1861 Oxtoby, Taylor and Frobisher confusion

[louisa maud]

I have not been able to find any of this family on 1841

My guess is Boletta might not be the correct name, Smith, oh dear ?

Louisa Maud

[avm228]

Are you able to post a clip of the Boletta Smith entry?  What does it say about her - “present at the birth”?

[teach3r]

Thank you for you help avm288 and louisa maud.  I have attached Charles' birth cert.

[avm228]

Informant: Violetta Smith, occupier.

Charles was born on the "twentieth" (not the 15th).  This is of course very close to the 21 September 1843 birthdate of Charles Frederick Veith Taylor, baptised in 1847, as per my reply #13.  If he was a separate person I have not been able to trace him.  Curiouser and curiouser!

[avm228]

In 1851 Violetta Smith, wid, 73, alms washerwoman, was at 16 Damari(e)s Square, Garden St, Myton with an unmarried daughter Ann, 28, charwoman b Hull.

HO107/2363/325/42.

[teach3r]

This is of course very close to the 21 September 1843 birthdate of Charles Frederick Veith Taylor, baptised in 1847, as per my reply #13.  If he was a separate person I have not been able to trace him.  Curiouser and curiouser!

Charles Frederick Veith Taylor's parents are Frederick and Mary, whilst Charles Frederic is John and Mary - could this confirm that they are different people?

[teach3r]

As Violetta was the "occupier" does this mean that John, Mary and the baby Charles were lodgers of hers?

[avm228]

This is of course very close to the 21 September 1843 birthdate of Charles Frederick Veith Taylor, baptised in 1847, as per my reply #13.  If he was a separate person I have not been able to trace him.  Curiouser and curiouser!

Charles Frederick Veith Taylor's parents are Frederick and Mary, whilst Charles Frederic is John and Mary - could this confirm that they are different people?

Given the mystery surrounding both "couples", I'd reserve judgment for the time being.  If the two Charles are the same person it may well be that his mother Mary was not married to Charles' father, and by 1847 when the baptism took place the name of the supposed father had slipped everybody's minds.

[avm228]

As Violetta was the "occupier" does this mean that John, Mary and the baby Charles were lodgers of hers?

Quite possibly.  Well, Mary at least.  We don't know whether she was in fact in a settled relationship with the child's father.

On the previous 1851 census page at 12 Damaris Square, Garden St, is a midwife named Lilias Thorp.  Possibly there was knowledge among local women that they could have informal midwifery assistance in that area when they went into labour.

All guesswork really at this stage.