Charlotte Ellen SMITH / EIGHTEEN [Archive] - Genealogists' Forum

James18

23-09-15, 16:10

[This is also on Family Tree Forum, so if you use both forums you may get some déjà vu!]

Hi all,

Having made excellent progress with my family tree, I am nonetheless a little stumped as to exactly who my great-grandmother was, as information we have on her is limited and I am still no closer to finding exact birth and death dates. Information I've found on other people's online family trees seems suspect when studied in any detail, and so I thought I'd ask for your help rather than just 'go with the flow' and make assumptions.

Her details on her marriage certificate to my great-grandfather are:

Name: Charlotte Ellen SMITH
Age: 18
Condition: Spinster
Profession: -
Residence: Arthur Road
Father's name: Thomas SMITH
Father's profession: General Dealer [this is not 100% clear but looks about right]

She married Frederick Syer EIGHTEEN at St. John's Church, Reading on 19/06/1886.

Curiously, on my grandfather's marriage certificate to my grandmother, he has put his mother's name as Ellen Charlotte EIGHTEEN, rather than Charlotte Ellen. This may be important, I don't know.

There is a January 1923 death certificate index for her under the name Charlotte E L EIGHTEEN, but it just gives her birth as 'about 1870' and doesn't give an exact date of death. I believe the L is for either Louise or Louisa; you will find references to this on public family trees on Ancestry, and she had a daughter named Vera Ellen Louise EIGHTEEN.

I've scoured Ancestry for Charlotte Ellens, Ellen Charlottes and variations thereof, but I've not been able to locate anyone I believe to be the right candidate. I've seen mentions of a Fortunatus SMITH who lived in Reading and had a daughter named Charlotte A SMITH, but I believe the link to be erroneous. I've checked census records for 1871 and 1881, but again can't seem to find a convincing Charlotte Ellen SMITH, and of course after 1891 she appears as Charlotte Ellen EIGHTEEN and lives with Frederick Syer, which is fine and obviously that's her.

I did find a school admission record for a Charlotte SMITH at one of the same schools as some of the EIGHTEEN children went to, but her birthday was 15/10/1870 and the father's name was Wm. [sic] which I think is William, so we can probably rule her out.

If any of you kind folks wouldn't mind doing a bit of research and trying to help me pin down the right Charlotte Ellen then I'd be hugely grateful. I suppose the obvious answer would be to just order a copy of her death certificate, but I'm not sure it would give her date of birth or much useful information there besides.

Do you have any advice for me? I'm fairly new to genealogy and have been making surprisingly good progress so far, but every so often I do seem to hit a brick wall.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 16:22

There is a January 1923 death certificate index for her under the name Charlotte E L EIGHTEEN, but it just gives her birth as 'about 1870' and doesn't give an exact date of death. I believe the L is for either Louise or Louisa; you will find references to this on public family trees on Ancestry, and she had a daughter named Vera Ellen Louise EIGHTEEN.

The actual index won't give a date or year of birth; this will have been calculated by software from her age at death on the index. If you want the exact date of death and to see what the L stands for, you would need to order a copy of the death certificate (unless we can find a burial entry or probate or something.) But it won't give her date of birth on the death cert either.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 16:28

Who were the witnesses at Charlotte and Frederick's wedding, please?

James18

23-09-15, 16:31

John and Sophia Eighteen, his brother and sister-in-law.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 16:36

There is a Thomas Smith at 4 Arthur Rd, Reading, in on the 1881 census, but he is an unmarried labourer in a biscuit factory:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7572/BRKRG11_1305_1308-0976/348648?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1881%26gss%3dangs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn_x%3d1 %26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26 msrpn__ftp%3dBerkshire%252c%2bEngland%26msrpn%3d52 54%26msrpn_PInfo%3d7-%257c0%257c0%257c3257%257c3251%257c0%257c0%257c0%2 57c5254%257c0%257c0%257c%26msrpn_x%3d1%26msrpn__ft p_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x %3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26 msbns0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng 0_x%3d1%26mscns0_x%3d1%26gskw%3darth*r%26gskw_x%3d 1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5%26gl%3d%26gst%3d%26hc%3d 10%26fh%3d10%26fsk%3dBEEGZmYIgAAdlAEzSJ4-61-&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

Age 45, born Combebrook, Middlesex. I'll see if I can find him in 1891 to rule him out.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 16:56

The Thomas Smith in post #5 is still unmarried in 1891, in Reading Union Workhouse, with occupation General Laborer. I haven't found him in 1871 yet (just in case he was with a young Charlotte then!)

kiterunner

23-09-15, 17:00

There is this family in 1881:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7572/BRKRG11_1300_1304-0263/312638?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1881%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_r_db %26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3del*n *%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbdy%3d1869%26msbdy _x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp%3dReading%252c%2bB erkshire%252c%2bEngland%26msbpn%3d82142%26msbpn_PI nfo%3d8-%257c0%257c0%257c3257%257c3251%257c0%257c0%257c0%2 57c5254%257c82142%257c0%257c%26msbpn_x%3d1%26msbpn __ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp%3dBerkshire%252c%2bEnglan d%26msrpn%3d5254%26msrpn_PInfo%3d7-%257c0%257c0%257c3257%257c3251%257c0%257c0%257c0%2 57c5254%257c0%257c0%257c%26msrpn_x%3d1%26msrpn__ft p_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng%3dtho*%26msfng_ x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26 msbng0_x%3d1%26msbns0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns 0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26mscns0_x%3d1%26_83004003-n_xcl%3dm%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

42 Castle Street, Reading
Thomas Smith Head Mar 31 Sawyer & Beer Shop Keeper Oxon Cropredy
Mary Do Wife Mar 39 Do Didenton
Ellen Do Daur 12 Scholar Berks Reading
Rosa Do Daur 9 Do Do Do
Anne Do Daur 5 Do Do Do
Maria Archer Servant Unm 21 Dairy Maid Do Ascot

James18

23-09-15, 17:03

kiterunner

23-09-15, 17:10

Frederick Syer lived at 7 Arthur Road according to the 1881 census, and so this will likely be the same address he was at in 1886 when he got married.

That means that Charlotte either lived with her own family (father?) down Arthur Road, or was already staying with Frederick Syer -- although given the period, I admit this is very unlikely.

So, I suppose that narrows things down.

She may have just put it down as her address when she got married for convenience's sake - so she was living in the same parish as Frederick, for instance, to save on having banns called in two churches or whatever.

Merry

23-09-15, 17:11

I'm not saying this is the case here, but couples often put the same address as each other when they married to save paying to have the banns read in two churches if they actually lived in two different parishes.

EDIT - sorry, snap Kate!

kiterunner

23-09-15, 17:20

The Thomas from post #7 is at the Forester's Arms, 99 London St, in 1891, and his occupation is Beer House Keeper. Daughter Ellen isn't with them.
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/6598/BRKRG12_993_996-0067/16184092?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1891%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_r_db %26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3dann* %26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbdy% 3d1876%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d 1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x% 3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26ms bng0_x%3d1%26msbns0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_ x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26mscns0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dreadi ng%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

and in 1871 he was a greengrocer:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7619/BRKRG10_1276_1279-0466/985452?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1871%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_r_db %26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3dtho* %26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbpn_ _ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp%3dBerkshire%252c%2bEngland %26msrpn%3d5254%26msrpn_PInfo%3d7-%257c0%257c0%257c3257%257c3251%257c0%257c0%257c0%2 57c5254%257c0%257c0%257c%26msrpn_x%3d1%26msrpn__ft p_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x %3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26 mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26gskw% 3dcr*p*d*%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

Shona

23-09-15, 17:26

Charlotte's age is recorded as 22, 31 and 41 in the 1891, 1901 and 1911 censuses. Find My Past has Charlotte Ellen Eighteen, age 53, buried on 19 January 1923, London Road Cemetery. Residence: 30 Leopold Road. Therefore a birth year of 1870 give or take a couple of years seems likely. In each of the census records, her birthplace is Reading.

There is a birth of a Charlotte E Ada Smith registered in the first quarter of 1870 in Reading. So far, I haven't found her in the census records prior to her marriage.

James18

23-09-15, 17:26

This is very interesting information, Kate. Appreciated.

I wonder, can you find them on the 1871 census? If it turns out Charlotte/Ellen wasn't born in Reading after all (as I'd been led to believe) then that may explain why I've not been able to find a birth index for her.

Well, that and the fact she's down as just being an Ellen Smith.

EDIT: Sorry, just saw the 1871 link. Likely was born in Reading, then.

So we're looking for an Ellen Smith, c. 1869?

James18

23-09-15, 17:29

Charlotte's age is recorded as 22, 31 and 41 in the 1891, 1901 and 1911 censuses. Find My Past has Charlotte Ellen Eighteen, age 53, buried on 19 January 1923, London Road Cemetery. Residence: 30 Leopold Road. Therefore a birth year of 1870 give or take a couple of years seems likely.

There is a birth of a Charlotte E Ada Smith registered in the first quarter of 1870 in Reading. So far, I haven't found her in the census records prior to her marriage.
Yes, this is the information I already had.

Charlotte E Ada Smith is, I believe, the daughter of Fortunatus Smith, and a red herring. I won't rule it out, but I don't think it's her.

James18

23-09-15, 17:41

Okay, here's a theory...

I know that children were often baptized together rather than individually, and I have a baptism record for three of my grandfather's brothers being baptized on the same day, despite being born a few years apart.

I found a baptism record for a Charlotte Ellen Smith here (http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?gss=angs-c&new=1&rank=1&gsfn=Ellen&gsln=Smith&gsln_x=NN&mswpn__ftp=Reading%2c+Berkshire%2c+England&mswpn=82142&mswpn_PInfo=8-%7c0%7c0%7c3257%7c3251%7c0%7c0%7c0%7c5254%7c82142% 7c0%7c&MSAV=1&msbdy=1869&msfng=Thomas&msfns=Smith&msmng=Mary&msmns=Smith&cpxt=1&cp=11&catbucket=rstp&uidh=yke&pcat=BMD_BIRTH&h=40495116&db=FS1EnglandBirthsandChristenings&indiv=1&ml_rpos=23). What do we think to the idea that she was born Ellen Smith c1869, but was baptized - perhaps with some of her siblings - and given the name Charlotte in 1876?

That gives us the right name, the right location, and the right parents.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 17:42

The 1887 Reading directory (Kelly's Directory of Berkshire, on the Historical Directories website) has "Smith, Thomas, fruiterer, 22 Castle Street", who I should think is the same Thomas as in posts #7 and #11. But no closer to finding out whether he is your Thomas!

kiterunner

23-09-15, 17:48

James18

23-09-15, 17:54

That would make sense, although sadly I still can't find a birth index.

Still, at least we know (or at least have a good reason to think) we're looking for an Ellen Smith, rather than a Charlotte.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 19:06

The fact that she is called Ellen on the censuses doesn't necessarily mean that her birth was registered as Ellen - could just be that she was officially Charlotte Ellen but known as Ellen.

Also, bear in mind that it wasn't compulsory to register a birth until 1875, so it could be that Charlotte Ellen wasn't registered.

She is age 1 on the 1871 census and has a younger sister Henrietta, age 1 month.

