View Full Version : Upholland Billinge ancestors help please .
hi , looking for my great grandfather , Joseph Whalley . My grandfather George was born in Billinge in approx 1863 , trying to trace the line back on both sides . George married a Esther Heyes in Upholland in 1887 . Any help with this would be much appreciated . Thanks
Here's the 1881 census record for the family on Family Search:
https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QKXF-LWZY
(assuming you don't have an ancestry or fmp sub?)
From the 1881 census:
Ormskirk Road, Orrell, Lancs
Joseph Whalley, head, married, 45, ag lab, born Ramford, Lancs
Mary Whalley, wife, married, 44, born Orrell
Ellen Whalley, dau, unmarried, 21, colliery labourer, born Orrell
George Whalley, son, unmarried, 18, colliery labourer, born Billinge
John Whalley, son, unmarried, 16, colliery post boy, born Billinge
Joseph Whalley, son, unmarried, 14, colliery labourer, born Billinge
Mary Whalley, dau, unmarried, 9, scholar, born Orrell
Amelia Whalley, dau, unmarried, 5, scholar, born Orrell
Sarah Whalley., dau, unmarried, 7, scholar, born Orrell
Jane Whalley, dau, unmarried, 3, scholar, born Orrell
Edit: SNAP, Merry!
garstonite
17-02-16, 07:56
Baptism: 20 Jul 1862 St Aidan, Billinge, Lancashire, England
George Whalley - Son of Joseph Whalley & Mary
Born: 19 Jul
Abode: Billinge
Occupation: Farm Labourer
.................................................. .....
possible marriage
Marriage: 16 Dec 1858 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
Joseph Whalley - (X), 24, Labourer, Widower, Wigan Lane
Mary Pink - (X), 20, Spinster, Wigan Lane
Groom's Father: John Whalley, Labourer
Witness: Thos. Smalley; Charles Carter
Here is George's baptism at St Aidan's Orrell.
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/60561/41177_334205-00217/93590?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk%2 fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3dwiganbapt%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dR OOT_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26gsfn%3dgeorge%26gsfn_x%3d 1%26gsln%3dwhalley%26gsln_x%3dNN%26MSAV%3d1%26mscn g%3dgeorge%26gskw%3dbillinge%26gskw_x%3d1%26cpxt%3 d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drstp%26uidh%3dfpy&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
He was born on 19 July 1862 and baptised the next day. Parents: Joseph Whalley (farm labourer) and Mary Whalley.
Edit: Snap, Allan. You're all blurry fast this morning!
garstonite
17-02-16, 08:04
it does look like the right marriage - Mary Pink was born in Orrel as stated on the census return
Baptism: 17 Apr 1824 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
Mary Pink - 2 Daur. of Edward Pink & Elizabeth
Born: 22 Feb
Abode: Orrell
Occupation: Miner
added
born 22nd feb 1824 - but aged 44 in 1881 - doesn't match ??....
Ah, Allan - that's interesting.
Just been looking at the marriage of Joseph Whalley to Mary Pink at All Saints, Wigan on 16 Dec 1858: http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&db=wiganmarriages&gss=angs-d&new=1&rank=1&gsfn=joseph&gsfn_x=1&gsln=whalley&gsln_x=NN&MSAV=1&mssng=Mary&mssng_x=1&gskw=lancashire&gskw_x=1&cpxt=1&cp=11&catbucket=rstp&uidh=fpy&pcat=34&fh=0&h=306933&recoff=&ml_rpos=1
The record shows that Joseph was a widower (a correction to what was orginially written) and Mary Pink was a spinster. His father was a labourer named John Whalley. The details of her father are not filled in.
This looks like Joseph and Mary Whalley in 1861:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8767/LANRG9_2782_2786-0852?pid=8937194&backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk%2f%2fcg i-bin%2fsse.dll%3findiv%3d1%26db%3duki1861%26gss%3da ngs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3djoseph%2 6gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dwhalley%26gsln_x%3dNN%26MSAV% 3d1%26mssng%3dmary%26mssng_x%3d1%26gskw%3dlancashi re%26gskw_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3 drstp%26uidh%3dfpy%26pcat%3d35%26fh%3d4%26h%3d8937 194%26recoff%3d%26ml_rpos%3d5&treeid=&personid=&hintid=&usePUB=true
Billinge
Joseph Whalley, married, head, 27, labourer at the colliery, born Rainford
Mary Whalley, married, wife, 23, born Orrell
Ellen Whalley, unmarried, daughter, 7, scholar, born Orrell
So Ellen could be from Joseph's first marriage.
Thanks to you for all the valuable info
Hi , I am trying to find the right Whalley. Father of Joseph Whalley who Married Mary Pink . In a previous post someone mentioned the fathers name was John on the marriage online at Wigan all saints in 1858 . I have searched the online parish clerks on Rainford . And only can find one baptism around 1817 of a Joseph Whalley born to Thomas and Ellen Whalley . Could this be the right Father ? Has I want to trace the line back to Rainford any Help out there thanks ? ????
kiterunner
16-06-18, 19:09
Isn't Joseph supposed to be born about 1833-4?
kiterunner
16-06-18, 19:17
This looks to be his family in 1841:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/8978/LANHO107_516_517-0524?pid=3582439&treeid=&personid=&rc=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=Czj16964&_phstart=successSource
Brushey Lane, Rainford, Prescot, Lancashire
John Whalley 40 Labourer Y
Mary Do 40 Y
Ellen Do 10 Y
Joseph Do 5 Y
Mary Do 4 Y
If you check the GRO indexes for the children of Joseph and Mary Whalley, her maiden name is given as Peet, not Pink.
In 1851 there is a Mary Peet dau of George Peet b Orrell about 1838, so her details do match those of Mary Whalley, but not the marriage Allan found.
Having said that, I can't see a marriage between Mary Peet and Joseph Whalley, so perhaps she is a red herring?
kiterunner
16-06-18, 19:22
This looks to be Joseph's baptism on ancestry:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/2575/4425459_00163?pid=17400834&treeid=&personid=&rc=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=Czj16966&_phstart=successSource
Rainford Bishop's Transcripts:
Born 28 Apr 1833, baptised 26 May 1833, Joseph, son of John and Mary Whalley of Rainford, father's occupation husbandman.
kiterunner
16-06-18, 19:25
Mary Pink seems to have been illegitimate as there are no father's details for her on her marriage to Joseph, so maybe one of her parents was a Peet and one a Pink?
