Finding a Durham ancestor using the Bishops' Transcripts.

[Tickettyboo]

Just coming back to this (I'm a pedant  ) on FindMyPast the baptism is said to be at Shotley Bridge.

However the same record on Durham Records Online indicates it took place within the Crook Primitive Methodist Circuit.

Since the residence was Sunnyside I venture to suggest that, for some reason, the indexing on FindMyPast is incorrect. DRO are far more likely to be correct.

You're not a pedant, or if you are we can form a club, as I went even further to see where this baptism was likely to have taken place :-)

I looked on FindMyPast too, their transcript shows that the info came from Family Search's indexes billed as England Baptisms 1538-1975.
So I searched for her on FS and found the film number the record had been indexed from.
film 2107176
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/results?count=20&query=%2Bfilm_number%3A2107176
looks like when it was indexed, the specific circuit was not changed for each item on the film
which 'could'  mean that there may be a LOT of entries from that film that are wrong.

I agree with JenB, I'm a lot more likely to accept the transcript on DRO.

Boo

[Peter L. Mitchell]

Hi folks.

Wow! You've all been very busy! I really appreciate the work everyone has put into this question. Here's what I've found in the last 24 hours:

Elizabeth Halliday:
Durham Online
Baptism, Chester-le-Street District – Record Number: 468199.0
Location: Chester-le-Street, County Durham
Church: St. Mary and St. Cuthbert
Denomination: Anglican
22 Oct 1848 Elizabeth Ann Halliday, of Plawsworth, daughter of George Halliday (Cartwright) & Phoebe Ann Halliday (nee Hodgson)

GRO
Halliday, Elizabeth Ann (Mother’s Maiden Surname Hodgson). Reference: 1848 S Quarter in Chester-le-Street Volume 24 Page 43

This unfortunately doesn't match Elizabeth Sherlock's 1848 birth certificate (see attachment).

In the 1851 census Margaret Dial is recorded as aged 1, birthplace Berry Edge, and presumably her mother (Sarah Dial, aged 25) is recorded as a visitor in the house of Matt Snowdon (Residential Note: Lead Gate).

According to Peter Dial and Isabella Sherlock's marriage certificate her father's name was Thomas (surname Shawlock on the certificate). The 1841 census shows Isabella's parents as Thomas and Elizabeth. One of her siblings is George, born in 1832, who appears to have been one of the witnesses at Isabella's wedding in 1850.

I've spent several hours combing through DTO and GRO searches and not really come up with any definitive solution. The birth certificate has no father named, which is usually a strong indication that the child was illegitimate. The 1851 census shows Robert, Isabella and Elizabeth living at Willington. The Halliday link is credible and it's a line I definitely need to further investigate, but I guess I'm hamstrung by the lack of any proof like adoption papers (not that they existed for most people in those times). If I find any more information I will post it.

Thank you to everyone who has put in so much effort to find out new information. This is a fantastic site that has many brilliant contributors such as yourselves. I really appreciate your help.

Peter

[heywood]

Peter,
If you look at Jon’s post, reply #3, with his findings and explanation, I think you can track your Elizabeth from that.
As you say, you will not find adoption records but it looks as though the child Elizabeth, for whatever reasons, and also perhaps at 10 years of age or so, was taken in by her aunt Margaret ‘Sharlock’ Halliday -Isabella’s sister when her mother emigrated.
Elizabeth uses the two surnames Halliday and Dial on her marriage. Perhaps she regarded both as her family.
That’s how I see it anyway.
Heywood

[Peter L. Mitchell]

Hi Heywood.

I've ordered Sarah Ann's 1876 birth certificate from the GRO as that will give me some clues about what happened to Elizabeth. I actually think that Jon's worked it out, and I'm looking for more evidence to confirm it. Elizabeth's marriage certificate would be useful, so I'm on the trail of that (not sure how to get it).

I'm sure that the root of my cautious skepticism is that I find it difficult to accept that an ancestor could have done something so callous as to abandon her child in another country. However, the more I research the more I am coming to the conclusion that they were a family bound by secrets. This seems to be one of them. It's interesting; you often expect your ancestors to have been squeaky clean citizens but the reality is sometimes quite different. I'm also looking at the next Dial generation and there are some very weird things that happened with them, but that's for a possible future post. Whatever else I discover about Elizabeth I'll leave on this post.

Thanks for taking the time to give me a gentle but firm nudge in the right direction.

Peter

[Tickettyboo]

I'm sure that the root of my cautious skepticism is that I find it difficult to accept that an ancestor could have done something so callous as to abandon her child in another country.
Peter

Maybe you are looking at the past from a present day perspective.
IF the girl remained here when her mother, stepfather and half brother emigrated I think you have to bear in mind that she was 12. To us, at the present time, a twelve year old is still a very young child. Back then it was just about grown up, many girls were 'in service' from a young age, sometimes many, many miles away from home and may only have had the opportunity to visit family perhaps once a year if that.

Perhaps they intended for her to go but she flat out refused so they reached a compromise whereby she would stay with her aunt, knowing she would be safe and cared for with family and hoping that at some stage she may decide to follow them.

Its impossible to actually know all these years later, they may have abandoned her, they may have reached the best possible compromise they could  - we can't really judge as we don't know the people or the circumstances.

Boo

[JenB]

Peter

I find it difficult to accept that an ancestor could have done something so callous as to abandon her child in another country.

I am sure Boo is right. We have no idea what the circumstances were or what the family dynamic was. To us it seems callous. But for all we know Elizabeth might have been perfectly happy with the arrangement!   

I feel sure that the right person has been found (thanks to Jon for getting the ball rolling).

[barryd]

County Durham Registers under the jurisdiction of Bishop Shute Barrington.


http://www.durhamrecordoffice.org.uk/article/10576/Baptisms-and-burials-1798-1812

[JenB]

County Durham Registers under the jurisdiction of Bishop Shute Barrington.


http://www.durhamrecordoffice.org.uk/article/10576/Baptisms-and-burials-1798-1812

Useful as Barrington registers are, they ended in 1812 so I’m struggling to see their relevance to a specific enquiry about someone born in 1848.....

[Tickettyboo]

Might this be her burial, in 1894, aged 43?
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSJW-C99Z-3?i=155&cat=996888

This also suggests its the correct burial/death entry

Darlington & Stockton Times, Ripon & Richmond Chronicle
21 July 1894  page 8 col 8

Deaths
Darlington
Luck's-square, 17th, aged 43, Elizabeth, widow of Mr James Bainbridge.

Boo