Henry Greenwood, born about 1854, Manchester or Salford.

[Althea7]

I have a puzzle in my family tree.  On the 1861 census, Henry Greenwood is age 6, living with his grandmother Fanny Greenwood, her daughter Mary Greenwood, single, and another of Fanny's grandchildren Joseph Smith, age 2, in Charlesworth, Derbyshire.  On the 1871 census, Henry Greenwood is age 16, born Manchester, living as Son with Edward Fernly age 32 coal miner born Charlesworth and Mary Fernly age 34 born Manchester.

I had written down that he was born in Salford in the Jan-Feb-Mar quarter, but now I cant find him on the GRO index at all.

Until a day ago I thought he was the son of Hiram Greenwood, Fanny's son who died in 1855, and Mary nee Stanfield, Hiram's widow, who I assumed married Edward Fernly, but from a DNA match I am now wondering if he was the son of Mary, Fanny's daughter.

Mary nee Stanfield, born 1822, would have been too old really to marry a much younger man like Edward Fernly, 1839-1921, and to have a child James Fernly born 1870.  I could find two marriages for Mary nee Stanfield, one to Hiram Greenwood in Manchester on October 27th 1850, and one to Isaac Wakeling b. 1829 on June 28th 1857 when she was 35.

On Fanny Greenwood's death certificate, the two Informants were Mary and Edward Fernly.  I had assumed this Mary was the widow of Fanny's son Hiram.  But now I am wondering if this Mary is her daughter born 1830 in Manchester.  Mary and Fanny seemed close on both the 1851 census, where they are living together in a lodging house in Manchester, and the 1861 census when they are living together in Charlesworth, Derbyshire, with Fanny's two grandsons, Henry Greenwood age 6 and Joseph Smith age 2.

I have not been able to find a marriage for Edward Fernly, so can't tell which Mary he married.  And I can't find a mother's maiden name on the GRO for Henry Greenwood born about 1854 Manchester, so I can't be sure if his mother is Fanny's daughter Mary or Mary nee Stanfield.

It was only a day ago when a DNA match had Fernly's linked to Mary and Fanny Greenwood that made me wonder where I went wrong here?  The DNA match is being linked to James Fernly born 1870, and I thought I wasn't biologically connected with either his father Edward Fernly, or his mother Mary nee Stanfield.  But if his mother is Mary Greenwood, Fanny's daughter, that would make sense.  It is only a tiny amount of DNA I share with this match, and the suggested link could be wrong, and I can't find the marriage of James Fernly's father Edward Fernly to Mary, to see which Mary it was, and I can't find a GRO record for Henry Greenwood born about 1854 Manchester, to find out what his mother's maiden name was...

[Kay99]

Was this the GRO Birth

HENRY  GREENWOOD  mmn      THORLEY     
GRO Ref 1854  March Qtr SALFORD  Vol 08D  Page 29

Kay

[Althea7]

The DNA match is showing ancestry via James Fernly born 1870.  I did find him on the GRO, with mother's maiden surname Greenwood.  I had assumed that Mary nee Stanfield, having been previously married to Hiram Greenwood, was using that surname.

It is starting to look as though this is Mary Greenwood, Fanny's youngest daughter.  That is the only way I would share DNA with James Fernly.  Of course, it is only a tiny amount of DNA I share with this match, and still not conclusive.  And what about Henry Greenwood, born about 1854, Fanny's grandson, living with Fanny and her daughter Mary on the 1861 census, is he Mary Greenwood's son?  How would I verify that?

[Althea7]

Was this the GRO Birth

HENRY  GREENWOOD  mmn      THORLEY     
GRO Ref 1854  March Qtr SALFORD  Vol 08D  Page 29

Kay

I was just looking at that on the GRO, but don't recognise the mother's maiden name at all.  I don't think it is the right person.  I usually leave the registration district blank on GRO index searches, as there are so many even in the Manchester area.

The mother's maiden name would either be Greenwood or Stanfield.  A lot of the mother's maiden name fields on the GRO for Henry Greenwood, born 1854 plus or minus two years, are blank, and I am not sure what that means.

There is one possible one in September 1853, with mother's maiden name left blank. But that would make him 7 in September 1860, and 7 in April 1861 when the census was taken, and on the census it says he is 6.  Also the 1871 census says he is 16, when he is living as a son with Edward and Mary Fernly.

[mckha489]

   A lot of the mother's maiden name fields on the GRO for Henry Greenwood, born 1854 plus or minus two years, are blank, and I am not sure what that means.

It means it was an illegitimate birth

[avm228]

James was born in 1869 rather than 1870.

Birth reg as James Fernaley, mmn Greenwood, Sep qtr 1869 Hayfield 7b 636.

Baptised as James Fearnley, son of Edward & Mary, 22 August 1869 at Charlesworth, Derbyshire.

[avm228]

Mary Greenwood nee Stanfield did remarry - but to Isaac Wakeling in Manchester on 28 June 1857.

[Althea7]

   A lot of the mother's maiden name fields on the GRO for Henry Greenwood, born 1854 plus or minus two years, are blank, and I am not sure what that means.

It means it was an illegitimate birth

Ok, thanks, I didn't know that.  So it looks as though Henry Greenwood born about 1854 Manchester could be the son of Fanny's daughter Mary Greenwood.  I would have to make a guess at which one he could be and get the birth certificate from the GRO.  I don't know if that would even give much information, and I might guess wrong.

I tried to upload an attachment of Fanny Greenwood's 1866 death certificate PDF, but it said it is too big to load here. It is interesting, as it was first signed by Edward Fernly as the Informant, then the registrar seems to have made a fuss because he had written her as Frances, when she was always known as Fanny, and there is an extra note at the end where both Edward Fernly and Mary Fernly had to come back and make their marks to acknowledge the change of name from Frances to Fanny.  Fanny's daughter Mary seems to have been always especially close to her mother, and maybe it was initially her husband Edward who went to the registrar's office as Informant because Mary was too upset?  It seems unusual for the registrar to require a second person to be Informant, and maybe indicates that this Mary was Fanny's daughter.

[Althea7]

James was born in 1869 rather than 1870.

Birth reg as James Fernaley, mmn Greenwood, Sep qtr 1869 Hayfield 7b 636.

Baptised as James Fearnley, son of Edward & Mary, 22 August 1869 at Charlesworth, Derbyshire.

Thanks for that, I had found the GRO reference but not the baptism.  So many ways these records are spelling Fernly.