View Full Version : Help wanted to trace ancestors walker family Upholland
Hi , I am looking for any history of the Richard Walker , named as father on birth of cisely Walker , 1803 st Thomas Upholland , does anyone know where he was born ? Thanks
First of all it's a good idea to record Cicily's siblings, in order to hopefully find the correct marriage for Richard. These are from Lancs OPC:
Baptism: 29 Apr 1798 St Thomas, Upholland, Lancashire, England
Mary Walker - Daughter of Richard Walker
Abode: UpHolland
Occupation: Collier
Register: Baptisms 1789 - 1812, Page 27, Entry 14
Source: LDS Film 1657546
Baptism: 11 May 1800 St Thomas, Upholland, Lancashire, England
Betty Walker - Daughter of Richard Walker
Abode: UpHolland
Occupation: Collier
Register: Baptisms 1789 - 1812, Page 33, Entry 9
Source: LDS Film 1657546
Baptism: 6 Jan 1803 St Thomas, Upholland, Lancashire, England
Cisely Walker - Daughter of Richard Walker
Abode: UpHolland
Occupation: Collier
Register: Baptisms 1789 - 1812, Page 40, Entry 33
Source: LDS Film 1657546
Burial: 2 Feb 1803 St Thomas the Martyr, Up Holland, Lancashire, England
Cicily Walker - Daughter of Richard Walker
Abode: Upholland
Register: Burials 1790 - 1812, Page 1, Entry 17
Source: LDS Film 1657546
Baptism: 25 Mar 1804 St Thomas, Upholland, Lancashire, England
Cecily Walker - Daughter of Richard Walker
Abode: UpHolland
Occupation: Collier
Register: Baptisms 1789 - 1812, Page 45, Entry 24
Source: LDS Film 1657546
This could be his marriage:
Marriage: 31 Oct 1797 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
Richard Walker - (X), Upholland
Ellen Gaskell - (X), Upholland
Witness: Wm. Bancks; Henry Fishwick, (X)
Married by Banns by: John Fawel
Register: Marriages 1790 - 1803, Page 188, Entry 752
Source: LDS Film 1885689
Next thought is, less than ten years worth of children after the marriage. Was that because Richard's wife was older, or because she (or Richard) died, or because they moved to a different parish or had come from a different parish in 1798 (making that 1797 marriage less likely)?
Also, you said "1803 birth" note that 1803 was the year the child was baptised, not necessarily when they were born. The Cecily baptised in 1803 died in 1803, so your Cecily was baptised in 1804.
If that 1797 marriage is the right one, then the family did move.
Baptism: 22 Dec 1806 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
Ellen Walker - fifth Daur. of Richard Walker & Ellen (formerly Gaskell)
Born: 26 Nov
Abode: Haigh
Occupation: Miner
Mother's Parents: Henry & Mary Gaskell
Register: Baptisms 1799 - 1812, Page 224
Source: Original register at Wigan Archives
Most helpful of the vicar to record maiden name, mother's parents and "fifth daughter" - that never happens in my tree! lol
I don't know if this is the same Ellen (jr)
Burial: 21 Nov 1813 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
Ellen Walker - Daughter of Richard Walker
Age: 7
Abode: Standishgate
Cause of Death: Smalpox
Buried by: T.Pigot
Register: Burials 1813 - 1818, Page 55, Entry 438
Source: LDS Film 1885700
The issue is when researching common names is that obviously there may be many possible entries that fit the bill, so you may have to research other people within the potential families to see if anything helps you.
I presume this is the correct bap for Ellen Gaskell though, as she has the correct parents, as recorded by the vicar at the 1806 baptism.
Baptism: 6 Sep 1778 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
Ellen Gaskell - Daughter of Henry Gaskell & Mary
Abode: Pemberton
Register: Baptisms 1754 - 1778, Page 236
Source: Original register at Wigan Archives
There is an Ellen Walker of the right age b Upholland on the 1841 and 1851 census, but I think her husband was William Walker not Richard as the baptism of her daughter Sarah (living with her in 1851) seems to confirm this.
I think this is the right Ellen Walker:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/60563/41177_334251-00214/8026?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk%2f cgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3dWiganBurials%26gss%3dsfs28_ms _r_db%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26gsfn%3 dell*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dwalker%26gsln_x%3d1%26 gskw%3dwigan%26gskw_x%3d1%26MSAV%3d2%26MSV%3d1%26u idh%3d672&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
The entry reads "Ellen wife of Richard Walker, abode Blackrod, buried Dec 6th 1840, found dead"
That entry rather suggests Richard was living when Ellen died.
Wow , great work , yes potentially the marriage looks a possible one , and places like Pemberton where potentially Ellen was born is only a few miles away and so is Blackrod , as there was a lot of work around these area and again isn't too far away . Have you any idea where Richard was born ? it could be in the surrounding areas if not Upholland ? I I found a Richard walker on the 1841 census in Blackrod age 65 Looks like he was on his own as it doesn't mention anyone else with him in Goodmans Fold Blackrod , Yes the. First cisely Walker may have died and then she had another baby the following year and named her Cisely Thanks for your help Regards Qwackers
Have you any idea where Richard was born ?
No, because I can't find a burial for him which should show his approx. age at death and he doesn't seem to be showing up on the 1841 or 1851 census. EDIT - but I didn't see the 65 year old, so will try and find him now. You should have posted a link or the ref to his entry!!
There don't appear to be any baptisms of a Richard Walker in Upholland or Wigan at the right time, but there are around plenty to choose from if he was born somewhere else in Lancashire.
lol Ancestry helpfully transcribed that Richard as Ruther!
