PDA

View Full Version : Another branch of the Birch tree


vita
12-01-17, 10:15
Could someone please help me with the parents of this man?

William Birch b abt 1820, probably around High Wycombe, Bucks. In 1843 he

m Mary Foot.I have much info on him after that but need to establish his

origins.

Thanks

Vita

kiterunner
12-01-17, 10:39
I assume you haven't got his marriage cert, Vita?

kiterunner
12-01-17, 10:41
Ancestry has it in the England, Select Marriages (I think these are taken from FamilySearch) 19 May 1843 Wycombe, and it shows his father as Nathaniel Birch.

kiterunner
12-01-17, 10:43
So he could be the William Birch who was baptised 28 Jan 1816 (born 25 Dec 1815) at Great Missenden, Bucks, parents Nathaniel and Ann.

kiterunner
12-01-17, 10:47
I think this is him on the 1841 census as the occupation matches the 1861:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/8978/BKMHO107_53_55-0342/3620866?backurl=&ssrc=&backlabel=Return

St Mary Street, High Wycombe
John Bristow 50 Sawyer
Ann Do 50
Thomas Do 15 Sawyer
William Do 13
-
William Birch 20 Chair m Y

vita
12-01-17, 11:28
Thanks Kite - no, I didn't have his marriage cert. I came across him a couple of days ago

& was fairly sure he was one of mine but can't tie him in.

Oakum Picker
12-01-17, 12:49
Tenterfield Julie has BIRCH in that area including a few Nathaniels but probably a little earlier than yours.

vita
12-01-17, 12:57
Tenterfield Julie has BIRCH in that area including a few Nathaniels but probably a little earlier than yours.

Interesting - thanks for that. The Birches come into my family in 1787 when

James Birch m Harriet Trenley so I'm looking for a possible link between

James & Nathaniel.

Merry
12-01-17, 13:01
Vita, do you have James Birch's burial or anything else to establish when he was born?

Merry
12-01-17, 13:05
I see James and Harriet married in London.

What info do you have already suggesting there will be a link between Nathaniel and James?

vita
12-01-17, 13:18
I see James and Harriet married in London.

What info do you have already suggesting there will be a link between Nathaniel and James?

Nothing concrete Merry - just a hunch due to the same Christian names

cropping up in both families & them being just a few miles apart. I've

never looked into James's origins.

vita
12-01-17, 13:21
James was still around in 1826 & running a draper's shop in Uxbridge.

Merry
12-01-17, 13:40
So are these them?

Harriott Birch
Burial
9 Nov 1792
St John the Baptist, Hillingdon, Middlesex
wife of James Birch tayler (sic) of Uxbridge

and

James Birch
b abt 1740
bur 13 Jun 1834
St Margaret, Uxbridge
Hillingdon

So he seems to have been well into his 40s when he married (apparently for the first time).

Do you have a bap for Harriet?

vita
12-01-17, 13:45
Yes - 1759 St Mary's, Denham. Daughter of John Trenley & Sarah, nee Newman.

Merry
12-01-17, 15:36
There are a lot of baps for people called James Birch.

William's father may be Nathaniel Birth b about 1786 (but there are others)

Nathaniel Birch b abt 1786 at Great Missenden, Buckinghamshire
Lodger occ labourer residing at Chipping Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

says married but no wife.

Then there is:

Mary Birch babt 1793 at Picotts Comma Roghandon (that's the transcription! lol), Buckinghamshire occ Housekeeper residing at Chipping Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

says married but no husband.

And that would fit if the Nathaniel who married Ann was the same one who later married Mary:

Nathaniel Birch m 16 Nov 1812 Great Missenden,Buckingham to Ann Aldridge

Nathaniel Birch m 27 Mar 1817 Great Missenden,Buckingham to Mary Benning

Children Mary, Wm and Ann bap 1813-1818 at GM parents Nat and Ann

No children with parents Nat and Mary.

I haven't found any Gt Missenden records to see if there's a bap for Nat or James there. FS says the IGI has a few baps from the 17thC and no records online anywhere else. I've not actually searched myself.

What were the names that matched up between the families?

vita
12-01-17, 15:56
Walter & Charles were two that caught my eye - hardly unusual,I know. And William was

everywhere - but then it always is!