Looking on the Berkshire BMD site, I can't see a birth registration for Henrietta in 1871.

The age difference between Thomas and Mary does make me wonder whether Mary was married before, though. Hopefully the others in the household in 1871 can help with tracing her, though I'm off to eat soon:

1871 census
32 St Mary's Butts, Reading
Thomas Smith Head Mar 24 Greengrocer Oxon Cropredy
Mary Smith Wife Mar 29 Do's Wife Oxon Denton
Ellen Smith Daughter 1 Berks Reading
Henrietta Smith Daughter 1 mo Berks Reading
Annie Preedy Sis in Law Widow 28 Oxon Bandicutt
Fanny Preedy Niece 4 Surry Croydon

kiterunner

23-09-15, 19:11

Hmm, there are possible birth regs for Rose (1872) and Anne Maria on Berkshire BMD, though the one for Anne Maria is Maria A F (1876). But with a name like Smith, it's so easy to go wrong.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 19:19

This looks like Mary in 1851 but I have to go and eat now:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8860/NTHHO107_1735_1735-0037/4232866?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1851%26gss%3dangs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3dmar y%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbdy%3d1842%26msbdy _x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp _x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x% 3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0%3dann*%26 msbng0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng 0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dd*d*n*t*n%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2 %26uidh%3dvm5%26gl%3d%26gst%3d%26hc%3d10%26fh%3d20 %26fsk%3dBEEszMwIgAAinACo3zU-61-&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

Paradise, King's Sutton, Northamptonshire
Joseph Preedy Head Mar 34 Groom Oxon Middle Aston
Catherine Do Wife Mar 32 North Aynho
Benjamin Do Son 12 Ag Labourer Oxon Deddington
Mary Do Daur 11 Do Do
Ann Do Daur 9 Oxon Boddicott
William Do Son 7 North Kings Sutton
Albert Do Son 4 Do Do
John Do Son 1 Do Do

Merry

23-09-15, 19:19

I couldn't find a birth reg for Fanny or Frances Preedy either!

However, I took a chance that Annie Preedy was actually b at Bodicote in Oxfordshire (rather than Bandicutt as written on the 1871 census)

I looked at Ann* b Bodicote in 1851 and then looked to see if there was a sister called Mary b somewhere that looked a bit like Denton. I found an Ann and Mary of the right ages, Ann b Bodicote and Mary b Deddington Oxon and their surname was...............

Preedy! lol

http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8860/NTHHO107_1735_1735-0037?pid=4232867&backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk%2f%2fcg i-bin%2fsse.dll%3findiv%3d1%26db%3duki1851%26gss%3da ngs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3dann*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp _x%3d1%26msbdy%3d1842%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26 msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw%3dbod*cot*%26gskw_x%3d1%26 _83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3 drstp%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3d672%26pcat%3d35%26fh%3d8 %26h%3d4232867%26recoff%3d6%26ml_rpos%3d9&treeid=&personid=&hintid=&usePUB=true

Transcribed by Ancestry as Pereey

So, on the face of it Annie Preedy was not a widow in 1871 which explains why I didn't find anything when I looked for Preedy marriages and a death for a Preedy husband etc.

Of course I can't find a Preedy/Smith marriage but as Kate said, Mary may have been previously married.

Merry

23-09-15, 19:21

It seems I've been too slow as I spent a VERY LONG TIME on that last post, but I was too slow!

James18

23-09-15, 19:32

This is looking like I won't be able to order a birth certificate for her. :(

kiterunner

23-09-15, 22:10

This is looking like I won't be able to order a birth certificate for her. :(

Maybe not, but it could be that she was registered with a different name from what we are expecting. There are a few Ellens with different middle names around the right time, for instance.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 22:12

This is Mary Preedy on the 1861 census, at Cropredy, Oxfordshire (Thomas's birthplace), 21, unmarried, dairy maid.
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8767/OXFRG9_916_920-0198/18288525?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3findiv%3d1%26db%3duki1861%26gss%3da ngs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3dmary%2b%2b%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbd y%3d1839%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_x% 3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_ x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26 msbng0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng 0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dd*d*n*t*n%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2 %26uidh%3dvm5%26pcat%3d35%26fh%3d114%26h%3d1828852 5%26recoff%3d%26fsk%3dBEFTMzMIgAAiPwDO-43-V4-61-%26bsk%3d%26pgoff%3d%26ml_rpos%3d115&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnRecord

kiterunner

23-09-15, 22:26

There is a Mary Preedy marriage in the Oct-Dec quarter of 1861 in Banbury district, which was the district for Cropredy, to either a John Checkley or an Edward Gregory. The other bride was Emma Cantwell. I haven't managed to find any of them afterwards yet to sort them out.

kiterunner

23-09-15, 22:38

There is a John Checkley, married, with no wife, in Cropredy on the 1871 census. He is 59.
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7619/OXFRG10_1461_1464-0488/14407898?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3findiv%3d1%26db%3duki1871%26gss%3da ngs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3djohn%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dch*k*y%26gsln_x% 3d1%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn_ _ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3 d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26m ssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5 %26pcat%3d35%26fh%3d36%26h%3d14407898%26recoff%3d% 26fsk%3dBEEGZmYIgAAdwwA01uw-61-%26bsk%3d%26pgoff%3d%26ml_rpos%3d37&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnRecord
And I think this is the same John in 1861, a widower:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8767/OXFRG9_916_920-0203/18288647?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1861%26gss%3dangs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3djohn%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dch*k*y%26gsln_x% 3d1%26msbdy%3d1812%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d10%26ms bpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3 d1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msm ns_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x% 3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5%26gl%3d %26gst%3d%26hc%3d10%26fh%3d10%26fsk%3dBEDmZmYIgAAi PwAvgl4-61-&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

James18

24-09-15, 08:44

Good job on finding that previous marriage. So what's your theory?

kiterunner

24-09-15, 08:52

John Checkley is down as a widower in 1881:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7572/OXFRG11_1526_1531-0153/18018674?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3findiv%3d1%26db%3duki1881%26gss%3da ngs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3djohn%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dch*k*y%26gsln_x% 3d1%26msbdy%3d1812%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d5%26msb pn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d 1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmn s_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26msbns0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3 d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26mscns0_x%3d1%26 MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5%26pcat%3d35%26fh%3d5%26h%3d1 8018674%26recoff%3d%26ml_rpos%3d6&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnRecord#?imageId=OXFRG11_1526_1531-0154

and in 1891:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/6598/OXFRG12_1182_1184-0054/16080633?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1891%26so%3d2%26pcat%3d189 1UKI%26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3djohn%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dch*k*y%26gsln_x% 3d1%26msbdy%3d1812%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d5%26msb pn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d 1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmn s_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26msbns0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3 d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26mscns0_x%3d1%26 MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

It was pretty normal for someone to say they were widowed on the census when they were really separated from their spouse, though.

There is a John Checkley death Jan-Mar 1900 Banbury district, age 87, which could be him.

If he was Mary's husband, it would certainly explain why we can't find a marriage between her and Thomas Smith.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 08:54

Good job on finding that previous marriage. So what's your theory?

My theory is that young dairymaid Mary Preedy married much older widower John Checkley, and a few years later she ran off to Reading with young Thomas Smith.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 09:03

I posted a link to the Smiths' 1891 census entry before (in post #11), but I didn't note this one of their lodgers:

Catherine Preedy Lodger Wid 70 On her means Oxon Chipton

Margaret in Burton

24-09-15, 09:06

Have you looked for the marriage many many years after you were expecting to find it?
I ask as in my family, an Emma Smith marries. She has three children by this man and then runs off with his cousin. She had a child with him but had to leave her other children with their father. They were told she'd died.
I used to be in touch with the granddaughter of the child of the runaways.
They didn't marry until many years later after her husband had died. In fact I've also made a connection through GR many years ago with the descendants of the first family. It was them who told me the story of her supposed death. They wouldn't believe the truth even though I offered to send copies of certs. I said find the death then, they couldn't. Still refused to believe so I gave up. If people don't want to find a skeleton in the cupboard they shouldn't look into their family history.

I wish you luck in your quest James.

James18

24-09-15, 09:16

Thank you, Margaret.

Finding skeletons in closets is not something that bothers me, and I've found a few so far!

It's quite possible they married later in life, although I suspect if Kate's theory holds up then they probably pretended to be married when they arrived in Reading.

I've tried searching for an Ellen born to a Thomas Smith and a Mary Smith/Preedy/Checkley, and no luck so far. I'm far from giving up on this, but it does look increasingly like no birth was registered. I wonder if it would help to try to find a birth record for one of her siblings, to see what the details look like.

That could help with tracing her, if indeed a record exists.

Still, at least we know when she was baptized and died. That's something, I suppose.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 09:19

I have looked for a marriage between Thomas and Mary long after their children were born, but I didn't find one, Marg.
I can't find Mary on the 1901 census, and there is a possible death for her in the last quarter of 1891. Of course there are so many Mary Smith deaths it may well not be her. But it could be that she and Thomas never got the chance to marry because she died before her husband did.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 09:23

I've tried searching for an Ellen born to a Thomas Smith and a Mary Smith/Preedy/Checkley, and no luck so far. I'm far from giving up on this, but it does look increasingly like no birth was registered. I wonder if it would help to try to find a birth record for one of her siblings, to see what the details look like.

Mother's maiden name wasn't shown on the GRO birth index in those days, James, and Berkshire BMD doesn't have it on their index for any of the records I looked at yesterday. I'll go back and try to put together the possible birth regs and see if we can rule any of them out without you ordering all of them!

James18

24-09-15, 09:31

Mother's maiden name wasn't shown on the GRO birth index in those days, James, and Berkshire BMD doesn't have it on their index for any of the records I looked at yesterday. I'll go back and try to put together the possible birth regs and see if we can rule any of them out without you ordering all of them!
Appreciated! :D

It looks like Ellen was the oldest, anyway, and had a younger sister named Henrietta who appears to have died at some point between the 1871 and 1881 census', with Rose and Anne being born in the mean time.

James18

24-09-15, 09:39

On the 1871 census, Ellen is 1 year old and Henrietta is 1 month, which would mean she was conceived roughly ten months prior. On that basis, Ellen must surely have been nearly two years old on April 2nd, 1871.

Would June 1869 make sense as a rough date of birth? In terms of narrowing down birth indexing.

(Sorry if my maths is rubbish!)

EDIT: Mind you, she's down as being 18 on her marriage certificate, which would make her d.o.b. 1868... but she could have been lying. I assume it was 18 to marry in those days, and she was (we're fairly sure) already pregnant when she married Frederick Syer.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 09:51

EDIT: Mind you, she's down as being 18 on her marriage certificate, which would make her d.o.b. 1868... but she could have been lying. I assume it was 18 to marry in those days, and she was (we're fairly sure) already pregnant when she married Frederick Syer.

No, you didn't have to be 18 to marry in those days; you could marry much younger than that, and it was 21 to marry without parental consent. But people weren't always very sure of their exact date of birth anyway.

