Have I got the right Samuel Sheen?

[reynolds_1979]

As the title suggests I am after opinions as to whether I have my research correct and I have the correct Samuel Sheen as my 4 x g grandfather.

Working backwards from a more certain point Elizabeth Sheen (3 x g grandmother) b1824 and baptised at St Dunstan and All Saints, Stepney. Her parents are listed as Samuel (a labourer) and Susan.
She is one of six baptisms I have found with parents of Samuel and Susan/Susannah at St Dunstan.
Ann Mary b1819
William George 1822
Elizabeth 1824
Sarah 1826
Susanna 1828
George Mills 1831

The first four record Samuel as a labourer and the last two record him as a Mariner.
Elizabeth's 1844 marriage to George Roots also records Samuel as a Mariner.

Until recently I was sure I had the correct baptism record for Samuel.

10 Apr 1796 St Mary's, Whitechapel. Parents Thomas and Ann. No occupation for Thomas but an address of Rosemary Lane, which is now Royal Mint Street.

This led me to a marriage to a Susan Papworth 24 May 1818 at St Dunstan. As Whitechapel and Stepney are only a mile apart I consider this quite a firm match. Nothing on their marriage record really adds anything.

After this I have nothing until a burial record of a Samuel Sheen at All Saints, Poplar. Born abt 1787 buried 26 June 1835. Whilst this is the right area for my Samuel is age is practically a decade out.

Which leads me to what has made me doubt things.

A tree on Ancestry (which I know are notoriously bad in some cases) has Samuel Sheen with the same marriage details and children as I do but with rather different birth and parentage. This Samuel was born on the 16 July 1790 and baptised 12 July 1818 at St James, Piccadilly. Parents George and Elizabeth. George's occupation is hard to decipher.

He is also recorded as having joined the Royal Navy in 1804 and serving until 1815. Which could be a link to the occupation change in later life to Mariner. There are no sources for his naval service.

What I did find potentially odd is that the second Samuel was baptised a couple of months after his marriage.

I hope this is clear enough for people to understand and maybe offer up some thoughts as to where I may be right or wrong and where I could go to clear up who Samuel Sheen was and who his parents were.

Thanks.

[reynolds_1979]

I have just found a will on the National Archive's website for Thomas Sheen d1825 an Undertaker. And the few lines that are shown prove this to be the will of Samuel's father. Rosemary Lane is mentioned, as being where they have property. This makes me even more uncertain that I have the right parents for my Samuel sheen. How does an undertakers son go from what appears to be relative comfort of life to a labourer?

[Daisypetal]

HI,

Regarding a Samuel SHEEN in the Navy, I found this record,

http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C8974093

At Ancestry he is transcribed as Samuel SHEM.

It shows ships he was on from 1803 until 1815, under these it says Greenwich 17 June 1840, I'm not sure what this is referring to.


Regards,
Daisy

[reynolds_1979]

Thank you for the link, Daisy.

Best wishes
Philippe

[avm228]

There is a 50 yr old Samuel Sheen, undertaker, still alive in Church Lane, Whitechapel in 1841.

With him: Samuel Sheen, apprentice undertaker, 15, and Eleanor Sheen, 50.

Is this (Samuel snr) perhaps Thomas’s son - a different person therefore from your Samuel?

Samuel (snr), undertaker, and wife “Ellen” in 1851, still in Church Lane: HO107/1546/247/33.

[avm228]

I note in passing that when George Mills Sheen married at St Dunstan, Stepney on 3 March 1859, there was on the same day a marriage of Jeremiah Sheen, 26, son of Patrick Sheen (& Catherine Sheen a witness).  Possibly entirely coincidental, but I wonder whether these Sheens were related in some way.

[avm228]

I see that Susan Sheen is a nurse in Poplar in 1841 (her children elsewhere).

Still a nurse in Poplar in 1861 (b abt 1896 Greenwich) with sister Elizabeth Papworth and granddaughter Elizabeth S Roots: RG9/305/148/13.

[avm228]

I am not very persuaded either by the “other” Samuel Sheen baptism, the 1818 one at St James’, Westminster, born 1790, parents George & Elisabeth, abode King St, occupation vintner.  This doesn’t seem to chime with anything known about your Samuel.

There’s another Samuel Sheen baptised 22 July 1787 at St Paul’s, Hammersmith, parents John & Mary, who may be worth following up.

[reynolds_1979]

Thanks for the hints about Susan Sheen on the census, I was literally just this second searching through the 1841 to try and find her. And the 1787 bap. I will follow that up.

I am now sure that Samuel bap 1796 to Thomas and Ann in Whitechapel is definitely not my ancestor.  Some deleting and syncing of trees to be done. 

I am inclined to agree about the strange adult baptism of Samuel Sheen 1818. The only thing that keeps it in my kind is the naming pattern of Samuel and Susan Papworth's children. First boy is called William George. William being Susan's father's name and George matches the 1818 father. Then the second boy is named George.

Of course this could be pure coincidence and I am suffering confirmation bias.