Yes, could be. The Pink marriage fits in all other ways...…..
Thanks that s great , I think I know the lane in Rainford . That ticks the box , it's a strange thing regarding Mary pink , I thought it said he was a widower , on the online parish clerk . Could he have been married before and his first wife died ? And then he married Mary pink . It's a thought .
Could he have been married before and his first wife died ? And then he married Mary pink . It's a thought .
Sorry, we probably just assumed you would realise that without it being spelled out! I think there was an older child on the first census Mary appeared on, so you could check the GRO index for the mother's maiden name and then see if you can find the first marriage for Joseph.
EDIT
Here on 1861;
Billinge
Joseph Whalley, married, head, 27, labourer at the colliery, born Rainford
Mary Whalley, married, wife, 23, born Orrell
Ellen Whalley, unmarried, daughter, 7, scholar, born Orrell <<<<<<<<
kiterunner
17-06-18, 14:55
I think this is his first marriage:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/60562/41177_334246-00295/250085?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdbid%3d60562%26gsfn%3djos*%26gsln% 3dw*l*y%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln_x%3d1%26cp%3d11%26msfn g%3djohn%26msfng_x%3d1%26msgdy%3d1853%26new%3d1%26 rank%3d1%26redir%3dfalse&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
I thought I recognised the bride's name and that we had looked at it before, but maybe not?
12 Nov 1855 Wigan All Saints, Joseph Whalley 22 bachelor labourer, residence Upholland, father John Whalley labourer, and Nancy Bibby 26 spinster, residence Upholland, father William Bibby nail maker.
Then there is a Nancy Whalley death Jan-Mar 1857 Pemberton sub-district, age 29.
I'm wondering if seven-year-old Ellen was actually aged one as she is 11 on the next census and there's a birth reg for her, mmn Peet.
kiterunner
17-06-18, 15:22
Her occupation would be wrong too, if so, as it says Scholar.
There is an Ellen Bibby birth Jul-Sep 1854 Pemberton sub-district, MMN Bibby on the Lancs BMD site. No MMN on the GRO site, so she was illegitimate.
Hi. Yes that seems to fit , Nancy could have married Joseph and had a child Ellen I found a death of Nancy Whalley in Upholland in 1857 on online parish clerks . So that could be her . , then he married Mary Pink and went on to have more children . Maybe mystery solved of the child ??????
That's interesting, so where is the other Ellen in 1861? (Not that I've looked for her)
Nancy could have married Joseph and had a child Ellen
As Kate said, Nancy had her dau Ellen before she married Joseph.
Yes she could have had Ellen and then married Joseph . In 1855 .
Yes on the birth reg of Ellen in 1854. Mothers name is the same , so Ellen was illegitimate.
kiterunner
17-06-18, 16:37
Yes on the birth reg of Ellen in 1854. Mothers name is the same , so Ellen was illegitimate.
MMN being the same as the child's surname doesn't necessarily mean that the child was illegitimate as it could be that both parents had the same surname before they got married (for instance, cousin marriages.) But the fact that the new online GRO birth index doesn't show MMN for that entry does mean that the child was illegitimate.
Hi , I am not on ancestry , have you any idea of john and Mary Whalley s marriage perhaps in Rainford ? Josephs mother and Father . Thanks
First it's helpful if you can find the potential surname of the bride (esp as, if you had looked at Rainford PRs on Lancs OPC you would have seen there were no Whalley marriages in Rainford).
In this case you have a child named Mary aged 4 in 1841 and aged 14 in 1851 (born in Rainford), showing as John's daughter in 1851. (Mary the mother is dec'd by then).
Next I looked at Lancs OPC for Mary junr's baptism:
Baptism: 20 May 1838 All Saints, Rainford, Lancashire, England
Mary Whalley - Daughter of John Whalley & Mary
Born: 20 Apr 1838
Abode: Rainford
Occupation: Husbandman
Baptised by: Wm Ellam
Register: Baptisms 1813 - 1840, Page 183, Entry 1460
Source: LDS Film 1657568
Her age was a little off on the census, but helpfully her dob was recorded at baptism. Next, to the GRO indexes to see if she was registered. Rainford is in Prescot District:
WHALLEY, MARY mmn SWIFT
GRO Reference: 1838 J Quarter in PRESCOT Volume 20 Page 680
At the moment we don't know this is her for certain - many children went unregistered at the start of civil registration...…
Look for a Whalley to Swift marriage.....
Marriage: 4 Dec 1820 St Mary The Virgin, Prescot, Lancashire, England
John Whalley - (X), Labourer, Bachelor, this Parish
Mary Swift - (X), Spinster, this Parish
Witness: Ralph Blackburn, (X); Ann Swift, (X)
Married by Banns by: Wm. Vernon, Curate
Register: Marriages 1813 - 1830, Page 119, Entry 355
Source: LDS Film 1657584
Looks like the right one. Rainford Baptisms have the first match for a child of a John and Mary Whalley in 1821 (Thomas born 20 Aug 1821).
I think it is correct as Prescot isn't that far from rainford , Great stuff
Thank you for all your great work as I'm not on Ancestry and it makes it more difficult using just church records and free bmd etc . I am now looking at George Whalley s wife Esther Heyes who married him in Upholland in 1887 I want to follow her tree back . So any help would be gratefully received.????
I see Esther Heyes was aged 19 in 1891 and born in Upholland Lancashire.
Do you have her father's details from the 1887 marriage certificate?
There is a transcription of the marriage entry on Ancestry which has Esther's father as John Heyes. The transcription states Esther was aged 15 at the marriage in Nov 1887.
There is a nine year old Esther Heyes b Upholland with father John on the 1881 census.
There are three possible birth registrations:
HEYES, ESTHER mmn HARRISON
GRO Reference: 1871 J Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 6
HEYES, ESTHER mmn SMALLSHAW
GRO Reference: 1871 D Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 125
HEYES, ESTHER mmn DERBYSHIRE
GRO Reference: 1872 J Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 77
However, I think the middle one, mmn Smallshaw, is the right entry as when I looked up some birth registrations for the younger children that was the name that came up in the matches.
