Author Topic: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!  (Read 5548 times)

Offline avm228

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 24,827
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #36 on: Monday 29 April 19 21:30 BST (UK) »
I hardly dare mention it, but the daughter born Dec qtr 1847 Melksham to Henry Richards and Hester née Cully was registered not as Kate, or Jane, but Sarah ???

Anyway they seem to have renamed her as by 1851 they have a Jane, 3, and a Mary, 1 (reg as Mary Ann, Mar qtr 1850 Melksham).

HO107/1840/48/11.

They did go on to have a Sarah Ann, Jun qtr 1853.
Ayr: Barnes, Wylie
Caithness: MacGregor
Essex: Eldred (Pebmarsh)
Gloucs: Timbrell (Winchcomb)
Hants: Stares (Wickham)
Lincs: Maw, Jackson (Epworth, Belton)
London: Pierce
Suffolk: Markham (Framlingham)
Surrey: Gosling (Richmond)
Wilts: Matthews, Tarrant (Calne, Preshute)
Worcs: Milward (Redditch)
Yorks: Beaumont, Crook, Moore, Styring (Huddersfield); Middleton (Church Fenton); Exley, Gelder (High Hoyland); Barnes, Birchinall (Sheffield); Kenyon, Wood (Cumberworth/Denby Dale)

Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,854
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #37 on: Monday 29 April 19 21:44 BST (UK) »
Thanks - found them now  :)

There is:

Jane baptised 26th May 1850 - parents Thomas and Mary

Jane baptised 26th October 1851 parents Henry and Hester

The Macauleys have children both Mary and Esther - and Jane and Kate  :)
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline lauralem

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 14
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #38 on: Monday 29 April 19 21:48 BST (UK) »
I thought the Jane=Kate theory had been based on the fact that Jane had been found in London in 1871 and until this thread Kate had not, so it was thought/hoped they might be one and the same?

On the other hand, a Jane Adams marries John McAuley, Dec qtr 1873 Medway, and turns up in subsequent Kent censuses with him showing a birthplace of Melksham c1847-9, and a clutch of children with mmn Richards.

E.g. Mary Alice McCauley, mmn Richards, Sep qtr 1874 Medway.

So I take it all back :). Looks entirely possible that Kate was really the daugher Jane belonging to that Melksham family, and Florence was their granddaughter rather than their niece.

No doubt the 1873 marriage certificate would be illuminating as to who her father was.

Mega sleuth! I was holding some info back because I didn't want to overcomplicate things, but I'll lay all my cards on the table as you're catching up to me.

I've spoken to another descendent of Jane/Kate, and she believes after William died Jane remarried the McCauley chap and moved to Kent (apparently she's listed as a widow on the marriage cert), and Florence was sent to Melksham. I didn't buy it, because I couldn't find evidence that Kate & William were ever together; but as you've all debunked that, the other descendent could be right.

With regards to the Janes: there is a Thomas Richards (older brother of Henry) who also has a daughter called Jane, born within a couple of years of Henry's Jane. At the moment, I believe Thomas is Florence's grandad... but I'm ready to be proved wrong again!

Just to complicate things even more, though, I recently discovered there were TWO Richards families in Melksham, and both had sons called Henry... so I think I need to go through all those parish records with a fine tooth comb to confirm that Thomas is the brother of the Henry that was Florence's uncle.

(And for anyone who's interested, I've pieced together Florence's life from 1881 onwards: 1881, living with the Richards in Melksham; 1891, working at Wiltshire Lunatic Asylum; 1892, gets engaged to another colleague at the Lunatic asylum, but then calls it off on her Uncle Henry's advice, so the jilted lover goes and murders her uncle in revenge(!); moves to Portsmouth and works as a barmaid; meets George Staniforth who is in the Royal Marines and they marry; 1899, family moves to Hull.)

I really appreciate all the help you're all offering me!

Offline lauralem

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 14
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #39 on: Monday 29 April 19 21:49 BST (UK) »
Sons called Henry & both born in the same year, I seem to recall


Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,854
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #40 on: Monday 29 April 19 22:04 BST (UK) »
Just to say it would have helped to have the McCauley information even if you were doubtful.
It would have saved a lot of searching.
If you purchase the marriage certificate, you will have the right parent hopefully.
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,854
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #41 on: Monday 29 April 19 22:15 BST (UK) »
Uncle Henry who was murdered in 1892 is only young - newspaper snippet has him 32yrs but death registers 28yrs.
It looks as though he is the son of  Henry and Hester.
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline avm228

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 24,827
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #42 on: Monday 29 April 19 22:28 BST (UK) »
OK so Jane was a widow on the 1873 marriage certificate - but has the other researcher told you what it says about her father?
Ayr: Barnes, Wylie
Caithness: MacGregor
Essex: Eldred (Pebmarsh)
Gloucs: Timbrell (Winchcomb)
Hants: Stares (Wickham)
Lincs: Maw, Jackson (Epworth, Belton)
London: Pierce
Suffolk: Markham (Framlingham)
Surrey: Gosling (Richmond)
Wilts: Matthews, Tarrant (Calne, Preshute)
Worcs: Milward (Redditch)
Yorks: Beaumont, Crook, Moore, Styring (Huddersfield); Middleton (Church Fenton); Exley, Gelder (High Hoyland); Barnes, Birchinall (Sheffield); Kenyon, Wood (Cumberworth/Denby Dale)

Offline avm228

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 24,827
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #43 on: Monday 29 April 19 22:33 BST (UK) »
Presumably Florence is actually either a granddaughter or great-niece of Henry & Hester, despite appearances?
Ayr: Barnes, Wylie
Caithness: MacGregor
Essex: Eldred (Pebmarsh)
Gloucs: Timbrell (Winchcomb)
Hants: Stares (Wickham)
Lincs: Maw, Jackson (Epworth, Belton)
London: Pierce
Suffolk: Markham (Framlingham)
Surrey: Gosling (Richmond)
Wilts: Matthews, Tarrant (Calne, Preshute)
Worcs: Milward (Redditch)
Yorks: Beaumont, Crook, Moore, Styring (Huddersfield); Middleton (Church Fenton); Exley, Gelder (High Hoyland); Barnes, Birchinall (Sheffield); Kenyon, Wood (Cumberworth/Denby Dale)

Offline lauralem

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 14
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Facts that don't stack up & reading between lines - help me solve a mystery!
« Reply #44 on: Monday 29 April 19 22:39 BST (UK) »
Just to say it would have helped to have the McCauley information even if you were doubtful.
It would have saved a lot of searching.
If you purchase the marriage certificate, you will have the right parent hopefully.

Sorry, I didn't mean to waste your time. The information just seemed completely irrelevant when I made my original post and I didn't anticipate everyone going above and beyond to help me with this.

And great spot with Uncle Henry. I completely missed that.