it to my computer screen (or possibly to the inside of one of my eyelids - lol).

And William HACKNEY - good suggestion. I've not looked into him at all. Right, my mission for the morning; trace young William Hackney 

I'll post my findings tomorrow.

Thanks again,

Rowan Tree