I looked back through the birth registrations looking for the first Heyes entry with mmn Smallshaw and that was Mary born 1860. She is on the 1881 census with her parents and Esther. I know you don't have Ancestry but you can look at the 1881 census on Family Search.
Here's the marriage details:
5 Sep 1859 Upholland
John Heyes 27 bachelor stonemason Upholland William Heyes weaver
Mary Smallshaw 20 spinster Upholland no father's details
Both made their mark
Witnesses William Smith, Thomas Grounds (serial witness), both signed
No time to do anything more now.
The 1859 marriage entry suggests John Heyes was born about 1832 and Mary Smallshaw about 1839. The 1881 census has John a little older, b about 1827/8.
We know John's father s William, a weaver and that John said he was born in Upholland.
There's a John Heyes in Upholland aged 24 (transcribed by Ancestry as aged 21), with father William and William's wife Ann aged 49 and 45 respectively, all born Upholland, on the 1851 census. William is a hand loom cotton weaver.
I've not found them in 1841 at the moment.
This is probably Mary Smallshaw in 1851
Parliament St Upholland
Thomas Holland head m 56 stone mason b Upholland
Esther Holland wife m 59 b ditto
John Holland son widower 25 stone mason b ditto
Ellen Huyton dau widow 29 pauper b ditto
Thomas Smallshaw grandson unm 14 mason's labourer b ditto
Mary Smallshaw granddaughter 11 b ditto <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Esther Smallshaw granddaughter 5 b ditto
Frederick Huyton grandson 6 b ditto
John Ashcroft grandson 5 b ditto
There are no obvious birth registrations for Thomas, Mary or Esther as Smallshaw.
In 1841 it would seem the Smallshaw's were called Holland:
Dog Lane, Upholland
Thomas Holland 45 stone mason
Esther Holland 45
Margaret Holland 20 cotton weaver
Ellen Holland 15 cotton weaver
John Holland 15
Thomas Holland 4
Mary Holland 1
All born in county.
This looks like a possible birth reg for Mary's younger sister Esther:
HOLLAND, ESTHER mmn -
GRO Reference: 1845 J Quarter in WIGAN UNION Volume 21 Page 874
but I don't see one for Mary.
This might be Thomas Holland's baptism:
Baptism: 26 Mar 1837 St Thomas the Martyr, Upholland, Lancs.
Thomas Holland - son of Margaret Holland
Abode: Holland
Occupation: Weaver
Baptised by: Jno. Bird
Register: Baptisms 1825 - 1841, Entry 1811
Source: LDS Film 1657546
but I don't see a baptism for Mary or Esther.
Now it gets complicated! I'm not going to go through all the stages I went through, but go straight to the conclusion! lol
First, the marriage of Mary's grandparents, Thomas and Esther Holland:
Marriage: 2 Jun 1817 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
Thomas Holland - (X), Parish of Wigan
Esther Smalshaw - (X), Parish Of Wigan
Witness: Hugh Hickox; Saml. Vizard
Married by Banns by: Edwd. Hill Curate
Register: Marriages 1816 - 1819, Page 79, Entry 236
Source: LDS Film 1885691
On the 1841 census (above) they had Margaret aged 20 living with them and also Margaret Holland was the name of the mother of Thomas Holland who was baptised (illegitimate) in 1837 (above).
It's most likely Margaret is the daughter of Thomas and Esther (no relationships given in 1841) and she is listed as 20, so apparently born after Thomas and Esther were married.
However, aged were rounded down in 1841 and Margaret was actually baptised before Esther was married:
Baptism: 16 Mar 1817 St Thomas, Upholland, Lancashire, England
Margaret Smallshaw - illegitimate daughter of Esther Smallshaw
Abode: UpHolland
Baptised by: Jno. Bird
Register: Baptism 1813 - 1825, Page 107, Entry 853
Source: LDS Film 1657546
It seems most likely Margaret then had the three Holland/Smallshaw children before she got married. At the marriage in 1847 she used her birth name and no father's details:
Marriage: 12 Aug 1847 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
Thomas Gaskell - 45, Farmer, Widower, Upholland
Margaret Smallshaw - (X), 35, Spinster, Upholland
Groom's Father: Joseph Gaskell, Farmer
Witness: Daniel Hatton; William Bancks
Married by Banns by: Arthur Coates Curate
Register: Marriages 1846 - 1848, Page 156, Entry 312
Source: LDS Film 1885695
by the 1851 census Thomas Gaskell had died.
Burial: 2 Mar 1851 St Thomas the Martyr, Upholland, Lancashire, England
Thomas Gaskell -
Age: 57
Abode: UpHolland
Register: Burials 1847 - 1961, Page 118, Entry 942
Source: LDS Film 1657555
As you see, he has aged a lot since his marriage! Having said that, this age fits better with him having a son aged 25 in 1851 so he probably rounded himself down at the marriage:
1851 Census
Parliament St Upholland (three households from Margaret's parents)
Joseph Gaskell head unm 25 shoemaker b Upholland
Margaret Gaskell stepmother widow 35 b Upholland
Mary Gaskell sister unm 15 servant b ditto
James Gaskell brother 21 months b Upholland
John Gaskell brother 1 month b Upholland
The birth registrations for James and John have mmn Smallshaw.
Next Margaret remarried, this time giving Thomas Holland as her father:
Marriage: 14 May 1854 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
William Holland - (X), 29, Sawyer, Bachelor, Upholland
Margaret Gaskell - (X), 35, Widow, Upholland
Bride's Father: Thomas Holland, Mason
Witness: Eliza Stephenson; Joseph Turner
Married by Banns by: Francis H.Coldwell Curate
Notes: [1855 written in error for year of marriage]
Register: Marriages 1854 - 1855, Page 3, Entry 6
Source: LDS Film 1885697
I note William Holland was a bachelor, yet there are plenty of children in the new Holland household in 1861.....
Back Brow Upholland
William Holland head m 36 sawyer b Upholland
Margaret Holland wife m 44 b Upholland
James Holland son 10 drawer (coal pit) b ditto
Henry Holland son 8 Scholar b ditto
Ellen Holland dau 7 scholar b ditto
Sarah Holland dau 5 scholar b ditto
Margaret Holland 3 farm labourer (presume this should be for the lodger!) b ditto
Joseph Glover unm lodger ditto for occ and birthplace.
I'm thinking James is James Gaskell from the previous census.
