A child recorded in The Lincolnshire Chronicle, 1862 - but nowhere else?

[garstonite]

Found 2 deaths in Gainsborough:
Rebecca July Q 1862 aged 0 (mmn Peart) so if we're looking for mmn Bennett not her.
Susan 1869 aged 7. (mmn possibly Vickers)           ditto

Thank you! You are absolutely right - Harriet's maiden name was Bennett. This is confirmed by a marriage record and a newspaper report in the Stamford Mercury (both from 1854). Apologies for not mentioning this in my post. I was afraid of running out of space! I hadn't linked these 2 children's deaths to their mothers' maiden names. I'm very grateful to you for clarifiying this.

geneanet has the marriage of John William Richardson to Harriet Bennett in Cadney Cum Housham , Lincolnshire

[Dundee]

It is possible that the newspaper left out the word 'stillborn'.  It was not unusual to advertise the births of stillborn children and there would be no birth or death registered.

Debra 

[alpinecottage]

It is possible that the newspaper left out the word 'stillborn'.  It was not unusual to advertise the births of stillborn children and there would be no birth or death registered.

Debra 

That was my thought too.  I think your only faint hope is to find a family gravestone on the off chance that the stillborn girl is mentioned on that - perhaps buried with grandparents or the older boy who also died young.

[ARBELLA]

It is possible that the newspaper left out the word 'stillborn'.  It was not unusual to advertise the births of stillborn children and there would be no birth or death registered.

Debra 

Thank you very much! This is a vital piece of information, which I did not know. I am very grateful.

If you have time, I would be very glad to have your thoughts on the burial of stillborn children in Victorian England. (I am also asking 'alpine cottage', as different experts may know different and illuminating examples.)

Am I right in believing that the Church of England, in 1862,  did not hold funerals for unbaptised children and (officially) did not allow them to be buried in consecrated ground? I have, however, seen a reference to Bertrand Russell's aristocratic parents visiting the grave of their stillborn child (born 1868), in a graveyard. The father of the child in the newspaper announcement, John William Richardson, was one of the leading farmers in his village (Willoughton, Lincolnshire), and many anecdotes show him as a forceful character. Is it possible that a stillborn child of his would be buried in the village churchyard?

There is a photograph online of the complete inscription on the joint grave of John William Richardson (died 1869) and his wife Harriet[t] (died 1873). My copy is too large a file to attach- apologies. But there is definitely no reference to children, although their elder child, also John William, who died at 4 days old, appears in the parish register of their home village, Willoughton (Lincolnshire) in both baptism and burial sections.

Thank you very much for your time!

[ARBELLA]

It is possible that the newspaper left out the word 'stillborn'.  It was not unusual to advertise the births of stillborn children and there would be no birth or death registered.

Debra 

That was my thought too.  I think your only faint hope is to find a family gravestone on the off chance that the stillborn girl is mentioned on that - perhaps buried with grandparents or the older boy who also died young.

Thank you very much for confirming to me that Victorian parents might advertise the birth of a stillborn child. i did not know this - it is a surprising, but most helpful discovery.

Your suggestion about searching for the Richardsons' tombstone is also most helpful. There is a photograph online of the grave of John William Richardson (died 1869) and his wife Harriet[t] (died 1873). My copy is too large a file to attach- apologies. The inscription definitely does not mention children, although their elder child, also John William, who died at 4 days old, appears in the parish register of their home village, Willoughton (Lincolnshire) in both baptism and burial sections.


If you have time, I would be very glad to have your thoughts on the burial of stillborn children in Victorian England. (I am also asking 'Dundee', as different experts may know different and illuminating examples.)

Am I right in believing that the Church of England, in 1862,  did not hold funerals for unbaptised children and (officially) did not allow them to be buried in consecrated ground? I have, however, seen a reference to Bertrand Russell's aristocratic parents visiting the grave of their stillborn child (born 1868), in a graveyard. The father of the child in the newspaper announcement, John William Richardson, was one of the leading farmers in his village (Willoughton, Lincolnshire), and many anecdotes show him as a forceful character. Is it possible that a stillborn child of his would be buried in the village churchyard?