James18

24-09-15, 10:02

Ah, right, then that's fine then. It rules out needing to lie about her age on the marriage certificate. Makes things a bit easier to trace.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 10:02

Starting with Henrietta:

FamilySearch has the baptism of an Edith Mary Smith 23 Aug 1871 at St Mary's, Reading. FreeBMD shows the birth registration of an Edith Mary Smith Apr-Jun 1871 and death reg Jul-Sep 1871, age 0. Berkshire BMD shows that both of these were in the St Mary sub-district of Reading. The Smiths were in St Mary's parish on the 1871 census (and 1881). So it's possible that they changed their minds about her name in between census night and registering the birth, or it could be a mistake on the census, or of course Edith Mary could belong to a different family altogether. If she is Henrietta, then it would seem strange that they didn't get Charlotte Ellen baptised at the same time, but it could be that the baby's baptism was an emergency one if she was very ill and likely to die.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 10:19

Charlotte Ellen:

The only birth reg for a Charlotte is Charlotte Ada, and I think you have already ruled her out?

There are three birth regs for Ellen Smiths around the right time:
Ellen Elizabeth Jul-Sep 1868 (St Giles sub-district)
Ellen French Oct-Dec 1869 (St Mary sub-district)
Ellen Lucy Jan-Mar 1870 (St Lawrence sub-district).

There is the baptism of a Helen Elizabeth Smith 11 Sep 1868 at St Giles, Reading, daughter of Henry and Matilda, and no birth reg for a Helen.

So I think we can rule Ellen Elizabeth out, but I haven't found anything more on Ellen French or Ellen Lucy yet.

James18

24-09-15, 10:24

Yes, Charlotte Ada Smith is the daughter of a Fortunas Smith, who a lot of people seem to have down as being my great-grandmother's father, but I honestly think this is a case of people just copying what other people/family trees have done and assuming it is right.

If you do some quick research into this, you can see that it is certainly not the same family as our Thomas, Mary and Ellen Smith, and the father's name on the marriage certificate is definitely Thomas Smith, so I've ruled it out on that alone. Whatever else one may lie about on official records, I can't think of a reason to lie about her father's name.

I am fairly confident Charlotte Ada is nothing to do with my family, but feel free to argue that point if you uncover further evidence.

EDIT: Fortunas/Thomas and Charlotte/Ellen are also obviously not the same people, and appear on separate census records in different parts of the country.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 10:35

A public ancestry tree shows Ellen Lucy Smith born 1870 Reading as marrying a Mark Leeks 15 Oct 1894 at Holy Trinity, Barnes, Surrey. On the marriage cert she is just Ellen Smith, age 24, father Henry Smith, licensed victualler. On the 1901 census she is age 30, born Reading, with a brother William Smith age 23, born Stockfield(?), Berks. On the 1911 census she is Ellen Lucy.
Ah, on the 1891 census Ellen Lucy Smith age 21, born Reading, is the daughter of Henry and Matilda. Ellen Elizabeth Smith died 1868 age 0. So it seems that Ellen Lucy Smith was the younger sister of Ellen Elizabeth, both daughters of Henry and Matilda. That just leaves Ellen French to rule out or in...

James18

24-09-15, 10:44

Indeed, great work Kate. You're an old hand at this now for sure.

We can account for Charlotte Ellen after her marriage to Frederick Syer, as she lived with him at various Eighteen family properties (that family owned a lot of houses in Reading) and is on the 1891, 1901 and 1911 census' alongside him and their ever-expanding litter of children.

My guess would be that Ellen French isn't her, but of course it could well be. The problem is that if it isn't her, we're back to square one.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 10:55

I should look for birth regs for Rosa and Anne next, but I got a bit sidetracked with the name French trying to see whether either Thomas or Mary had a French in their families. There are quite a few Frenches in Cropredy, but I think it is quite a common surname. I have to go out shopping now, but will just leave this to work on later, probably a red herring, but what if Thomas was originally a French and changed his name to Smith?!
1851 Cropredy
Elexander French Head Mar 49 Ag Lab Oxfordshire Cropredy
Charlott Do Wife 34 Oxfordshire Barford St John
Children all born Cropredy: Elexander 12, Elizabeth 11, Joice 9, William 7, Sarah 6, Thomas 1.
1861 Cropredy
Charlotte French Head Mar 49 Ag Lab Wife Oxford Barford
Children all born Cropredy: Elizabeth 20, Thomas 11, James 9, Mary A 4.

Not found any of them in 1871 yet except for James who is a lodger somewhere.

Merry

24-09-15, 12:33

I don't have time to look at this again now (and am on my phone which isn't the best implement for doing searches), but just wanted to point out quickly that surely it would be likely Henrietta died before he date of the baptisms of her siblings in 1876 (was it 1876? don't have time to check!). Anyway, though the registration of a death was also not compulsory until the same year as it became compulsory to register births, it is much less common for a death to go unregistered in this time frame (1871-1876), yet when I looked yesterday I didn't see a death reg for Henrietta and I thought that could be something worth investigating.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 12:35

Oh blimey, there is a public tree on ancestry for Alexander French and Charlotte which looks just as messy as the saga of Thomas and Mary. Makes me think it is the right family for Thomas! Will investigate further.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 12:49

James18

24-09-15, 12:57

kiterunner

24-09-15, 12:58

This looks to be Thomas Smith in 1901:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7814/MDXRG13_1203_1205-0957/1907739?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fgst%3d-6&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

When I looked at it earlier, I thought it was a different Thomas because of the occupation, but now looking at the landlady's name and birthplace, I think it is probably the right Thomas.

12 St Andrews Rd, Hanwell, Middlesex
Benjamin C Pritchard Head M 38 Laundry Proprietor Hants Basingstoke
Edith M Do Wife M 37 Do Do Berks Reading
Thomas Smith Boarder Widr 51 Tree Feller Oxon Cropdury

Benjamin Charles Pritchard and Edith Maude Gosling married Jan-Mar 1892 Basingstoke.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 13:01

As someone else asked, I just wanted to clear up a few possible issues re identity: http://www.familytreeforum.com/showthread.php/112747-Help-determining-exactly-who-my-great-grandmother-was?p=2554573&viewfull=1#post2554573

Not much use in finding out about her birth, though.

Sorry, I don't quite get what you mean, James. Do you mean you aren't interested in tracing her parents back? I think in a case like this, it's best to follow all leads and possible lines as far as possible, in case you find something on one of them which confirms you have the right family.

For instance, if we manage to find anything to prove that Thomas French became Thomas Smith, it would make it very likely that Ellen French Smith is your Charlotte Ellen.

James18

24-09-15, 13:35

Sorry, you misunderstand me, I meant that my post linked to above may not be much use in finding out about her birth, not that I wasn't interested in doing so!

kiterunner

24-09-15, 13:36

Can anybody find Thomas Smith born about 1850 in Cropredy, Oxfordshire, before the 1871 census, or Thomas French born same date, same place, after the 1861 census? I haven't been able to. I did find another Thomas French of about the same age (a little bit older) in 1871 but I also found that one in 1851 so not him.

Of course Thomas French could have died young; there is a possible death in 1864 before age was shown on the death index. But apart from that, I can't find anything to prove that Thomas French didn't change his name to Smith.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 13:37

Sorry, you misunderstand me, I meant that my post linked to above may not be much use in finding out about her birth, not that I wasn't interested in doing so!

Oh right, thanks for the explanation.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 13:47

Anyway, going back to searching for birth regs for Ellen's sisters:

Rose / Rosa (Rosa age 9 on the 1881 census, but baptised as Rose according to FamilySearch)
There is a birth reg for a Rose Smith Apr-Jun 1872 Reading district, shown as St Mary sub-district on Berkshire BMD. I can't find an alternative baptism for her. So this could well be the right birth reg.

Anne (Anne age 5 in 1881, Annie age 16 in 1891, baptised as Annie Maria according to FamilySearch. Must have been born before 17 Feb 1876 as that is the baptism date)
The only possible birth reg I can see for her is Maria Annie F Smith Jan-Mar 1876 Reading (St Mary sub-district on Berkshire BMD.) I wonder whether the F stands for French?! Again, I don't see another baptism for this Maria.

I will try to trace Rose and Annie forwards to see whether we get any clues from that.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 14:24

The 1901 census has a Rose Smith age 19, born Reading, as a servant in Frimley, Surrey:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/6598/SRYRG12_565_567-0017/23088514?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1891%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_db%2 6new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsf n%3dros*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1% 26msbdy%3d1873%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26 msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x% 3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26msbns0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%2 6mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26mscns0_x%3d1%26gskw %3dreading%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

And this could be Anne in 1911:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/2352/rg14_05351_0013_03/51629795?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fgst%3d-6&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Annie Maria Smith, single, 35, boarding house proprietor in Littlehampton, Sussex, born Reading, Berks, St Mary's.

No clues.

James18

24-09-15, 14:28

Could well be her, as she was baptized Annie Maria in 1876.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 14:36

This is Annie in 1901:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7814/ESSRG13_1572_1574-0372/8945095?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1901%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_db%2 6new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsf n%3dann*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1% 26msbdy%3d1876%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26 msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x% 3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%2 6mscng0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dreading%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV %3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

Merry

24-09-15, 15:00

Did you read post #41 yet, Merry? Do you think she could be Edith Mary?

I think there's a very good chance she is.

James18

24-09-15, 15:36

Interestingly, my uncle's family tree he made for his sister (my aunt) some twenty years ago - before extensive Internet research was available - has:

Charlotte Ellen SMITH b.1870 Reading
Fortunatus SMITH b.1835 Surrey
Hortensius SMITH b.1811 Surrey
...and so on.

I still think that's wrong, though, and it'd be great if we could somehow prove it.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 15:56

Sorry, I thought you said you had already proved that your Charlotte Ellen wasn't the daughter of Fortunatus. I'll have a look at that family now.

James18

24-09-15, 15:59

Well, I don't think she is, because on her marriage certificate she has put her father's name as being Thomas Smith.

I'm just saying that when my uncle did his research in the 90s, he'd obviously ended up with the Fortunatus / Charlotte Ada Smith link, which other people online have too. I think it's wrong, though.

Merry

24-09-15, 16:06

Somewhere back on this thread I think there's more info on the dau of Fortunatus. Shona found her marriage and she appears on the census at the same time as your Ellen/Charlotte, so is clearly a different person. She had Ada as one of her middle names.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 16:32

Charlotte Ada Smith's birth was registered Jan-Mar 1870, in the St Giles sub-district of Reading. On the 1871 census Fortunatus and Emma are in the St Giles parish with daughter Charlotte A age 1, born Reading. On the 1881 census they are in Kings Langley, Herts, and Charlotte A is age 11. On the 1891 census Emma is in Portsea, Hampshire, a widow, with her younger children, and this must be Charlotte Ada:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/6598/HAMRG12_867_869-0226/14336783?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1891%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_r_db %26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3dchar l*t*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1%26ms bdy%3d1870%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_ x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfn g_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1% 26msbng0_x%3d1%26msbns0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mss ns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26mscns0_x%3d1%26gskw%3db %253frk*%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Also in Portsea, she is down as Charlotte A Smith, 21, unmarried, servant, born Reading.

Your Charlotte Ellen was married with a child by that time, wasn't she?

I will try following Charlotte Ada further forward (sorry, Merry, I couldn't find where her marriage was posted on this thread?).