Most likely birth reg for Henry:
GASKELL, HENRY mmn -
GRO Reference: 1853 J Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 78
HOLLAND, ELLEN mmn SMALLSHAW
GRO Reference: 1854 S Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 82
HOLLAND, SARAH mmn SMALLSHAW
GRO Reference: 1856 M Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 87
HOLLAND, MARGARET mmn SMALLSHAW
GRO Reference: 1858 D Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 92
I was going to go on and look for baptisms of all these children, but I think I'll let you do that! lol (Lancs OPC).
Actually, it's not that complicated - just that I found all this in the wrong order, so sometimes I was looking at the right entry but not recognising it, such as ignoring a married women called Margaret Holland because I was looking for a spinster of the same name!
Here's the Heyes family in 1841 at Higher Lane Upholland
William Heyes 35 weaver
Anne Hayes 35
Thomas Heyes 14 nail maker
John Heyes 13 nail maker
I can't find this page on Ancestry. Fmp has the ref as piece 522, folio 24, page 9 which brings up a different page on ancestry!
kiterunner
20-06-18, 13:57
There should also be a book number for the 1841 census, shouldn't there?
There should also be a book number for the 1841 census, shouldn't there?
20
No matches on Ancestry.
kiterunner
20-06-18, 14:08
Looks as though the page is missing from ancestry - or maybe out of sequence. This is the page 8 which should be before it:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/8978/LANHO107_522_523-0156?backurl=https%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk%2 fsearch%2fdb.aspx%3fdbid%3d8978%26path%3d&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnBrowsing#?imageId=LANHO107_522_523-0162
and then it goes straight on to page 11. I found a free transcription in here (Word document):
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwiR4NLKs-LbAhXFN8AKHSk5Ce0QFggpMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lan-opc.org.uk%2FUpholland%2Fdownloads%2FUPHOLLAND%252 0CENSUS%25201841.doc&usg=AOvVaw3dhgWV1usG8v0MUA3VCBxu
The Heyes family are on page 49 of the Word document.
Hi , Merry and Kiterunner , your both absolutely stars . Thank you x
Hi , it s took me a while to understand the Smallshaw , Holland connection , I think I get it now . Margeret Smallshaw had illigimate children before she married into the Holland Family so they would have taken the Holland name once she married . She had a lot of Children . ! So Mary Thomas and Esther are illegitimate. And then Margeret marries into the Holland Family . I think I've got it !
Margaret was born a Smallshaw but used her stepfather's name of Holland (at least on the 1841 census. She had three illegitimate children registered as Holland and were Holland in 1841, but used Smallshaw on the 1851 census. The child we have looked at married as a Smallshaw.
Margaret married widower Thomas Gaskell who already had some children. She had two Gaskell children during the marriage. Then Thomas died.
Next Margaret had another illegitimate child, Henry Gaskell. Then she re-married to William Holland and had more children. I don't know how many as I didn't look after 1861, but she was in her mid-40s by then, so maybe just the three that were on the 1861 census with her.
I think the family were pretty fluid with what surnames they decided to use at which date and why! (Smallshaw, Holland, Gaskell, Holland)
Hi , i am trying now to trace back . Ancestors on the Whalley side in Prescot and Rainford pre 1840s can you help. ? thanks
You haven't given us any details of what you are looking for or what entries are the furthest back you have at the moment!
I have spent all the available time I had just reading back this thread and wonder if these three posts are where you are up to with the Whalley line?
This looks to be his family in 1841:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/8978/LANHO107_516_517-0524?pid=3582439&treeid=&personid=&rc=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=Czj16964&_phstart=successSource
Brushey Lane, Rainford, Prescot, Lancashire
John Whalley 40 Labourer Y
Mary Do 40 Y
Ellen Do 10 Y
Joseph Do 5 Y
Mary Do 4 Y
This looks to be Joseph's baptism on ancestry:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/2575/4425459_00163?pid=17400834&treeid=&personid=&rc=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=Czj16966&_phstart=successSource
Rainford Bishop's Transcripts:
Born 28 Apr 1833, baptised 26 May 1833, Joseph, son of John and Mary Whalley of Rainford, father's occupation husbandman.
First it's helpful if you can find the potential surname of the bride (esp as, if you had looked at Rainford PRs on Lancs OPC you would have seen there were no Whalley marriages in Rainford).
In this case you have a child named Mary aged 4 in 1841 and aged 14 in 1851 (born in Rainford), showing as John's daughter in 1851. (Mary the mother is dec'd by then).
Next I looked at Lancs OPC for Mary junr's baptism:
Baptism: 20 May 1838 All Saints, Rainford, Lancashire, England
Mary Whalley - Daughter of John Whalley & Mary
Born: 20 Apr 1838
Abode: Rainford
Occupation: Husbandman
Baptised by: Wm Ellam
Register: Baptisms 1813 - 1840, Page 183, Entry 1460
Source: LDS Film 1657568
Her age was a little off on the census, but helpfully her dob was recorded at baptism. Next, to the GRO indexes to see if she was registered. Rainford is in Prescot District:
WHALLEY, MARY mmn SWIFT
GRO Reference: 1838 J Quarter in PRESCOT Volume 20 Page 680
At the moment we don't know this is her for certain - many children went unregistered at the start of civil registration...…
Look for a Whalley to Swift marriage.....
Marriage: 4 Dec 1820 St Mary The Virgin, Prescot, Lancashire, England
John Whalley - (X), Labourer, Bachelor, this Parish
Mary Swift - (X), Spinster, this Parish
Witness: Ralph Blackburn, (X); Ann Swift, (X)
Married by Banns by: Wm. Vernon, Curate
Register: Marriages 1813 - 1830, Page 119, Entry 355
Source: LDS Film 1657584
Looks like the right one. Rainford Baptisms have the first match for a child of a John and Mary Whalley in 1821 (Thomas born 20 Aug 1821).
So, do you have any more than:
John Walley and wife Mary Swift both rounded down (probably) to age 40 in 1841, married in 1920 in Prescot.
I don't know if the 1851 census for the above couple is also on this thread. I may have missed it, but that's what you need next, in the hope you can get a better idea of their ages and pick up their birth places.
I don't have time to type this out now, but this may be what's left of the family in 1851:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/8860/LANHO107_2195_2195-1579/13095080?backurl=&ssrc=&backlabel=Return#?imageId=LANHO107_2195_2195-1578
John Whalley aged 49 b Rainford labourer. Widower.
