Author Topic: Tithe Map/Apportionments 1848 vs Electoral Register for Saxton Cum Scarthingwell  (Read 341 times)

Offline mikebrunger

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
I have started research for my wife's parents farm at Saxton Grange which is near Towton, North Yorkshire (Formerly in West Riding). I have found all the Electoral Register records detailing who was occupying the farm at the time in 1848 when the Tithe Map was created. Either I'm mis-understanding something or there is a discrepancy between Tithe information and the Registers:

1848 Tithe Map for Saxton cum Scarthingwell, York shows in the location of the current farm a piece of land marked 76. The apportionment shows that this (along with many other parcels of land) was owned by Lord Hawke and Occupied by William Marshall. However, on the Electoral Register for 1848 it shows that a John Birkinshaw was occupier of Saxton Grange in the location identified by piece 76. See attached files.

Can anyone please explain this? I obtained the records from The Genealogist website and also discovered that the West Yorkshire Archive Service store them. I may decide to pay for their research service but would like to be clear on why there are discrepancies between the two sets of records. Thanks.

Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,798
    • View Profile
From the Leeds Mercury 23 July 1842


Moderator Comment: Copyrighted image removed.
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline mikebrunger

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Yes, I have that record. The Birkinshaws occupied Saxton Grange from at least 1835, possibly earlier, until around 1850 according to Electoral Registers. My confusion/query is around why the Tithe Map does not show this and also why it doesn't show buildings.


Online josey

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,358
  • Sooty why won't you come in?
    • View Profile
Maybe William Marshall sublet the land to John Birkinshaw? I think 'Occupier' had a slightly different meaning then, as it did in Ireland - for instance, the manager of a Workhouse who registered births & deaths was named as the 'Occupier'.

Who was living there in the 1851 census?
1841 HO107/1283/4/6 Saxton Grange

Benjamin   Birkinshaw   Male   70   
Phillis Birkinshaw           Female  65
Benjamin   Birkinshaw   Male   30   
John   Birkinshaw   Male   25   1816   
Jane   Birkinshaw   Female   9   
Helen   Goodall   Female   55   
James   Monkman   Male   18   
Samuel   Pears   Male   15   
All born Yorkshire
Seeking: RC baptism Philip Murray Feb ish 1814 ? nr Chatham Kent.
IRE: Kik DRAY[EA], PURCELL, WHITE: Mea LYNCH: Tip MURRAY, SHEEDY: Wem ALLEN, ENGLISHBY; Dub PENROSE: Lim DUNN[E], FRAWLEY, WILLIAMS.
87th Regiment RIF: MURRAY
ENG; Marylebone HAYTER, TROU[W]SDALE, WILLIAMS,DUNEVAN Con HAMPTON, TREMELLING Wry CLEGG, HOLLAND, HORSEFIELD Coventry McGINTY
CAN; Halifax & Pictou: HOLLAND, WHITE, WILLIAMSON

Offline mikebrunger

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Thomas Richardson was there with his family and servants working as a Farmer. So you're saying that Lord Hawke owned the land; William Marshall 'Occupied it'; he then sublet to Birkinshaw?? Pretty confusing!

Maybe William Marshall sublet the land to John Birkinshaw? I think 'Occupier' had a slightly different meaning then, as it did in Ireland - for instance, the manager of a Workhouse who registered births & deaths was named as the 'Occupier'.

Who was living there in the 1851 census?

Online josey

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,358
  • Sooty why won't you come in?
    • View Profile
Was just adding 1841 [above] as you replied. Certainly the complicated scenario is possible!

I see Thomas Richardson is a farmer of 245 acres, so that is an example of a farmer living on one farm bu subletting others. Thomas was presumably the legal tenant of 245 ac but only lived at one at Saxton Grange  [parcel 76 is far smaller than 245 ac]. Perhaps try to find William Marshall in 1841/51?

PS I suggest you just add a snip & 1851 census reference, as we are not allowed to post whole census pages.

ADDED: Maybe WY Archives may have the farm leases? May have reference from whom Thomas Richardson took over?
Seeking: RC baptism Philip Murray Feb ish 1814 ? nr Chatham Kent.
IRE: Kik DRAY[EA], PURCELL, WHITE: Mea LYNCH: Tip MURRAY, SHEEDY: Wem ALLEN, ENGLISHBY; Dub PENROSE: Lim DUNN[E], FRAWLEY, WILLIAMS.
87th Regiment RIF: MURRAY
ENG; Marylebone HAYTER, TROU[W]SDALE, WILLIAMS,DUNEVAN Con HAMPTON, TREMELLING Wry CLEGG, HOLLAND, HORSEFIELD Coventry McGINTY
CAN; Halifax & Pictou: HOLLAND, WHITE, WILLIAMSON

Offline mikebrunger

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Ah Ok, thanks for the warning. I've just noticed that there is a William Marshall on the 1848 Electoral Reg. at Scarthingwell. He is an Occupier of a Farm at 50 rent. This is just south of Saxton Grange. So maybe he has sub-let a parcel of land?? Shame there are no buildings marked in that location as the farm buildings show uop very clear on the 1845 OS map! Any other thoughts would be much appreciated.

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,503
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
I'd strongly advise you to remove the image of the map too, which actually shows the copyright symbol. The site where you took it from is extremely hot on picking up copyright infringement, and you might well be jeopardising your subscription there.

Offline mikebrunger

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Done!!

I'd strongly advise you to remove the image of the map too, which actually shows the copyright symbol. The site where you took it from is extremely hot on picking up copyright infringement, and you might well be jeopardising your subscription there.