I would take the above plus your Charlotte's father being Thomas, general dealer, on her marriage cert as proof enough that your uncle's tree is wrong. But if you are trying to prove it to him and / or your sister, I'm sorry to say that it could be difficult to get them to give up a family tree with names like Fortunatus and Hortensius in it, and to accept that their ancestor was the illegitimate daughter of an illegitimate ag lab turned beer house keeper who changed his name from Thomas French to Thomas Smith (I realise this bit hasn't been proved yet), and Mary who was actually married to somebody else. Especially if they have made contact with "distant cousins" who share this tree, have visited the places their "ancestors" came from, and so on.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 16:37

Charlotte Ada is with her mother Emma and siblings in Camberwell, London, in 1901, listed as Ada, single, age 31:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7814/LNDRG13_507_508-0086/3819861?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1901%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_db%2 6new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsf n%3demma%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1% 26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp _x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%2 6msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns 0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dwinchester%26gskw_ x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

Merry

24-09-15, 16:42

I will try following Charlotte Ada further forward (sorry, Merry, I couldn't find where her marriage was posted on this thread?).

There is a birth of a Charlotte E Ada Smith registered in the first quarter of 1870 in Reading. So far, I haven't found her in the census records prior to her marriage.

When I originally read the above I'd already looked at the dau of Fortunatus and knew she was Charlotte E Ada and I thought Shona was referring to the marriage of this Charlotte, but maybe she was referring to James's ancestor's marriage!

*slinks away* :o

kiterunner

24-09-15, 16:44

And in 1911 Charlotte Ada is with Emma again, in Peckham, London, but as Ada Tallent, married for 7 years, one child (a daughter, Mildred):
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/2352/rg14_02514_0765_03/3954042?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3d1911England%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_ r_db%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3d ada%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1%26msb dy%3d1870%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_x %3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng _x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%2 6msbng0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscn g0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dreading%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2% 26uidh%3dvm5&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

kiterunner

24-09-15, 16:46

When I originally read the above I'd already looked at the dau of Fortunatus and knew she was Charlotte E Ada and I thought Shona was referring to the marriage of this Charlotte, but maybe she was referring to James's ancestor's marriage!

*slinks away* :o

I think the "E" in Charlotte E Ada was a typo in Shona's post, because she is just Charlotte Ada on the GRO index and Berkshire BMD.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 16:50

I presume her marriage is Harry Tallent / Ada Smith Jul-Sep 1904 Camberwell, but I can't find it in the parish registers on ancestry. Probably a register office / non-conformist wedding.

There is a public tree on ancestry which has the correct marriage for Charlotte Ada and lots of extra info, even a nickname for her:
http://trees.ancestry.co.uk/tree/68517791/person/32183760899

Maybe the tree-owner actually knew her.

James18

24-09-15, 18:30

Yeah, they're different, and it's not a case of trying to prove anything to my uncle (he's dead, for a start) but rather that I am doing our family tree from scratch; I am using some of my uncle's existing notes, but double-checking everything rather than copying his work and adding to it.

I realized quite early on that Fortunatus' daughter was very likely a different person, so that's not a problem.

I'm happy to continue down the French/Smith route, and for what it's worth - looking at the evidence provided so far - I think you're bang on the money.

I appreciate everything you girls have done, and I look forward to hearing more.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 18:47

I think what you should do now, James, is to order the Ellen French Smith birth certificate, and also get copies of the Smith baptisms from 1876 and the one from 1871. The 1876 baptisms might give the ages of the children or even dates of birth (though these may not be accurate), and if that birth cert turns out to be the right one then we would know the name French is definitely connected with your family.

After that you might want to get more certificates, e.g. Mary's marriage cert for her marriage to John Checkley, the other girls' birth certs, etc. but maybe one or two at a time!

James18

24-09-15, 18:54

Kate, would it be possible for you to provide links to the specific Ancestry indexes you think I should order, so I make sure I don't order the wrong ones by mistake?

Thank you.

kiterunner

24-09-15, 19:20

Yes, I'll do it later, James.

James18

24-09-15, 19:25

Thanks.

I assume this (http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?gss=angs-g&new=1&rank=1&gsfn=Ellen+French&gsln=Smith&MSAV=0&cp=0&catbucket=rstp&uidh=yke&pcat=ROOT_CATEGORY&h=50998789&recoff=7+8+9&db=FreeBMDBirth&indiv=1&ml_rpos=3) would be the starting point?

EDIT: Although, if she was born September+ 1869 then she wouldn't have been 18 when she got married in June 1886. Of course, it depends how long after the birth it was registered, and so on.

James18

24-09-15, 19:48

To start with, I'm going to order Charlotte E Eighteen's death certificate (January 1923) as I at least know that's her, and perhaps it will provide some details we don't already have. At the very least, it should provide an accurate date of death.

With any luck there may be a better hint towards her year of birth. Who knows.

Merry

24-09-15, 20:17

I think the "E" in Charlotte E Ada was a typo in Shona's post, because she is just Charlotte Ada on the GRO index and Berkshire BMD.

lol When I first read Shona's post I thought I'd not seen the E when I'd looked at the birth indexes and imagined that was why I'd not come across a marriage for her!!

James18

24-09-15, 21:26

kiterunner

24-09-15, 22:03

Yes, the birth reference you linked to in post #75 (the birth reg for Ellen French Smith) is the one I was saying you should order straight away. I honestly wouldn't worry about her age on her marriage cert being slightly out. But certainly her death cert is important too.

The John Checkley / Mary Preedy marriage refs are: Oct-Dec 1861, district Banbury, volume 3a, p 1250. I don't tend to use ancestry to look up BMD references; I normally use FreeBMD instead. Whichever you use, you should always view the image of the index page to make sure the numbers have been transcribed correctly before ordering.

As for the Reading baptisms, you would need to either go to Berkshire Record Office to view them, or contact Berkshire Record Office to order copies, or order the microfilm in to your local FamilySearch Centre.

This is the link to Berkshire Record Office's website:
http://www.berkshirerecordoffice.org.uk/

If you want to order the microfilm to your FamilySearch Centre, it is film number 1040619 (it shows you this when you click on the baptism entries in your search results on FamilySearch.)

kiterunner

24-09-15, 22:04

With any luck there may be a better hint towards her year of birth. Who knows.

Age at death is usually less accurate than on earlier records, since it is supplied by the "informant" who may not have the correct information.

Merry

25-09-15, 05:57

Age at death is usually less accurate than on earlier records, since it is supplied by the "informant" who may not have the correct information.

And, the age at death on the certificate would normally be the same age as is given in the GRO index, so in this case 53.

Margaret in Burton

25-09-15, 08:36

And, the age at death on the certificate would normally be the same age as is given in the GRO index, so in this case 53.

I agree with Merry. The age on the actual certificate is going to be exactly the same as in the index. There won't be a date of birth as it's pre 1969.
England and Wales death certs hold very little information. The only extras you will discover are the date she died, where she died, cause of death and if there was an inquest and the informant. If there was an inquest then the informant is usually the coroner which doesn't help with tracing family. If there is no inquest then the informant maybe a family member.

James18

25-09-15, 08:37

How far were you able to get following the French route? I wonder what else we can find out before I have to order some certificates.

Kate, what's your theory on the name change? When and why?

Merry

25-09-15, 08:52

Just going out, but I note this must be the marriage for Alexander and Charlotte French

Marriages Mar 1844

FRENCH Alexander Banbury 16 9
SAVAGE Elizabeth Banbury 16 9
STEPHENS Charlotte Banbury 16 9
WHITEHEAD Thomas Banbury 16 9

They are already together in 1841 in Cropredy (ancestry spellings, I've not viewed the page):

Elexander French 35
Sharlott Stephens 25
Elexander Stephens 2
Elizabeth Stephens 1

Must dash........ !

kiterunner

25-09-15, 08:52

How far were you able to get following the French route? I wonder what else we can find out before I have to order some certificates.

Kate, what's your theory on the name change? When and why?

I think it would be best if you order the Ellen French Smith birth certificate now so we can see for sure whether the name French is relevant to your family. What I found out from looking into the Frenches was that there is a Thomas French born in Cropredy at the right time, mother's name Charlotte, (which of course would fit with your Ellen being given the name Charlotte), and I couldn't find any trace of him after your Thomas Smith first appears in the records. But I couldn't find anything that would definitely prove that he is the same person as Thomas Smith. If it turns out that he gave Ellen the name French (and possibly Anne too, as the likely birth reg for her is indexed as Maria Annie F Smith, Jan-Mar 1876 Reading, vol 2c, p 357) then that would be a very strong indication that he was Thomas French. Until we know whether this is the right birth certificate, though, I wouldn't like to say for sure.

If Thomas French did change his name to Thomas Smith, then I guess it was either to try to avoid being traced by John Checkley or someone else, or that the name Smith comes from somewhere else back in the family tree - a brief look at the public tree on ancestry for the French family suggested that Charlotte was already married to a Mr Stevens when she married Alexander French, but I didn't look into them very closely to see if the name Smith appeared anywhere as I feel we need to know whether there is a "French connection" (sorry!) first.

James18

25-09-15, 09:02

Right, okay then, sod it, I'll order her (hopefully!) birth and death certificates now. :D

EDIT: Done!

kiterunner

25-09-15, 09:16

Let us know when they arrive, please, James!

James18

25-09-15, 09:24

Let us know when they arrive, please, James!
Will do!

Hopefully this is our breakthrough. I'm going up to Scotland for a little family reunion in early October, so it's a shame I probably won't have this information verified and sorted out in time because it's doubtful the certificates will have arrived by then, but thankfully I do have a lot of other information to share.

I'll certainly tell my aunt about the Fortunatus Smith red herring, and about your French theory, etc.

Fascinating stuff. If you find out anything else please do let me know. I really appreciate all the effort you've gone to, Kate. Much obliged.

I hope this is a beginning rather than an end.

James18

27-09-15, 09:47

Kate, I'm a bit confused with all of these names and theories... what was your idea as to who Ellen French Smith's (if it's our girl) parents were? What name would she be under on the 1871 census?

For 1881 I believe she's just Ellen Smith, by which time she's with Thomas and Mary Smith, right?

I'm just trying to put a picture together in my head, but I'm a bit confused.

kiterunner

27-09-15, 09:53

This is the 1871 census entry, remember, with Ellen age 1:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7619/BRKRG10_1276_1279-0466/985452?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1871%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_r_db %26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3dtho* %26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dsmith%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbpn_ _ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp%3dBerkshire%252c%2bEngland %26msrpn%3d5254%26msrpn_PInfo%3d7-%257c0%257c0%257c3257%257c3251%257c0%257c0%257c0%2 57c5254%257c0%257c0%257c%26msrpn_x%3d1%26msrpn__ft p_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x %3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26 mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26gskw% 3dcr*p*d*%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

I don't know of any reason to think that Thomas and Mary weren't her parents?

James18

27-09-15, 10:06

kiterunner

27-09-15, 10:23

Ah, that's it. Sorry, I was just a bit confused with this French link.

Who was it you thought had been married to a Mr. Stevens (?) before? Was that Ellen?