Still has Ellen and Mary at home, but Ellen's age may have been rounded down in error in 1841 (aged 10 to aged 24)
Ooh, John may have remarried to Jane before 1861 (think the address is the same as 1851?) so there's a chance of finding his father's name from the 2nd marriage.
Marriage: 25 Dec 1854 St Mary the Virgin, Prescot, Lancashire, England
John Whaley - (X), Labourer, widower, Rainford
Jane Ball - (X), widow, Rainford
Groom's Father: John Whaley, Labourer
Bride's Father: George Derbyshire, Labourer
Witness: Peter Dearden, (X); Elizabeth Dearden, (X)
Married by Banns by: S Cavan
Register: Marriages 1854 - 1860, Page 30, Entry 59
Source: LDS Film 1657597 item 2
Baptism: 25 Nov 1798 All Saints, Rainford, Lancashire, England
John Whalley - Son of John Whalley & Sapphyra
Born: 7 Nov 1798
Abode: Rainford
Occupation: Husbandman
Register: Baptisms 1765 - 1812, Page 52, Entry 9
Source: LDS Film 1657568
I think Sapphyra is probably supposed to be Sophia!
Siblings:
Baptism: 2 Oct 1796 All Saints, Rainford, Lancashire, England
Robert Whalley - Son of John Whalley & Sophia
Born: 16 Sep 1796
Abode: Rainford
Occupation: Husbandman
Register: Baptisms 1765 - 1812, Page 47, Entry 7
Source: LDS Film 1657568
Baptism: 7 Mar 1802 St Peter and St Paul, Ormskirk, Lancashire, England
Mary Whalley - Daughter of John Whalley & Sophia
Performed at: Skelmersdale Chapel
Register: Baptisms 1794 - 1812, Page 5, Entry 41
Likely marriage:
Marriage: 16 Dec 1793 St Peter and St Paul, Ormskirk, Lancashire, England
John Whalley - (X), this parish
Sophia Rothwell - (X), this parish
Witness: John Hesketh; Jno Hankin
Married by Banns by: Jno Kirkby Curate
Register: Marriages 1784 - 1812, Page 103, Entry 415
Source: LDS Film 1849664
Source: LDS Film 1849663
Olde Crone
04-09-19, 11:04
I found these too.
All at St Peter and St Paul, Skelmersdale Chapel
Ellen, bp 17 Mar 1805
James bp 20 Dec 1807
Mary bp 3 Mar 1811
Parents John Whalley and Fiah.
OC
Thank you all , your Stars .
hi I have been trying to trace back from Mary swift post 28 who married John Whalley . I believe her father was a jerimiah swift , there is a tree for jerimiah Swift born 1868 in Rainford . The only problem is it is on ancestry , and i'm not a member . I was wondering if you could be so kind , and check it out ? There's a jeremiah Swift born in 1808 ,who may be mary's brother . You may be able to glean more info for me Thanks Chrissie
ElizabethHerts
22-03-21, 15:51
hi I have been trying to trace back from Mary swift post 28 who married John Whalley . I believe her father was a jerimiah swift , there is a tree for jerimiah Swift born 1868 in Rainford . The only problem is it is on ancestry , and i'm not a member . I was wondering if you could be so kind , and check it out ? There's a jeremiah Swift born in 1808 ,who may be mary's brother . You may be able to glean more info for me Thanks Chrissie
I don't think you mean 1868, do you?
ElizabethHerts
22-03-21, 15:53
I tried to delete my post but it won't let me.
I see you have changed the year of birth to 1808.
hi , i'm sorry that should be jeramiah swift born 1768 rainford , and Jeramiah swift born in rainford in 1808 . thanks
hi I have been trying to trace back from Mary swift post 28 who married John Whalley . I believe her father was a jerimiah swift , there is a tree for jerimiah Swift born 1868 in Rainford . The only problem is it is on ancestry , and i'm not a member . I was wondering if you could be so kind , and check it out ? There's a jeremiah Swift born in 1808 ,who may be mary's brother . You may be able to glean more info for me Thanks Chrissie
Post #26 doesn't tell me anything. Post #46 and #45 tell me Mary was dec'd by 1851, so all we know is that she was (probably rounded down to) 40 in 1841 and was married in 1820. We don't know where she was born, but she wa living in Rainford in 1841.
I don't know why you keep looking at trees? Much better and more satisfying to do your own research.
There's a Mary Whalley buried at Rainford 2 April 1847 but she is said to be 55. If that's correct she was born about 1792/3. John Whalley was 49 in 1851 according to the census, so potentially as much as ten years younger. In 1841 they were both recorded as aged 40!
There are 16 baptisms for people called Mary Swift in the 1790s according to Lancs OPC, plus the one you presumably were thinking was yours in 1801 at Rainford. I don't know how you can be sure which one is yours.
You said in a earlier post that john Whalley married a mary Swift ,so i was looking back on her tree .of the swifts .
mary swift was born in 1801 , to jerimiah swift , that's why i was looking at the tree . There's a lot of info going forwards on swift tree , but not after jerimiah swift . we have all the info going from mary and john going forwards you helped me with all that . iI was looking back on the tree .
the tree in question ,is correct and it goes forwards to my mother's father so i know that it is correct , i know what you mean that it is more satisfying ,i agree . i really would like to double check all the info on there to make sure it's correct .
You said in a earlier post that john Whalley married a mary Swift ,so i was looking back on her tree .of the swifts .
Exactly. That is what my post #56 is all about.
How do you know the daughter of Jeremiah Swift is the right one?
It looks as if that Mary died in 1812:
Burial: 25 Aug 1812 All Saints, Rainford, Lancashire, England
Mary Swift - Daughter of Jeremy Swift
Abode: Rainford
Occupation: Husbandman
Register: Burials 1765 - 1812, Page 35, Entry 2
Source: LDS Film 1657568
So you need to look at the other 16 baptisms!!
what church ar those baptisms at. as there is only two on rainford online parish ?
I'm not saying they are all near, but you don't know where she was born except that it was in Lancashire (Post #45), also you don't have a very accurate age record for her. You could check the GRO index es to see if there are any others close by between 1841 and 1851 in case I've missed the correct burial.