I am very grateful for your help with this sad story. I will just add quickly that, as a child, I lived in the Richardsons' home, which John William had built: a square Victorian farmhouse, perched on a hillside in a wood of carefully chosen trees: a Wellingtonia, a copper beech - and dark yews, right next to the house and the bedroom where Harriett's children were born. So I feel particularly obliged to tell their story accurately in my book, 'Village'. Thank you.

[alpinecottage]

Do you know where the older child was buried?  It's unlikely  the baby would have had her own grave, so maybe she is with her brother and possibly that stone may have a reference to her.

[ARBELLA]

Found 2 deaths in Gainsborough:
Rebecca July Q 1862 aged 0 (mmn Peart) so if we're looking for mmn Bennett not her.
Susan 1869 aged 7. (mmn possibly Vickers)           ditto

Thank you! You are absolutely right - Harriet's maiden name was Bennett. This is confirmed by a marriage record and a newspaper report in the Stamford Mercury (both from 1854). Apologies for not mentioning this in my post. I was afraid of running out of space! I hadn't linked these 2 children's deaths to their mothers' maiden names. I'm very grateful to you for clarifiying this.

geneanet has the marriage of John William Richardson to Harriet Bennett in Cadney Cum Housham , Lincolnshire

This is indeed their marriage. Harriet[t] Richardson's birthplace in the 1861 Census is given as Cadney. Her age (33)  in that Census matches that of Harriet Bennett, 13, a farmer's daughter in the 1841 Census for Cadney. That child's elder brother, Francis Bennett, is an executor of Harriett Richardson's Will... Thank you very much for your help.

[ARBELLA]

Do you know where the older child was buried?  It's unlikely  the baby would have had her own grave, so maybe she is with her brother and possibly that stone may have a reference to her.

After your kind reply to my query, I looked at Ancestry to check again that there was no link to an image of the grave of the older child (John William Richardson, born and died in 1855). That is how I've already found the image of the grave of his parents, Harriet[t] and John William. But there is no image for their son's grave. I know from the parish register that all three were buried in the graveyard of St Andrews in their home village, Willoughton.

The 'Find a grave' website lists 245 Willoughton graves at St Andrews, but none is for John William Richardson who died in 1855. There was another family called Richardson in Willoughton (including a John William!), who became very small-scale farmers and who have family members buried in the 20th century in Willoughton churchyard. But no link has been found by me, in Censuses or parish registers, between this family and the far richer John William Richardson, whose daughter's birth was advertised in 1862. The 'other' Richardsons are not mentioned in John William's brief will of 1868 or in Harriet[t]'s extremely detailed will in 1871.

Harriet and John William are buried in one grave very close to the Church, to the right of the path as you approach the main door - near a grand railed-off tomb (occupant unknown to me). Clearly this was regarded as a prestigious burial place. Perhaps their baptised child, at least, had been buried in that area.

Harriet[t] survived her husband, so presumably could have chosen his place of burial in 1869- and perhaps could have chosen to use the spot where her baptised son, John William, had been buried in  1855. But she may have been ill - she died of Bright's disease (of the kidneys), 4 years after her husband. She moved remarkably quickly from her husband's big farmhouse into a specially built smaller house, which must have meant a lot of planning & upheaval.  Her husband's death was not registered (by a servant) until 3 months after his death date, which suggests Harriet[t] may have been very busy or pre-occupied. It is not clear if the gravestone was erected after John William's or Harriet[t]'s death, or whether the person who arranged it (possibly Harriet[t]'s niece) knew the whereabouts of Harriet[t]'s son's grave.

Willoughton is 150 miles away, and, for various reasons, I think I'm unlikely to be visiting it soon. I may be able to find someone to check the older gravestones for me, just in case... Meanwhile, thank you very much for your help!

[alpinecottage]

It was also quite common for babies or newborns who died to be placed in a coffin with any local adult who died at the same time. You may be able to deduce where baby John was buried by looking at the burial register for other burials within a day or two of the baby's death, but I think locating the whereabouts of either child now rests on finding a document or record by absolute fluke. However the children obviously meant a lot to their parents and I think you can be assured they are buried somewhere in the Willoughton graveyard.