And we think Mary was married to a John Checkley, an older widow, but ran off with this Thomas Smith and possibly changed her name?

(I have been trying to follow all this, I promise!)

Thomas French's mother Charlotte seems to have been married to a Mr Stevens, but I didn't really look into that much as we don't know whether Thomas French did become Thomas Smith or not. When you have the Ellen French Smith birth cert, we should know whether it is your Charlotte Ellen or not, and if it is, we can look into the French family tree more then.

Yes, I think Mary Preedy married an older widower, John Checkley, and ran off with Thomas. If he was indeed Thomas French, then they changed their surname to Smith. But again, this is just a theory as you would need the marriage cert to check that it is the same Mary Preedy and the same John Checkley that we have been looking at.

Merry

27-09-15, 11:03

this is just a theory as you would need the marriage cert to check that it is the same Mary Preedy and the same John Checkley that we have been looking at.

Something of passing interest....

I 1861 John Checkley (married 59, no wife in the household) has lodgers Thomas and Mary Ann Cooknell and their children living with him. Mary Ann is his daughter and she and Thomas Cooknell married in the same Q as John Checkley and Mary Preedy. They are also indexed on consecutive page numbers, so its extremely likely the marriages took place at the same venue and could have even taken place on the same day or at least within a close time frame.

James18

27-09-15, 13:03

So, based on the 1871 census, we think this (http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=try&db=FreeBMDBirth&h=4459112) is Thomas Smith and this (http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=try&db=FreeBMDBirth&h=28968228) is Mary Smith? I hope I have the right links.

And they probably didn't marry, because Mary (as Mary Preedy) was possibly already married to John Checkley. If they did marry, it was probably bigamous and doesn't appear on any records on Ancestry (that I can find, at least).

At some point, the family adopted the name Smith and the children were born as either French Smith or just Smith?

EDIT: Merry's post is interesting... hope we've not gone down the wrong path!

@Merry

1911 census link (http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?gss=angs-g&new=1&rank=1&msT=1&gsfn=Thomas&gsln=Cooknell&gsln_x=1&MSAV=1&mssng0=Mary+Ann&cp=0&catbucket=rstp&uidh=yke&pcat=ROOT_CATEGORY&h=51880692&db=1911England&indiv=1&ml_rpos=1). Same people? If so, no problem.

Marriage (http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?gss=angs-c&new=1&rank=1&msT=1&gsfn=Thomas&gsln=Cooknell&gsln_x=1&MSAV=1&mssng0=Mary+Ann&cp=0&catbucket=rstp&uidh=yke&pcat=BMD_MARRIAGE&h=6206393&recoff=7+8&db=FreeBMDMarriage&indiv=1&ml_rpos=9), 1861.

Looks like John Checkley and his previous (dead) wife's daughter, Mary Ann Checkley, married Thomas Cooknell.

Red herring, I think?

kiterunner

27-09-15, 13:21

If you look at post #46 on this thread, Thomas French was 1 year old on the 1851 census, so he must have been born in 1849 or 1850. In post #21, Mary Preedy is 11 on the 1851 census, which would mean she was born around 1839 or 1840. This is the Preedy family in 1841:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8978/OXFHO107_873_875-0504/9353808?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1841%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_db%2 6new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsf n%3djos*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dpr*dy%26gsln_x%3d1% 26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp _x%3d1%26gskw%3dox*o*%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26ui dh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
and Mary is 2 on this census, so she was born about 1838 or 1839. (The younger the child on the census, the more accurate their age is likely to be.)

I still think it is best to wait for the Ellen French Smith birth cert to arrive before tracing the parents back, especially Thomas. At least we are sure that Mary Preedy was your Charlotte Ellen's mother, because of the Preedys appearing on various censuses with the Smiths, but we can't be certain that the Mary Preedy who married John Checkley was the same Mary until you get that marriage certificate. The fact that the Checkley / Preedy marriage and the Cooknell / Checkley marriage look to have happened very close together does at least make it very likely that the John Checkley who married Mary Preedy is the one we have been looking at on the censuses.

Merry

27-09-15, 13:26

Looks like John Checkley and his previous (dead) wife's daughter, Mary Ann Checkley, married Thomas Cooknell.

Red herring, I think?

I agree with the first sentence, but don't understand what you mean in the second!

James18

27-09-15, 13:28

But am I right in thinking Thomas Smith has put his age down as 24 on the 1871 census? I suppose it could be a 1, but it looks like a 4. If it is a 1 then I suppose that does allow for a window of ~9 years between them, which would fit in with your data from the 1851 census.

As I believe you've said, there are a couple of French family trees, although the Thomas French I saw (from Oxford) was born about 1815. His dad, possibly?

And yes, I am waiting for the certificate to arrive, but just wanted to see where these different avenues took us in the mean time. I'm not trying to go way back, just establish who the parents could have been.

kiterunner

27-09-15, 13:41

Yes, Thomas's age looks like 24 on the 1871 census. Then he is 31 on the 1881 census and 41 on the 1891. I would normally think the earlier census was likely to be more accurate but in this case, because he has a wife who is quite a few years older than him, maybe not (if he was adjusting his age for the census, I would expect him to be adding years on to be closer to his wife's age, not knocking them off.)

The Thomas French who I was looking at on the censuses had a father called Alexander or Elexander.

James18

27-09-15, 13:49

You said he was 51 on the 1911 census I believe, so your theory seems sound.

I assume that's the last we see of him? I've been looking at death records for someone born ~1850 and died ~1920 (ten years either way) but of course he could have lived much longer I suppose.

I'm looking through wills & probates as they often uncover interesting information, including an exact date of death. One possible lead so far.

Can you remember where he was on the 1911 census? Was it Reading, still?

Merry

27-09-15, 13:55

kiterunner

27-09-15, 13:58

kiterunner

27-09-15, 13:59

James18

27-09-15, 14:11

I wonder what Mary Ann thought of her new step-mother!

James18

27-09-15, 14:24

James18

27-09-15, 14:46

Buckingham Advertiser and Free Press 19 October 1861

October 13, at the Independent Chapel, Banbury, John Checkley to Mary Preedy, both of Cropredy.

October 13, at the Independent Chapel, Banbury, Thomas Cooknell to Mary Ann Checkley, of Cropredy.
According to a public family tree on Ancestry, John's parents were Thomas Checkley and Mary Ann Scaysbrook, so it would seem appropriate that his daughter was called Mary Ann.

I'll try to verify this information, though.

kiterunner

27-09-15, 15:01

Kate, I assume this is a different Mary Preedy to the one born in Steeple Aston, Oxfordshire ~1840?

She has numerous census records, but with her maiden name and alongside her sister Anne. I think they're farmers or something.

Mother: Catherine Hawkes
Father: Joseph Preedy

(According to several public family trees on Ancestry)

Your Mary is the daughter of Joseph and Catherine, and has a sister Anne, but I can't vouch for the accuracy of the info on any public trees.

Merry

27-09-15, 15:08

James, I don't know if you usually get your certificates from the GRO, but with that info from the newspaper of the exact date and venue of the Preedy/Checkley marriage you could purchase a copy certificate from the local register office instead. You need to ask if they can give you a photocopy of the register entry rather than a modern day copy (typed or handwritten) then the photocopy will show the signatures of the parties and witnesses (of course they may not have signed - may be just "X, the mark of ....") and whilst (if they signed) you may not end up with other signatures to compare them to, it might be worth going this route as I think you will agree you need all the help the records may be able to provide with this family!!

James18

27-09-15, 15:25

Merry, you're absolutely right of course, and I'd certainly be keen to try that.

Would I have to go to the register office in Banbury, or could I order a copy from my local office? If so, I could do that tomorrow afternoon.

So far for birth/death certificates I've been ordering from the GRO website, as that is much cheaper than doing it through Ancestry.

Any other suggestions?

There's a public tree (http://person.ancestry.co.uk/tree/57868629/person/48103493739/facts) for John Checkley's family -- the dates are a bit out, but I suppose that's not unusual with someone of his age; I suppose in those days it wasn't uncommon for people to be 'up-aged' simply because people assumed they were older than they really were.

Mind you, if that tree is correct then that contradicts another tree in which his parents are named Thomas and Mary Ann. Still, that's not a big deal as I only want him on my tree.

kiterunner

27-09-15, 15:36

Okay, these are the Preedy baptisms at Steeple Aston, children of Joseph and Pleasant, according to the "England, Select Births and Christenings" on ancestry (which will be taken from FamilySearch.)
Elizabeth 9 Nov 1831
Mary 16 Apr 1833
Anne 22 Feb 1835
Joseph 8 May 1836
Ellen 27 May 1838

The public ancestry trees which you mentioned do mistakenly have links to this Mary on the later censuses.

In 1841 your Joseph, with wife Catherine and children Benjamin 3 and Mary 2, is at Boddicott, Oxfordshire, the birthplace given for Mary's sister on whichever census she was with the Smiths.
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8978/OXFHO107_873_875-0504/9353811?backurl=http://person.ancestry.co.uk/tree/15757482/person/362295251/facts
This Joseph is a Horse Breaker.

So his Mary and Anne are not the Steeple Aston ones.

kiterunner

27-09-15, 15:38

I wouldn't put too much faith in those public trees on ancestry, James; you should check for yourself anything that you see on them. Though sometimes you do find useful things have been added to them, like images of certificates, photos, etc.

Merry

27-09-15, 15:40

Would I have to go to the register office in Banbury, or could I order a copy from my local office?

I don't think Banbury register office still exists.

FreeBMD give info on where historic records are held and they have this to say about Banbury district records:

Registers currently held at : Oxfordshire, Warwickshire (Warwick) and Northamptonshire.

So, you would first need to phone one of these offices and ask whether they, or one of the other two offices, hold the marriage certificates for Banbury reg district for 1861? Hopefully they will know the answer (I've had reg offices deny holding records and each in turn state one of the others has them!). Once you know who to approach, you need to provide all the info you have about the marriage along with your payment to the correct office. Some local offices have online databases and ordering systems, but this area doesn't seem to have that, so you will probably have to write a letter, enclose a cheque and maybe an SAE too.

Merry

27-09-15, 15:43

Here's a list of addresses and phone numbers, or, most are available by email, so that might be easier for your first enquiry!

http://www.ukbmd.org.uk/genuki/reg/regoff.html#695

James18

27-09-15, 16:16

I'm much obliged to you, Merry. I've contacted the Oxford office by e-mail and provided the details you gave, along with a request for an exact photocopy of the original entry. I'll let you know when they reply.

And Kate, I am in agreement with you with regards to public family trees. As I said earlier, I shall try to verify the information myself. I think John Checkley is roughly b.1814 d.1892, but not sure about death dates for Thomas or Mary yet.

Hopefully those two certificates arrive next week.

Merry

27-09-15, 16:27

I think John Checkley is roughly b.1814 d.1892,

This death reg is a closer fit for age than the 1892 entry:

Deaths Mar 1900
Checkley John 87 Banbury 3a 760

and I found a newspaper notice:

Northampton Mercury 09 February 1900:

CHECKLEY.- Feb.4. at Cropredy, John Checkley, 87.

James18

27-09-15, 17:23

That's a very good find, Merry!

Which site do you use for those newspaper articles?