Have a look at the baps here:
http://www.lan-opc.org.uk/Search/indexp.html
and the GRO here:
https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/login.asp
Hi merry , I was looking at again through the posts ,and noticed that a witness at john and Mary's wedding was a a witness ann swift . so i thought i'd check for her birth , and found her birth in prescot 1800 to henry and pricilla swift . and there is also a mary. born 1798 to them abode whiston , could this be our Mary swift ?
Well, it could be, but you don't know the witness is her sister. It could be her mother, grandmother, aunt, cousin, sister-in-law etc etc.
EDIT
Ann was buried aged 6 months:
Burial: 30 Aug 1800 St Mary the Virgin, Prescot, Lancashire, England
Ann Swift - Daur. of Henry Swift
Abode: Prescot
Occupation: Labourer
Register: Burials 1766 - 1809, Page 316, Entry 34
Source: LDS Film 1657583
It's possible this is the Mary Swift you were looking at:
Burial: 13 Apr 1820 St Mary the Virgin, Prescot, Lancashire, England
Mary Swift -
Age: 21 years
Abode: Prescot
Buried by: Wm. Vernon
Register: Burials 1813 - 1826, Page 154, Entry 1226
Source: LDS Film 1657597
but we don't know if this Mary was married or single.
hi. yes your correct ann could have been any relation , i'll do some searching later thanks
Hi ,I have been looking at the parish checks at prescot and came across a marriage for Ralph blackburn , and Ann swift in 1821 , they were the witness 's for john and Mary in 1820 their witnesses were john and Mary whalley . perhaps we can glean something from that ? i'd like to know your thoughts ?
That's more like it!
So now you need to look for that couple on the census to determine her age and place of birth if possible.
i also looked at the bans for John and mary they were posted at prescot. but it says rainford after their names .
So, I've found them in 1851 and Ann and Mary's baptisms. Have you got them yet?
will do that now ,thanks merry , i feel we are getting somewhere now lol
just going to go on family ,but it isn't great . thanks
i found a tre for ralph Blackburn married to ann , it says her parents are John and ellen . will carry on looking .
It's saying ann is 40 on the 1841 census , if it's correct .
ElizabethHerts
23-03-21, 14:07
It's saying ann is 40 on the 1841 census , if it's correct .
The ages are rounded to the nearest 5 years in 1841.
mary is also 40 on the 1841 census again if it's correct ,
You need to use the 1851 census, then look for the birth reg of 1+ of the children to check their mmn so you know you have the right family. The 1851 will give you Ann's age and birthplace. Then Lancs BMD for Ann's baptism, then look for siblings of Ann.
I checked to make sure the 1851 census was easy to find on Family Search and it is. It came us as the second match in my results.
i found a tre for ralph Blackburn married to ann , it says her parents are John and ellen . will carry on looking .
But you don' know other people's trees are correct. Look at the Jeremiah daughters - they were wrong because they both died but the tree owner had not done their research properly.
hi merry sorry had to nip out on a errand . yes your quick on the mark , Mary Born 1798 to henry and pricilla and ann born 1800 to same parents . Honestly my wifi is terrible it takes ages to load pages , the speeds below 7 which is shocking . plus ancestry is much better . i'm going to treat myself in a couple of months . and join .
i looks like they are sisters . and their parents henry and priscilla ? do you agree . ?
Both witnesses at each other's wedding .
Yes your right about the trees , They have to be double checked . to make sure they are right . I've been doing a practice sheet of my mums tree ,it's quite big with lots of children , But there are a few people i still have to research ,before i do the proper one , and like you said double check the names to make sure , that they are correct .
Nope, I don't think those are the right girls. Check Ann's birthplace in 1851.
We've already talked about the deaths of Henry's children earleir today.
I found a henry and pricilla tree , he was born in ormskirk . Now it has mary born 1898 !married to a edward brown. not john whalley , unless she married again after he died . so . they may not be the correct people ? what do you think .
No, they are not. We have already got the deatth of Ann the dau of Henry and Priscilla and a possible death for Mary too. See my last post where I directed you to the posts for that.
oh never mind so it's back to the drawing board , i'll check ann's birthplace on the 1851 census .
yes it says birthplace Aughton . so where do i go from here ?
Search on Lancs BMD for a birth of an Ann Swift around 1800 or just after and then pick the one that says born in Aughton!
the births only begin after 1837 .
kiterunner
23-03-21, 16:03
Merry probably meant Lancs OPC.
kiterunner
23-03-21, 16:05
Watch out though, because there are two places called Aughton in Lancashire.
There's a aughton near omskirk and a houghton near preston , but i will check .
Lancashire BMDs only begin after 1837 , so i'll try and look on family .
i found a ann swift born 1801 abode aughton on ormskirk online parish clerk father john. mother ellen , but nothing comes up in aughton for ann on family search .
Tilly Mint
23-03-21, 16:49
Have you seen this?....
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Swift-3978
And...
https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/KZFN-WBL/ann-swift-1801
Not sure if you have this info.....or if they are yours
thanks tilly mint i will check it out thanks
Merry probably meant Lancs OPC.
Sorry, yes, obviously.
i found a ann swift born 1801 abode aughton on ormskirk online parish clerk father john. mother ellen , but nothing comes up in aughton for ann on family search .
It is on Family Search - listed as Ormskirk because that's where the bap was, not Aughton. You can then view the film.
So did you look for her siblings? You are looking for Mary b a bit earlier than Ann. Easiest to look on Lancs OPC and then FS after when you know what you are trying to find.
hi ,yes i have found mary born 1895 , to john and ellen and ann 1801 to john and ellen swift .
marriage for john and ellen harrison 1895 ormskirk .
So Mary's baptism was two days after the marriage.
so was she illigitamate ?
Would she have been registered in her mother's maiden name ?
It's saying on the time line that there are three possible marriages for her and it say perhaps a thomas denton . So it looks like she isn't our girl ,unless there's something i'm missing . ?
mind you there are lots of mary swifts born in Lathom and other areas . so the ones to thomas denton may not be our Mary .
so was she illigitamate ?
Well, she was presumably born before the marriage!
Would she have been registered in her mother's maiden name ?
Birth registration didn't start until 1837.
It's saying on the time line that there are three possible marriages for her and it say perhaps a thomas denton . So it looks like she isn't our girl ,unless there's something i'm missing . ?
