Opinions please

[Olde Crone]

I am trying to help a new contact with her Holden tree.

What, if anything, would you deduce from the following burial record?

Burial: 7 Oct 1871 St Stephen, Tockholes, Lancashire, England
James Holden - Son of Elizabeth Holden
Age: 43 yrs
Abode: Tockholes
Buried by: Charles Hughes, Vicar
Register: Burials 1833 - 1882, Page 231, Entry 2801
Source: LDS Film 1595672

OC

[kiterunner]

I wouldn't assume that it meant he was illegitimate unless it was clear from other entries in the same register that this was how this particular register worked. Otherwise it could just mean that his father was deceased but his mother still alive when he died?

[Olde Crone]

Thankyou Kate. I thought it was rather oddly worded (he was married and his wife still alive) and I would have thought his father would have been mentioned as deceased. I wondered if the wording suggested he was a dependent adult.

If this is the same man, he has no father's name on his marriage cert and I think that suggests he is illegitimate. Contact has him "with parents" in the census but I'm sure it isn't the same James Holden.

OC

[Kit]

It could be that the father's name was unknown. Not as in illegitimate but whoever told the minister didn't know as the father was deceased. Mum was either alive or known to the minister or wife or whoever gave the information.

[Merry]

Is this him?

1841:

Low Hills (?) Tockholes, Blackburn, Lancs

Henry Holden 35 farmer Yes
Mary Holden 60 Yes
Betty Holden 30 Yes
James Holden 13 Yes

I would like to think Mary is the widowed mother of Henry and the unmarried Betty (Elizabeth?) and the grandmother of James.

[Olde Crone]

Oh Merry, you are spooky.

Yes, that's the record my contact is claiming. She has also found a baptism, mother Betty - I can't find the baptism so unclear as to whether it mentions any father.

Henry Holden married Betty Horrocks in 1825, Accrington but that doesn't mean the Betty on the 1841 is his wife, she could very well be his sister.

*Blasted James Holdens. Always a nuisance*

OC

I

[Merry]

In 1871 there are (typically!) two Betty Holdens living nextdoor to each other at Peak, Lower Darwen. One lives alone and is 68 and a widow, b Lower Darwen. The other is 69 and has her status altered from widow to unmarried. Here's her household:

1871:

Peak, Lower Darwen, Lancs

Betty Holden head unm 69 bread baker b Livesey, Lancs
Nancy Holden sister unm 67 bread baker b Lower Darwen
Margaret Holden sister (really??!) aged 38! bread baker b Livesey
Joseph Holden son unm 23 cotton weaver b Lower Darwen

[Olde Crone]

Ah, Livesey rings a bell. Off to look...

OC

[Merry]

Hmmm, in 1861 the three bread baking sisters are together only their ages are now 60, 56 and 47! Joseph is with them as well, but this time he is a nephew not a son!! All places of birth match the previously posted 1871 census.

[Merry]

Oooh, in 1851 the three sisters are weaving together:

Betty 48
Nancy 44
Margaret 37

then

John Holden, son of Margaret, 12 (age a bit iffy) power loom weaver b Livesey
Joseph Holden, son of Margaret, 3 b Livesey

So that sorts out who John belongs to. Did Betty have an illegitimate child too?

[Phoenix]

What marriage?

A man in his forties marries between the census and death a few months later, and is recorded as his mother's son, rather than an individual in his own right at his burial?

[Merry]

Hmmm....that John Holden might have been 16 andf then there's a John 6 with Betty and Margaret in 1841, no sign of another James (ten-a-penny??!) so maybe a red herring, unless he was the son of Betty but living with henry and his wife, also Betty.

Phoenix, Alice, James' wife, was alive at the 1871 census and doesn't seem to have then died before her husband.

[Olde Crone]

A frail Livesey connection - James Holden married Alice Aspden 5 May 1847. They had 9/10 children, ONE of whom (Reuben) was born in Livesey.

Yes, I lean towards this James being the illegitimate son of Betty, SISTER of Henry. Contact gives me James Holden born Feb 19 1828, baptised March 28, (where?) mother Betty.

OC

Phoenix

James was 23 years married when he died. A quick look at Tockholes regs shows that the vicar at the time recorded a parent for every death including adults. Mostly father's names but quite often mother's name instead. Never both. This vicar was into genealogy by the way and wrote a book about Tockholes people.

[kiterunner]

Yes, I lean towards this James being the illegitimate son of Betty, SISTER of Henry. Contact gives me James Holden born Feb 19 1828, baptised March 28, (where?) mother Betty.



At St Paul, Blackburn. The PR is on ancestry and shows abode as Darwen.

[Olde Crone]

Ah, thankyou Kate. Does it say father Henry please?

OC

[kiterunner]

No, it just has mother Betty.

[Olde Crone]

Thankyou Kate. So Henry as the father is just a guess.

OC

[Merry]

Is this him?

1841:

Low Hills (?) Tockholes, Blackburn, Lancs

Henry Holden 35 farmer Yes
Mary Holden 60 Yes
Betty Holden 30 Yes
James Holden 13 Yes



Henry Holden married Betty Horrocks in 1825, Accrington but that doesn't mean the Betty on the 1841 is his wife, she could very well be his sister.

OC

I

If the Henry and Betty in my 1841 post are the same people who married in Accrington, they are pretty young. I can't find them on the following census.

[Olde Crone]

Merry

Henry supposedly 1805-1881, which would make him the 75 year old who died in Preston. I don't think my contact has the cert.

OC

[Olde Crone]

Edited to remove rubbish, sorry!

OC

[Merry]

I haven't been able to make Henry a brother to the three sisters yet.

I can't work out which are the baps for the three sisters as there are so many Holdens!

The only reason I thought James might be the son of the baking Elizabeth/Betty was because she was the only single lady alive and in the right area at the time of James' death, but that doesn't prove anything - then seeing her sister had a couple of children outside marriage encouraged me.

The Henry who died in Preston seems like just a random Henry of the right age. He may well be the one who appears on most censuses (inc 1841) with a wife Margaret in Preston.


Back to the drawing board with James, I think.........

[Merry]

It seems a little odd that your contact wants James to have been the child of a Henry and Betty when the baptism they have is for an illegitimate child!

I feel sure that's the right baptism, at least!! lol (James Holden born Feb 19 1828, baptised March 28, at Blackburn, mother Betty.)

[Olde Crone]

Merry

Contact imagines the vicar mistakenly left Henry's name off the record.

No, I couldn't find any convincing baptisms for the three sisters either, nor for Henry.

Last hope is a bastardy order but I don't remember ever finding any for the Blackburn area.

OC

[Merry]

Contact imagines the vicar mistakenly left Henry's name off the record.


and the son forgot his father's name when he married as well!! lol

[Olde Crone]

Yup, and so did the Vicar who buried him!

OC