Margaret in Burton

27-09-15, 17:31

James, you will discover that Kate and Merry are two of the best researchers in the world. If they can't find it, then it isn't there.

Merry

27-09-15, 18:16

Stop it Marg *red face* (Kate's well ahead of me!)

The newspaper articles I've quoted on this site are from findmypast, which is not free, but another good site is Gale Cengage Learning Databases which may by available through your local library if you have a membership card.

James18

27-09-15, 18:27

Yeah, I thought it might be findmypast. During the free trial last week I went through and viewed/downloaded all of the Eighteen family articles I could find. :D

kiterunner

27-09-15, 18:42

:o at Marg and Merry's posts

The newspaper articles would also be on the British Newspaper Archive, but they don't seem to have one of those special £1 offers on at the moment as far as I can see, unfortunately.

James18

29-09-15, 21:38

I can't find a suitable Mary Smith on the 1901 census, so I think her & Thomas' final appearance together is here (http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=try&db=uki1891&h=16184091) in 1891.

I think you're right that Thomas is very likely the widower in Middlesex in 1901, and so logically that means Mary died at some point between 1891 and 1901. It's unlikely the family moved away from Reading whilst Mary was alive and any of their children were still living at home, so I think this (http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=try&db=FreeBMDDeath&h=31361756) could be a good candidate for Mary's death.

I'm not sure how or why Thomas ended up in Middlesex. He was ten years younger than Mary and presumably quite fit (if he was a tree feller in 1901) so perhaps he sold the house and moved away from Reading. Hard to speculate on the information we have.

We'll see how things go with the certificates; I'm not sure about when or where Thomas died but he will surely have been registered as Thomas Smith.

Thoughts?

kiterunner

29-09-15, 21:59

I already posted up a link to the 1891 census (post #11) and I mentioned the likely death reg for Mary (post #35), earlier in this thread, James, and yes, the same ones you linked to. I did have a quick look for Thomas's death but there were just too many Thomas Smith (or French) deaths without being sure which district he would have died in.

Plenty of families moved from one town to another before all the children had left home, but I do think that Mary Smith death would be the one to look at before looking for any outside of Reading. I don't think we have seen anything to say that Thomas owned their house, have we?

Shona

29-09-15, 23:30

Regarding housing tenure, most people rented at the time in question. Fewer than 10 per cent of people owned their homes in 1918. Even though the Co-operative Building Society provided loans to working-class people, the society had awarded only a couple of thousand mortgages nationwide by the early 20th century.

James18

30-09-15, 07:08

Hmm, that's interesting Shona. I hadn't considered it before but of course it makes sense.

And thanks for the reminder, Kate. My apologies -- it's just a case of me trying to keep track of everything, because you post so much useful information and I keep trying to comb through it all in order to try and take it on board. Thank you. :)

I'll probably go for that Mary Smith one next, assuming the ones I've already ordered are who/what we want them to be.

Thomas Smith is indeed unfortunate, though, as we don't know where or when he died. Still, it does make you wonder whether anyone has attempted an Eighteen or French/Preedy/Smith family tree before and got as far as you have. Obviously a lot of people have just (wrongly, it would seem) gone down the Fortunatus Smith route.

Fascinating stuff, certainly.

James18

01-10-15, 11:05

Kate!

Have to go out very soon, but will type these out quickly. Looking very good.

Fifth October 1869
5 Charles Street

Ellen French

Thomas Smith (father)

Mary Smith formerly Preedy (mother)

Father's occupation: Sawyer (or Lawyer, although highly unlikely!)

Informant: Mary Smith, Mother, 5 Charles Street, Reading

When registered: Fourteenth? Fifteenth? November 1869

&

Fifteenth January 1923
30 Leopold Road, Reading

Charlotte Ellen Eighteen

53 Years

Widow of Frederick Syer Eighteen, Fish Salesman

Chronic Endocarditis, 10 PM (?)

Informant: Alice Eighteen, daughter-in-law, 79 Orts Road, Reading, Eighteen January 1923

Should be good to go. Let me know how you get on. Got to go now, will view/reply this evening.

kiterunner

01-10-15, 12:05

That's great, James. It confirms that Ellen French Smith was Thomas and Mary's daughter, and so she surely must be the child who was baptised as Charlotte Ellen a few years later, though it would be good to have the full baptism entry to confirm it. Father's occupation is sure to be sawyer rather than lawyer, since we know that the Thomas and Mary we looked at on the censuses were this couple because of Mary's maiden name, and that Thomas certainly wasn't a lawyer.

Since you get six weeks to register a birth, it looks as though Mary left it until almost the last possible day.

So, now we know for sure that French was a family name, I'll have a proper look at the French family.

Margaret in Burton

01-10-15, 12:18

Brilliant, well done.

kiterunner

01-10-15, 12:56

The French family

1851 census:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8860/OXFHO107_1734_1734-0162/4217780?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1851%26gss%3dangs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3dtho*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbdy%3d18 50%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26 msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1% 26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0 _x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d 1%26gskw%3dcropredy%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh %3dvm5%26gl%3d%26gst%3d%26hc%3d10%26fh%3d20%26fsk% 3dBEFTMzMIgAAinABEbN4-61-&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

Cropredy, Oxfordshire
Elexander French Head Mar 49 Ag Labourer Oxfordsh Cropredy
Charlott Do Wife Mar 34 Do Barford St John
Elexander Do Son 12 Do Cropredy
Elizabeth Do Daur 11 Do Do
Joice Do Do 9 Scholar Do Do
William Do Son 7 Do Do Do
Sarah Do Daur 6 Do Do Do
Thomas Do Son 1 Do Do

1861 census:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8767/OXFRG9_916_920-0215/18288894?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1861%26gss%3dangs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3dtho*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbdy%3d18 50%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26 msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1% 26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0 _x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d 1%26gskw%3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3 dvm5%26gl%3d%26gst%3d%26hc%3d10%26fh%3d10%26fsk%3d BEFTMzMIgAAiPwA9ujo-61-&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Cropredy, Oxfordshire
Charlotte French Head Mar 49 Ag Lab Wife Oxford Barford
Elizabeth Do Daug Un 20 Do Cropredy
Thomas Do Son 11 Ag Lab Do Do
James Do Son 9 Do Do Do
Mary A Do Daur 4 Do Do

Charlotte French death registered Jul-Sep 1865 Banbury district (which was the district for Cropredy). Can't see Alexander's death at the moment.

Now, going back:
1841 census:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8978/OXFHO107_872_873-0539/9339086?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1841%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_r_db %26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3dele* %26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln_x%3d1%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26ms rpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw%3dcropred y%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Cropredy, Oxfordshire
Elexander French 35 Ag Lab Y
Sharlott Stephens 25 Y
Elexander Do 2 Y
Elizabeth Do 1 Y

Alexander and Charlotte are clearly not married to each other at this point since Charlotte has a different surname.

Possible Alexander French / Charlotte Stephens marriage Jan-Mar 1844 Banbury district, vol 16, page 9.

Birth Apr-Jun 1839 Alexander Stephens, Banbury district, vol 16, page 18
Birth Apr-Jun 1840 Elizabeth French Stephens, Banbury district, vol 16, page 21
Birth Oct-Dec 1841 Joyce Stephens, Banbury district, vol 16, page 19
Birth Jan-Mar 1844 William French, Banbury district, vol 16, page 15
Birth Jan-Mar 1845 Sarah French, Banbury district, vol 16, page 22

Two possible birth regs for Thomas (there are a lot of Frenches in Banbury district, so I'm not certain I have the right births for William and Sarah above)
Birth Oct-Dec 1849 Thomas French, Banbury district, vol 16, page 15
or Birth Jan-Mar 1850, Tom French, Banbury district, vol 16, page 16. We may be able to check which is more likely going by the other names on the same page (i.e. look them up on the 1851 census and see who was born in Cropredy.)

Birth Jul-Sep 1851 James French, Banbury district, vol 16, page 17
or Birth Jan-Mar 1853 James French, Banbury district, vol 3a, page 636
Birth Jan-Mar 1856 Mary Ann French, Banbury district, vol 31, page 639
or Birth Jan-Mar 1858 Mary Ann French, Banbury district, vol 3a, page 633
(as we don't know how accurate the ages on the 1861 census are)

kiterunner

01-10-15, 13:10

An Alexander French was convicted of larceny 31 Dec 1865 at Oxford, 2 previous convictions, sentenced to 4 months imprisonment:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/1590/31251_A006144-00393/205861?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3dcriminalregisters%26so%3d2%26 pcat%3dROOT_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3d*xander% 26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfrench%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn_ _ftp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw%3dox*o *%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3 d11%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

I can't see an age on there to tell us whether it is Alexander sr or jr (or some other Alexander French), but this could possibly be one of the two earlier convictions, the right age for our Alexander sr:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/1590/31250_A005029-00062/921153?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3dCriminalRegisters%26gss%3dsfs 28_ms_r_db%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26g sfn%3dalex*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfrench%26gsln_x% 3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrdp% 3d10%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Jun 1823 Middlesex Alexander French, age 22, larceny, 1 month imprisonment (very faint image so hard to make out)

Or there is another Middlesex one in 1841, age 17, which couldn't be either our sr or jr (but could be the one convicted in 1865.)

kiterunner

01-10-15, 13:16

Just adding these baptisms from FamilySearch in case any of them is our Charlotte:
Joseph Stievens baptised 15 Mar 1835 St Michael, Barford, Oxfordshire, parents John and Charlotte
James Stevens baptised 17 Oct 1836 Banbury, Oxfordshire, mother Charlotte
James Stevens baptised 23 Apr 1837 St Giles, Oxford, mother Charlotte

kiterunner

01-10-15, 13:32

So, okay, here is Joseph Stevens on the 1841 census:

http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8978/OXFHO107_873_875-0483/9353313?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1841%26h%3d9353313%26ti%3d 5538%26indiv%3dtry%26gss%3dpt%26ssrc%3dpt_t6592064 _p1309664175_kpidz0q3d1309664175z0q26pgz0q3d32768z 0q26pgplz0q3dpid&ssrc=pt_t6592064_p1309664175_kpidz0q3d1309664175z0 q26pgz0q3d32768z0q26pgplz0q3dpid&backlabel=ReturnRecord

Barford St John, Oxfordshire
William Tew 58 Ag Lab N
Elizabeth Do 50 Y
George Do 20 Ag Lab Y
William Do 15 Y
Joseph Stevans 6 Y

and in 1851:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8860/OXFHO107_1733_1733-0296/4206488?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1851%26h%3d4206488%26ti%3d 5538%26indiv%3dtry%26gss%3dpt%26ssrc%3dpt_t6592064 _p1309664175_kpidz0q3d1309664175z0q26pgz0q3d32768z 0q26pgplz0q3dpid&ssrc=pt_t6592064_p1309664175_kpidz0q3d1309664175z0 q26pgz0q3d32768z0q26pgplz0q3dpid&backlabel=ReturnRecord
Barford St John, Oxfordshire
William Tew Head Mar 67 Labourer Bucks Shawston
Elizabeth Tew Wife Mar 60 Wife Oxon Barford
Mary Tew Daughter U 23 Daughter Oxon Barford
Joseph Stevens Grandson U 16 Grandson Oxon Barford
Sarah Tew Grand Daur U 18 mos Granddaughter Oxon Barford

(I think the census enumerator needed some retraining!)