Of the public tress for this Mary Swift (the dau of John Swift and Ellen Harrison) some have her marrying Thomas Denton, some have her marrying Samuel Owen, and we have her marrying John Whalley. Some other people have the Mary who married John Whalley with different parents (John Swift and Esther Marsh). What you have to do is look at the evidence the tree owners are giving for their assumptions in each case and decide who has the best evidence - you or them. One thing is for sure that all the others can't be right as they are giving different scenarios for apparently the same person.
mind you there are lots of mary swifts born in Lathom and other areas . so the ones to thomas denton may not be our Mary .
Exactly, but you need to prove it.
Yes i understand . so we have to try and look into all these marriages and mary's . do some investigating
so the ones to thomas denton may not be our Mary .
Your Mary married John Whalley otherwise she isn't your Mary! The point is, which is the right baptism and parents for your Mary, not who she married.
Yes i understand . so we have to try and look into all these marriages and mary's . do some investigating
Exactly that. And hopefully eliminate all the others as the evidence you have for Ann Swift (the one who matches perfectly with the 1801 baptism etc) is strong and it would make a lot of sense if your Mary was her sister as the evidence we have for your Mary does fit with the 1795 baptism, but that evidence is a bit weaker as we know less about Mary than Ann.
on the banns for mary's marriage to thomas denton it says abode lathom , but mary was born in aughton or ormskirk ? so that may not be her
i've checked through a few of the baptisms for mary's in ormskirk , only found one with the right parents , so i will try and see if they didn't die who they married if i can .
Hi ,looked at the births of Mary's in ormskirk ,one fitted the parents. then checked marriages ,only came across the Denton marriage . so can't find anything as yet .
the mary in lathom married thomas denton , parents henry and ellen.
so at the moment i can't see any marriages around the time in question , lots from 1820 s to 1830 ,in ormskirk prescot and liverpool .
Ideally you need to find the Denton and Owen families after their marriages and discover that Mary Denton and Mary Owen don't fit with the 1795 baptism of Mary Swift that you think belongs to your Mary.
will do just got back from shopping .
found a thomas denton on the 1841 census , he's in ormskirk with a family agnas , and children eldest being 13 . so if that's him he isn't with mary .
can seem to find the owen family around the area
i have had to give up my eyes are going square .
can seem to find the owen family around the area
If you'd looked at Lancs OPC you would have seen their children were baptised at St Helens and they lived at Sutton. From the 1851 census Mary Owen was born about 1801 in Kirby, Lancs.
found a thomas denton on the 1841 census , he's in ormskirk with a family agnas , and children eldest being 13 . so if that's him he isn't with mary .
Was he a widower when he married Agnes? Or are there two Thomas Dentons?
agnes dennison ,married thomas denton in 1826 ormskirk ,i looked on family search 1841 , and they have changed the format and it doesn't give as much info , only children . so i don't know if it's the same person or not . On th banns it says there both from burcough
So, if you can't tell whether the Thomas Denton marrying Agnes in 1826 is the same person who married Mary Swift in 1822 from the marriage records (the groom signed and no condition given for the groom either time), you need to see if a Mary Denton died between those dates and, if there were any burials, do any of them look likely to be the wife of Thomas?
I checked burials all i could find is children and babies .
OK.
EDIT - Oh, there's this one:
Burial: 6 Sep 1824 St Cuthbert, Halsall, Lancashire, England
Mary Benton -
Age: 22 Years
Abode: Burscough
Buried by: Rich.Loxham Rector
Register: Burials 1813 - 1844, Page 61, Entry 488
Source: LDS Film 1849658
Note the abode. I looked at the image on Ancestry and it's def Denton not Benton. So, I would think this is Thomas Denton's first wife and she is a bit young to have been baptised in 1795.
So..... that's the Owen and Denton ladies eliminated. Were there any others?
hi think they were the only ones .
hi , I have come across family tree with george and esther whalley nee heyes . It is showing that john heyes esther's father married a jane birch . in 1861 skelmersdale . i contacted the owner of the tree and he says it's correct . Yet we thought that esther's mother was mary smallshaw . any ideas ? thanks
sorry i meant to put on post 33 .
I looked for esther's birth and found a esther heyes mmn Birch .
that is in upholland 1868 on lancs bmd
kiterunner
09-12-21, 09:22
According to post #32, your Esther Heyes was age 19 in 1891, which would mean she was born in 1871 or 1872, not 1868.
kiterunner
09-12-21, 09:23
Also, people usually do think their own tree is correct but that doesn't necessarily mean it is.
i've just checked her marriage feb 1882 her age is 15 . so it's possible that her birth could be 1867/8. around the time jane birch gave birth to esther . Isn't it ?
kiterunner
09-12-21, 09:48
Post #33 says the marriage was in Nov 1887?
kiterunner
09-12-21, 09:50
Lancashire OPC has the date as 28 Nov 1887.
sorry kiterunner i have seen the script on google but obviously the date is wrong as it says 1882 , I know esther married george whalley . But maybe the owner of the tree hasn't looked at all this info .from george and esthe and worked the dates .
there three years difference between the birth of esther with mother jane birch 1868 and mother mary smallshaw 1871 . It does say age 15 on the marriage form but could that be wrong ? i don't want to tell the owner of the tree unless i can show them
esther's birth is right on the 1901 census where she is 29 .
kiterunner
09-12-21, 15:11
esther's birth is right on the 1901 census where she is 29 .
If that's right then the age 15 on the marriage is also right.
Hi , I have been searching to see what happened to Ellen huyton widow Pauper from post 35 living with her parents . I haven't been able to find her or her marriage . I found fred huyton (highton ) 1861 census living in Pemberton with his grandmother esther and her son and family and also Nancy Highton. which i think must be ellen's daughter also . I can find also a marriage for a fred Highton in 1894 wigan to a wilimina millar . i found a marriage for a nancy highton in 1876 to a nicholas horrocks in Wigan . But her mother remains a mystery . I have tried to find a huyton Marriage for her but as yet haven't found one . Family search isn't so good , it comes up with no matches for a lot of people . since they have changed the format it's difficult . so if you have any ideas i would be grateful.Thanks
I can find also a marriage for a fred Highton in 1894 wigan to a wilimina millar .
