Author Topic: Teasdale family at Brooms, Leadgate  (Read 479 times)

Offline Elliven

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 946
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Teasdale family at Brooms, Leadgate
« on: Monday 06 September 21 10:51 BST (UK) »
Robert Teasdale married Elizabeth Fairbridge on 26 December 1790 at All Saints Church, Lanchester.  The registers for All Saints, Lanchester, record the baptism of an Eleanor Teasdale on the 2 February 1794 - Father shown as Robert Teasdale, Mother as Elizabeth Teasdale, residence 'Brooms'.  I  am trying to find out whether Robert and Elizabeth had any other children.  Can anyone help please?

Online ColC

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,616
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Teasdale family at Brooms, Leadgate
« Reply #1 on: Monday 06 September 21 11:04 BST (UK) »
On Freereg. 1790 - 1810

Lanchester : All Saints : Bishop's Transcript Robt & Eliz on some

John TEASDALE   Baptism   14 Nov 1791   Durham   

Eleanor TEASDALE   Baptism   2 Feb 1794   Durham

Ann TEASDALE   Baptism   1 May 1796   Durham

Robert TEASDALE   Baptism   1 Nov 1801   Durham

Father occupation   Farmer
Notes   2nd son. Father native of this parish and mother Elizabeth, daughter of Joseph FARBRIDGE, native of Slaley Northd

An Anthony & Jane had children there same period.

Colin
Clarke, Trickett, Orton, Lawless, Norton, Detheridge, Kirby, Goodfellow, Wagstaff, Lowe, etc.

Offline Elliven

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 946
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Teasdale family at Brooms, Leadgate
« Reply #2 on: Monday 06 September 21 11:30 BST (UK) »
ColC,

Thank you.  This looks very promising.

My research is into the family who owned the Jolly Drovers pub (and were probably also farmers).  The Robert Teasdale I mentioned was dead by the time of the 1841 Census but appeared to pop up again in 1852 and that was impossible!

His son, Robert, would have been 51 or 52 in 1852 and that is the period I am looking at.  The Robert you have found fits the bill very nicely as he had to be old enough to have a married daughter in 1852.  I had completely failed to find this Robert