So, since our Charlotte's birthplace is Barford St John on the censuses, it does look as though Joseph is her son, and that her maiden name was Tew, and that her first husband was John Stevens. Unfortunately, there aren't many Oxfordshire parish registers etc online at the moment to look for their marriage, but I found a very old RootsWeb message board post which says they married in 1834 at Barford St Michael:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/OXFORDSHIRE/1998-12/0913496364

Unfortunately, we don't know enough about John Stevens at the moment to know whether he died before Charlotte's marriage to Alexander. Divorces were very uncommon in those days, as you probably know.

James18

01-10-15, 17:04

My only concern at the moment is that Charlotte Ellen Smith is down as being 18 on her marriage certificate (19th June 1886) whereas I believe she'd have been 16, and I'm pretty sure she'd have been pregnant as well. Does that discrepancy worry you at all? I know you've said these can sometimes be explained, but if you were able to get married below 18 in those days then I am unsure as to why she'd have lied about her age.

I'll see about getting some death certificates for Thomas and Mary in the future. The lady I e-mailed at Oxford Register Office is (as of our last exchange) still looking for the John Checkley - Mary Preedy marriage certificate.

I'll see about getting Charlotte Ellen's baptism record at some point, but as things stand I am fairly confident your theory has been vindicated. I would definitely like to know when Thomas and Mary died, but now we've established her origins I'm very happy indeed.

Thanks very much once again.

My main queries - aside from Ellen's age when she married - are: are we assuming that Thomas and Mary never legally married, and just lived as Mr & Mrs Smith?; and when and why did the original name French get dropped in favour of Smith? (Avoiding John Checkley?)

kiterunner

01-10-15, 18:44

My only concern at the moment is that Charlotte Ellen Smith is down as being 18 on her marriage certificate (19th June 1886) whereas I believe she'd have been 16, and I'm pretty sure she'd have been pregnant as well. Does that discrepancy worry you at all? I know you've said these can sometimes be explained, but if you were able to get married below 18 in those days then I am unsure as to why she'd have lied about her age. Could just be that she wasn't sure of her age. It wasn't unusual in those days. No, it doesn't worry me.

My main queries - aside from Ellen's age when she married - are: are we assuming that Thomas and Mary never legally married, and just lived as Mr & Mrs Smith?; and when and why did the original name French get dropped in favour of Smith? (Avoiding John Checkley?)
They don't seem to have married but of course it's hard to prove that something didn't happen. All I can say is that as far as we can tell, they didn't marry. As for why the name Smith, I'm still working on the French family tree to see whether the name crops up in there at all, but it may take a while!

kiterunner

01-10-15, 18:58

kiterunner

01-10-15, 19:16

Oxford University and City Herald, 6 Jan 1866
Alexander French, 55, labourer, was charged with stealing a blanket at Cropredy, the property of John Budd. 4 months' hard labour.

Oxford Chronicle and Reading Gazette, 23 Oct 1858
Banbury Town Hall, Monday, Oct 18
Alexander French was charged with assaulting William Blencowe. Settled between the parties, French paying expenses.

Oxford Journal 30 Nov 1861
An old man, named Alexander French, of Cropredy, was charged with stealing a piece of oak timber belonging to T. Lambert, carpenter: he had only recently returned from Oxford gaol; committed for trial at the next Quarter Sessions.

I think there are some more, but I have to go and eat now. These are from Findmypast.

James18

01-10-15, 19:18

Haha, stealing a bucket and he got that. Poor sod.

kiterunner

01-10-15, 21:50

No mention of Alexander using Smith as an alias (so far), so it could just be something that Thomas and Mary came up with to avoid being traced.

kiterunner

01-10-15, 21:51

Haha, stealing a bucket and he got that. Poor sod.

I guess it was because of his previous record, not just that offence in isolation. But it does seem very harsh!

kiterunner

02-10-15, 14:44

Haha, stealing a bucket and he got that. Poor sod.

Oops, sorry, just realised it was a blanket, not a bucket. Findmypast's newspaper search had OCR'd it as bucket and I didn't notice the mistake. Probably because I was so confused at them listing a similar entry for a paper from 1859, which try as I might, I couldn't find on the image. Their database or their search must be messed up somehow, but the 1859 entry should have been this 1866 one.

I don't think there are any more newspaper reports online about Alexander French. I will try to trace Thomas French's brothers and sisters now, in case one of them uses Smith as an alias or anything else to connect them to Thomas Smith.

kiterunner

02-10-15, 15:03

Thomas's half-brother Joseph Stevens (see post #130 for 1841 and 1851 censuses):

1871:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7619/HAMRG10_1150_1153-0542/6246452?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1871%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3djos *%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dste*n*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswp n__ftp_x%3d1%26msbdy%3d1835%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp% 3d5%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw%3db%253frf*d%26gskw_ x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26cat bucket%3drstp%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Royal Naval Hospital, Alverstoke, Hampshire
Patient, widower, age 37, Marine Artillery, born Oxford, Barford St John.

kiterunner

03-10-15, 16:14

Thomas's older brother Alexander or Elexander - surname is French on the 1841 and 1851 censuses but his birth was registered as Stephens.

1861 census he is a lodger in Cropredy:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8767/OXFRG9_916_920-0212/18288887?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1861%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3dale x*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw%3dcropre dy%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp% 3d11%26catbucket%3drstp%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

This looks to be him in 1871:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7619/WARRG10_3201_3205-0040/24229993?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1871%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dalex*%26 gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dste*n*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__f tp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*% 26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d1 1%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
High Street, Cubbington, Warwickshire
Alexander Stephens Head Mar 32 Ag Lab Oxon Cropredy
Ann Stephens Wife Mar 23 Lab Wife Warwick Cubbington
Anne E " Daur 3 Scholar " Do
Joseph A " Son 2 " Do
Walter " Son 11 Mo " Do
Hannah Fell Mother in law W 59 Nurse " Knowle

and in 1881 at the same address:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7572/WARRG11_3093_3097-0999/22904240?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1881%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dalex*%26 gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dste*n*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__f tp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*% 26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d1 1%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Alexander Stephens Head Mar 42 Bricklayers Labourer Oxford Croperdy
Ann Do Wife Do 34 Warwick Cubbington
Joseph A Do Son 12 Faggott Maker Do Do
Albert W Do Do 10 Scholar Do Do
James Do Do 9 Do Do Do
William Do Do 7 Do Do Do
Jane Do Daur 4 Do Do Do
Ada Do Do 1 Do Do
Hannah Fell Mother in Law Widow 69 Invalid (Parish Relief) Do Solihull

1891, still at the same address:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/6598/WARRG12_2474_2476-0216/16907443?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1891%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dalex*%26 gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dste*n*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__f tp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*% 26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d1 1%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Alexander Stephens Head M 56 Agricultural Laborer Oxon Cropredy
Ann Do Wife M 44 Warwick Cubbington
James Do Son S 19 Laborer in Timber Yard Do Do
William Do Son S 17 Agricultural Laborer Do Do
Frederic Owen Do Son 8 Scholar Do Do
Minnie Do Daur 6 Do Do Do

1901, same address:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7814/WARRG13_2934_2937-0178/17052909?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1901%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dalex*%26 gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dste*n*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__f tp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*% 26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d1 1%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Alexander Stephens Head M 66 General Labourer Oxon Cropredy
Ann Do Wife M 54 Warks Cubbington
Joseph Alexander Stephens Son S 32 General Labourer Do Do
William Stephens Son S 27 Do Do Do Do
Minnie Do Daur S 16 General Servant (Domestic) Do Do

1911, same address:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/2352/rg14_18758_0335_03/25762694?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3d1911england%26so%3d2%26pcat%3 dROOT_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dalex*%26 gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dste*n*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__f tp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*% 26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d1 1%26catbucket%3drstp&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Alexander Stephens Father 70 Widower married 41 years, 13 children, 8 living, 5 died, Labourer, Croppedy
William Stephens Son 38 Single Cowman Cubbington
Minnie Stephens Daughter 26 Single Cubbington
Wallace Stephens Nephew 22 Labourer Smethwick Staffs

Here is his marriage on ancestry in the Warwickshire PR's:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/2445/4291066_00363/3024561?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3dwarwickcoemarriages%26so%3d2% 26pcat%3dROOT_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dalex*%26 gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dste*n*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__f tp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26msgdy%3d1866% 26msgdy_x%3d1%26msgpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw_x%3d1%26_8 3004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3dr stp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
His father's name is given as Alexander Stephens, but it's not unusual for a bride or groom who was illegitimate to have their father's surname wrongly down as the same as theirs. Less to explain to the in-laws that way! Witnesses are Thomas Jennings and Elizabeth Hind.

kiterunner

03-10-15, 17:58

Not sure what happened to Elizabeth and Joyce yet, or who Alexander's nephew Wallace Stephens is, but moving on to William French:

1861 census he is a servant in Offchurch, Warwickshire:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8767/WARRG9_2226_2231-0183/21390128?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1861%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3dwil *%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*ch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn __ftp_x%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_830040 02_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drstp%2 6MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

1871 census:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7619/WARRG10_3201_3205-0194/24232465?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1871%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dwil*%26g sfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*ch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp _x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d5%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_A dvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1845%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw% 3dcrop*%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cp%3d0%26 catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Radford Semele, Warwickshire
William French Head Mar 29 Agri Labourer Oxon Copready
Mary Do Wife Mar 23 Warwick Radford Semele
Annie Do Daur 3 Scholar Do Do
Eliza Do Daur 1 Do Do
William Lambert Boarder 1 Scholar Do Southam Wk

William French death registered Oct-Dec 1871 Warwick district, age 27.

This is William's wife with a new husband in 1881:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7572/WARRG11_3093_3097-1071/22905535?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1881%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsln%3dfrench%2 6gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_Adv CB%3d1%26msbpn__ftp%3dRadford%2bSemele%252c%2bWarw ickshire%252c%2bEngland%26msbpn%3d1679060%26msbpn_ PInfo%3d8-%257c0%257c0%257c3257%257c3251%257c0%257c0%257c0%2 57c5288%257c1679060%257c0%257c%26msbpn_x%3d1%26msb pn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cp% 3d0%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
David Legg Head Mar 36 Ag Lab Shepherd Gloucester Fairford
Mary Do Wife Mar 36 Warwick Radford Semele
Agnes E French Daug 11 Scholar Do Do
William E Legg Son 2 Do Do
Charles E Legg Son 1 Do Weston

On Mary French's marriage to David Legg in 1877, her father's name is Edward Hand, so the marriage to William must be William French / Mary Hands Apr-Jun 1866 Warwick district, vol 6d, p 721, but I can't find it in the PR's on ancestry to check the witnesses' names etc. so maybe it was a register office wedding.

kiterunner

03-10-15, 18:16

Sarah French:

1861 census she is a dairy maid in Upper Boddington, Northamptonshire:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8767/OXFRG9_916_920-0103/18287021?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1861%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dsar*%26g sfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*nch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ft p_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*y% 26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d1 1%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

1871 census at Queen Street, Cubbington, Warwickshire:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7619/WARRG10_3201_3205-0027/24229685?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1871%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dsar*%26g sfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*nch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ft p_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*y% 26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d1 1%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Thomas Fell Head Wid 28 Ag Lab Warwick Cubbington
Thomas " Son 5 Scholar Northampton Appletree
George " Son 2 Warwick Cubbington
Sarah French Sister in Law Unm 26 Dress maker Oxon Cropredy
Emma Do Sister Do 8 Scholar Oxon Banbury
George Stanly Nephew 16 Ag Lab Warwick Cubbington

So Thomas Fell must have married Joice Stevens Oct-Dec 1863 Banbury district, vol 3a p 1222. (Her first name isn't very clear on the GRO marriage index but now we know who she is it must be Joice!) There is a Joyce Fell death Jul-Sep 1870 Warwick district, age 29.