I think this is Frederick:
HUYTON, FREDERICK 19
GRO Reference: 1863 D Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 58
I haven't been able to find her marriage
I don't often see you saying you have tried Lancs OPC. I know it's not perfect for everywhere in Lancs, but easier to look there first before trying FS. If you had looked there it would have been almost impossible not to find her marriage!!
Marriage: 18 Jun 1844 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
James Highton - 21, Tailor, Bachelor, Upholland
Ellen Holland - (X), 22, Weaver, Spinster, Upholland
Groom's Father: Henry Highton, (dead)
Bride's Father: Thomas Holland, Flagger & Slater
Witness: William Holland, (X); Esther Holland, (X)
Married by Banns by: John Lomas, Curate
Register: Marriages 1844 - 1845, Page 50, Entry 100
Source: LDS Film 1885694
hi , sorry. i looked at a lot of opcs but not lancs Bmd . thanks for that
Not Lancs BMD. Lancs OPC - ie the main search that covers the whole county.
i found a marriage for a nancy highton in 1876 to a nicholas horrocks in Wigan .
You need to look at that marriage on Lancs OPC and decide whether it's the right one.
Now another poser. There was a nancy highton in the holland household in pemberton , but it's saying she is 4 in 1861 I found a burial of a james huyton at upholland in 1849 . no age given . and obviously ellen was a widow in 1851, was nancy illigitamate?
If she was Ellen's child, then yes, if James was dead in 1851! (and consider Nancy may or may not be her birth name).
So, have you looked at the GRO index to see how old James was if his age isn't recorded on the burial?
The age for James is also on Lancs OPC, as well as on the GRO index.
yes i see he was 29 on his death .
I don't seem to find ellen huyton , after 1851 .I will check burials , i've checked later census 's but with no luck .
kiterunner
11-12-21, 15:39
If she is the one who was 29 on the 1851 census, she may have remarried.
yes she is 29 on the 1851 census. will look for a remarriage
the only one i can find on family search is a 1860 marriage in manchester for a ellen highton to a george potter . . whether that is her are not . as the info doesn't show a lot of detail
kiterunner
11-12-21, 16:15
There is an Ellen Highton death 1859 Pemberton district, age 38, on Lancashire BMD.
yes that could be her , as her children are with their grandmother in pemberton . so i think it's most likely her.
post 44 , Hi i have struggled to Get the children of Margeret Smallshaw (holland ) in a order , and how many children she actually had with who as there are lots of children. I do know that she had the three children before she was married . But then she has other children as a gaskell and holland . .i would like to get them into a kind ogpf order with fathers if possible . obviously the first three we do not know the fathers names . But any help would be gratefully received .
I don't think you mean post #44!
By chance, I read post #42 and that sent me back to post #35 where I think I've done a lot of the work for you already.
You just need to use the GRO index and work your way through it using the various surnames to fill in any gaps I've left.
I've already written about Thomas, Mary and Esther.
You need to look for James and John as I didn't look up those two.
Then the next set are Henry, Ellen Sarah and Margaret and I've already posted their registrations.
I would suggest you make a list of all of these and see how big the gaps are in between to determine whether you need to be looking for any more children who may have died between the census returns.
thanks will make a list and see who i can find like you said and burials just in case .
hi , I have been trying to trace thomas hollands ancestors from post 35 . born in 1793 uppollamd . it says parents john and margeret , i've tried to find the marriage of these two , but as yet found a few marriages in upholland and wigan ,but not with the name margeret ? any ideas . there's a marriage in 1771 upholland of a john and a ellen Rigby ,
kiterunner
17-12-21, 09:08
I haven't found the marriage, but Lancs OPC has the burial of a Margret, wife of John Holland, collier, 3 Jan 1795 at St Thomas the Martyr, Up Holland, abode Holland.
Thanks. kiterunner , i will check that out . Regards chrissie
all i can find at the moment is a sarah darbisher ,married john 1790 in upholland .
but not a margeret i have checked omskirk skelmersdale and wigan online parish clerks but as yet not found a margeret .
hi ,merry I was going over some of these posts looking for mary swift . I did find a daughter mary born to betty swift illigitimatly to a betty swiftbin Aughton , i can't see if i mentioned her or not ? thanks
Sorry i've put this comment in th wrong place mary swift was john whalley s wife in a Rainford and was trying to find a link between ann swift who married ralph blackburn . and who were witnesses at mary and johns wedding .
Sorry i've put this comment in th wrong place mary swift was john whalley s wife in a Rainford and was trying to find a link between ann swift who married ralph blackburn . and who were witnesses at mary and johns wedding .
You need to post what you know already, with dates, places, census ot whatever etc and the source(s) for that information and then what your question is, please.
Hi , I was still trying to establish the birth of Mary swift from post 62 . she married john whalley in 1820 , witnesses ralph blackburn and ann swift .As i said in post later there are three trees of the whalley s but as you said the trees were mary married surname denton and owens are not belonging to me . I never did establish if there was a connection between ralph blackburn and ann swift witnesses at their wedding . I did findd a illigitamete birth to a betty swift in aughton in 1801 . there is a tree which suggest that a ellen harrison and john swift are the parents of mary.
but this is still all got to be gone over as you said before . you have prove everything that's been put down .
I never did establish if there was a connection between ralph blackburn and ann swift witnesses at their wedding .
Erm, yes, you did.
Hi i'm sorry merry you will have to give me a pointer as i can't remember seeing a post . saying there was a connection ?
It was you who posted it. Prob around post 70, I don't remember now. They married each other soon after the couple they were witnesses for.
Hi yes Ralph married Ann but I never found out if Ann and Mary were related
Yes you did. It's all here on this thread between posts 70 (roughly) and post 131. After Post 131 you came back after 9 months on a different topic.
after post 130 we left the topic , as i couldn't find out anything else you had eliminated denton and owen as being Mary's husbands . So i never concluded who was her parents for definite . yes i for some reason started another post 7 months later . But I do appreciate your input , i'm partially blind and sometimes struggle with seeing somethings It's very difficult using some of the old sites without a new browser
hi ,yes i have found mary born 1895 , to john and ellen and ann 1801 to john and ellen swift .
I thought this was you having a success with the baptisms for Mary and Ann. (Post #121, I think)
I am happy with ann and mary's birth to ellen and john in ormskirk . yiu eliminated denton and owen , so that leaves us with her marriage to John Whalley . Hope you agree
vBulletin® v3.8.7 PL3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.