I should think that "sister in law" Emma French is either Sarah's daughter or the daughter of one of the other French sisters, not Charlotte's daughter, but need to check.

1881 census at Church Terrace, Cubbington:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7572/WARRG11_3093_3097-0996/22904201?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1881%26so%3d2%26pcat%3d35% 26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dsar*%26g sfn_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp %3d2%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1846%26ms bpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_830 04002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drst p&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Thomas Fell Head Widower 38 Railway Carman Warwick Cubbington
Thomas Do Son Unm 16 General Labourer Northampton Appletree
George Do Do 12 Scholar Warwick Cubbington
Sarah French Sister in Law Unm 36 Housekeeper Oxford Croperdy
Rebecca Do Daur 9 Scholar Warwick Cubbington
Ellen E Do Do 6 Do Do Do
Julia Do Do 3 Do Do Do
William H Do Son 11 mo Do Do

It was pretty common for an unmarried sister to go and look after her brother-in-law's household and children, and pretty common for the widower and sister-in-law to then become an "item", but it was illegal to marry your "dead wife's sister", though many couples went ahead and got married anyway.

By 1891 Sarah is Thomas's "wife" (still at Church Terrace) but I can't see a marriage:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/6598/WARRG12_2474_2476-0234/16907352?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1891%26so%3d2%26pcat%3d35% 26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dsar*%26g sfn_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp %3d2%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1846%26ms bpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_830 04002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drst p&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
Thomas Fell Head M 48 Agricultural Labourer Warwick Cubbington
Sarah Do Wife M 45 Oxon Cropredy
William Do Son 10 Scholar Warwick Cubbington
John Do Son 8 Do Do Do
Julia Daur 13 Do Do Do
Charles Stanley Nephew's Son 2 Do Old Milvorton

In 1901 Thomas and Sarah are still at Church Terrace but no children still at home:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7814/WARRG13_2934_2937-0200/17053556?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1901%26so%3d2%26pcat%3d35% 26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dsar*%26g sfn_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp %3d2%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1846%26ms bpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_830 04002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drst p&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

In 1911 Thomas Fell is a widower:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/2352/rg14_18758_0197_03/25762090?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3d1911England%26gss%3dsfs28_ms_ r_db%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3d tho*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfel*%26gsln_x%3d1%26msb dp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msrpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msy pn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1%26msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_ x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1% 26mssns0_x%3d1%26mscng0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dcubbington% 26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
There is a Sarah Fell death Jan-Mar 1910 Warwick district, age 62.

kiterunner

03-10-15, 18:48

James French:

In 1871 he is a lodger in Cropredy:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7619/OXFRG10_1461_1464-0482/14407772?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1871%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dja*s%26g sfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*ch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp _x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d5%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_A dvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1852%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw% 3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1 %26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

1881 still in Cropredy:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7572/OXFRG11_1526_1531-0145/18018243?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1881%26so%3d2%26pcat%3d35% 26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dja*s%26g sfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*ch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp _x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d5%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_A dvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1852%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw% 3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1 %26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
James French Head Mar 30 Ag Lab Cropredy Oxon
Ernest Do Son 6 Scholar Wroxton Do

In 1891 at Byfield, Northamptonshire:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/6598/NTHRG12_1203_1205-0515/15800870?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1891%26so%3d2%26pcat%3d35% 26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dja*s%26g sfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*ch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp _x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d5%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_A dvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1852%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw% 3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1 %26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
James French Head M 40 Farm Labourer Oxon Cropredy
Harriet Do Wife M 34 Glos Sherington
Ernest Do Son 16 Farm Labourer Oxon Cropredy
William Do Son 8 Scholar Do Do
Annie Do Daur 5 Do Do Do
Arthur Do Son 3 Do Do

Same place in 1901:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7814/NTHRG13_1433_1435-0090/8254637?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1901%26so%3d2%26pcat%3d35% 26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dja*s%26g sfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*ch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp _x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d5%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_A dvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1852%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw% 3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1 %26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
James French Head M 54 Carter Oxon Cropredy
Harriet " Wife M 44 Glos Shenington
Ernest " Son M 26 Carter Oxon Wroxton
William " " S 18 Groom Oxon Cropredy
Annie " Daur S 15 Apprentice Dressmaking " "
Arthur " Son 13 " "
Percy " " 8 Northants Byfield
Charles Haynes Boarder S 18 Carpenter's Labourer Middlesex Acton

and 1911 still in the same place:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/2352/rg14_08461_0141_03/52044672?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3d1911england%26so%3d2%26pcat%3 d35%26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dja*s%26g sfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dfr*ch%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ftp _x%3d1%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d5%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_A dvCB%3d1%26msbdy%3d1852%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26gskw% 3dcrop*y%26gskw_x%3d1%26_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1 %26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drstp&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
James French Head 64 Married Labourer Cropredy Oxfordshire
Harriet French Wife 55 Married 37 years, 7 children, 5 living, 2 died, Shenington Gloucestershire
Annie Selina Haynes Daughter 25 Married 3 years, 1 child, 1 living, Cropredy Oxfordshire
Percival Edward French Son 18 Single Cleaner Byfield Northamptonshire
Caroline May Walker Boarder 9 Bethnal Green London
Charles Cecil Haynes Grandson 2 Byfield Northamptonshire

kiterunner

03-10-15, 19:14

This is Mary Ann in 1881:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7572/WARRG11_3089_3092-0084/22864096?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1881%26gss%3dangs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3dmary%2b%2b%2b%2b%26gsfn_x%3d1%26msbdy%3d185 7%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msbdp%3d2%26msbpn__ftp_x%3d1%26m srpn__ftp_x%3d1%26msypn__ftp_x%3d1%26msfng_x%3d1%2 6msfns_x%3d1%26msmng_x%3d1%26msmns_x%3d1%26msbng0_ x%3d1%26msbns0_x%3d1%26mssng0_x%3d1%26mssns0_x%3d1 %26mscng0_x%3d1%26mscns0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dcrop*y%26g skw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26uidh%3dvm5%26gl%3d%26gst%3d %26hc%3d10%26fh%3d10%26fsk%3dBEFTMzMIgAAdlADJC6g-61-&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
7 Crompton Row, Warwick
Shadrack Hopkins Head Mar 25 Hawker Hockley Heath Warwick
Mary Ann Hopkins Wife Do 25 Cropredy Oxford

This is her marriage:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/2445/4291957_00410/3164122?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk %2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3dwarwickcoemarriages%26so%3d2% 26pcat%3d34%26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dshad*%26 gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dhopkin*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ ftp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw_x%3d1%2 6_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket% 3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

and the witnesses are Smiths, but sadly they are called Richard and Margaret so I guess nothing to do with Thomas and Mary. :(

I will have to leave it there for now but will follow Mary Ann forwards another time in case she has any relatives with her on later censuses. Also there are a few nieces and nephews etc to follow up. Oh, and possibly find out what happened to Elizabeth.

kiterunner

04-10-15, 11:21

Mary Ann in 1891:

http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/6598/WARRG12_2467_2469-0289/25748046?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.u k%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1891%26so%3d2%26pcat%3d35% 26gss%3dangs-c%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dshad*%26 gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dhopkin*%26gsln_x%3d1%26mswpn__ ftp_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gskw_x%3d1%2 6_83004002_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket% 3drstp&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
26 Bowling Green St, Warwick
Shadrach Hopkins Head M 35 Hawker Warwick Alcester
Mary Do Wife M 34 Oxford Banbury
William Earl(?) None 6 Scholar Birmingham
Albert Wittingham Nephew 6 Do Warwick Alcester

In 1901 Shadrach has a new wife, Fanny age 35, born Maldon, Essex. There is a Mary Hopkins death Apr-Jun 1893 Warwick age 40 which could be Mary Ann, given that Shadrach's marriage to Fanny took place later that year.

kiterunner

04-10-15, 18:56

I haven't managed to figure out who Wallace Stephens or Emma French was (yet), nor what happened to Elizabeth French Stephens, but anyway, from following up the French family, all I can say is that I found nothing to disprove the theory that Thomas Smith is Thomas French, but nothing to prove it for certain either.

James18

05-10-15, 20:52

Hi Kate, back from my trip now. Thanks a lot for all of your hard work, let me read through and digest all of this and I'll get back to you tomorrow.

Thanks again.

EDIT: Unfortunate news re Preedy / Checkley marriage:

Hi [name]

Sorry to have not got back to you sooner, but I have been out of the office.

Unfortunately, although my colleagues and I have searched again, we cannot find the marriage entry you are looking for.

I thought it might be in the United reformed Church, but sadly not.

Perhaps you could try the General Register Office – website is www.gov.uk/general-register-office - they have different ways of searching.

Good luck.
[name]

Any other thoughts?

Merry

06-10-15, 06:35

October 13, at the Independent Chapel, Banbury, John Checkley to Mary Preedy, both of Cropredy.

It seems unlikely from the newspaper notice that the marriage would have taken place somewhere other than the Independent Chapel. Of course you could get a certificate copy from the GRO, but that would not have original signatures (if indeed anyone signed!).

A marriage taking place at a non-conformist chapel at this date will have been registrar attended (the non-conformist minister would not have been authorised to complete the legal part of the ceremony and so the local registrar would attend, bringing their own set of registers used for all the local dissenting churches except the Quakers). The URC didn't exist until 1972, but the registrar who contacted you may just be referring to a specific building rather than the accurate name of the congregation. Even if the current registrar thought they should check the URC records I think they would (should!!) have been looking in exactly the same register for either marriage venue, as long as both establishments were in the same sub district of Banbury. Having googled it's likely the Independents evolved into the Congregationalist congregation (ie they were the same people in the same building!) who eventually became part of the URC in the 1970s. The Congregationalists place of worship in Banbury wasn't built until the 1850s - before that worship took place in buildings at Church Passage and later in South Bar. None of this is of particular importance though as the Banbury registrar would most likely have used the same set of register books for all the independent churches on his patch at that date, so they should only have one place (a couple at the most) to look.

I have had these sort of issues with local offices in the past. Sometimes I have fought for what I wanted and they have come up trumps in the end - the problem has usually been a lack of understanding of how the historic records worked - after all digging out old records for FH purposes it's only a very small part of their job - and other times I have given in and bought the cert from the GRO. The choice is yours!! (unless someone else comes up with a bright idea!)