So, if that's the right Richard he was born in Lancashire possibly approx 1770-1775. There are around a dozen baptisms in Lancashire for a Richard Walker around those dates.
First cisely Walker may have died
Her burial details are in post #2.
We need to find this man in 1851 to see if it looks like the same man and to pick up his birthplace:
WALKER, RICHARD aged 82
GRO Reference: 1861 M Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 62
Here he is on FMP:
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/record?id=gbc%2f1851%2f4298990%2f00269&parentid=gbc%2f1851%2f0001632839
and Ancestry (don't know which you have)
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/8860/LANHO107_2198_2198-0497/13141733?backurl=https%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co. uk%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fdb%3duki1851%26so%3d2%26pcat%3dROO T_CATEGORY%26gss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26MS_AdvCB%3d1%26 gsfn%3dric*%26gsfn_x%3d1%26gsln%3dwal*%26gsln_x%3d 1%26msbdy%3d1779%26msbdy_x%3d1%26gskw%3dwigan%26gs kw_x%3d1%26cpxt%3d1%26cp%3d11%26catbucket%3drstp%2 6MSAV%3d2%26MSV%3d1%26uidh%3d672&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults
So, occ is wrong, but still could be him as I'm sure it's the same man as you found in 1841 as he's in the same place. So, born in Standish which is three miles or so from Wigan and possibly about 1778/9ish.
There are some baptisms around the correct years in Standish for the children of James and Ellen Walker, but no Richard that I can see at the moment. Bap dates and names are:
15 Mar 1772 Ann
17 Mar 1776 Alice
10 Oct 1779 Ellen
May 1784 Jane
Hi , thanks Merry , I'm afraid I'm not to savvy when it comes to posting links etc .thanks qwackers
hi ,Merry , just querying post 5 birth of ellen gaskell 1778 all saints Wigan . Daughter of henry and Mary abode pemberton christened all saints wigan . as on their marriage certificate it says abode Upholland , for both. could ellen not have been born in upholland as there are lots of births that could be possibilities . ? thanks
I did find a birth for a mary ellen ,gaskell in 1876 upholland parents henry and Mary . if they are the same parents ,would they have to children with the name ellen or was it not a problem . if they are the same parents thanks
She could have been born anywhere, but obviously more likely than not to have been born close-ish to where she lived later.
You need to make a list of the possible baptisms and then see how many you can eliminate.
I presume you have said the wrong year in your last post (1876??). It's unusual for a couple to name two childen the same if the first one hadn't died, but it does happen rarely. I have 10,000 on my tree and only one case of that happening that I'm aware of.
EDIT - I just realised you meant one was Ellen and one Mary Ellen. Again, unusual, but possible. (Assuming they were not almost a century apart!)
Remember Ellen's burial says she was 62 at the end of 1840.
I just searched for the Mary Ellen Gaskell you mentioned and saw the baptism was 1876 (as you said) so clearly not the same family as she was born in the wrong century!
hi ,Merry , just querying post 5 birth of ellen gaskell 1778 all saints Wigan . Daughter of henry and Mary abode pemberton christened all saints wigan . as on their marriage certificate it says abode Upholland , for both. could ellen not have been born in upholland as there are lots of births that could be possibilities . ? thanks
Please would you post these other possible entries from Upholland. Thanks.
there is a ellen Gaskell ,born april 1769 father joseph , ellen gaskell 1772 april father william ashurst , Mother Mary ? gaskell Abode pemberton . Mother from upholland child illegitimate
But her parents need to be Henry and Mary (see post #3), that's why I chose the Wigan entry. So the two you have found have the wrong parents and are probably too old (from the age at burial).
hi ,I also have just had a message from a walker ancestor in california, who has sent me a copy of a court Paper she has found , 25 th of July 1806 Lancashire order books records and petitions .Stating that Richard walker of haigh is reputed to be the father of Joseph male bastard child to Ann gaskell of billinge , and then a sum to be paid and then a weekly payment . she seems to think this is our Richard Walker and is also looking into the possibilitiy of Ann being the sister of Ellen Gaskell . It would be a reason they didn't stay in upholland and moved . Billinge isn't too far from upholland .
Do we know that ,the burial of ellen walker is for definite . I am trying to understand why they would have burials at wigan when they live in Haigh , Unless they had a plot there , as haigh i'd just over four miles away and it has its own church . Also could i ask could Richard walker be older perhaps in his thirties whe he got married ?
i have found two anns at the moment , father henry one born 1784 one born 1789 there are a couple more i will look at them tommorow .
Do we know that ,the burial of ellen walker is for definite .
If you have found some more, maybe you could post them here so we can take a look and see if any can be eliminated. We do know the hisband of that Ellen was called Richard.
Richard was most likely over 21 at the marriage, but other than that he could have been any age. Do you not like the look of the one on the census then? If you don't think that Richard is the one, then the Ellen burial probably isn't the one either, as that suggests her husband was still living.
Hi ,Yes I was always searching after 1770 for richard, But I found a Richard Thomas Walker baptised 21 july 1767 Born 27th dec 1766 father william and Mary Farmer . upholland and there are lots of walkers in upholland .Now that would make him around 30/31 , but Ellen could have been younger . so the burial could be right . that's my thoughts . And then we have got this latest scenario, where he could be the father of this Joseph Gaskell , mother ann gaskell . who is from that area , so i'm just looking at a bigger picture .
hi that should have been mary ,occupation farmer
You're a century out!
Name: Richard Thomas Walker
Gender: Male
Baptism Date: 21 Jul 1867
Baptism Place: UpHolland , Lancashire, England
Father: William Walker
Mother: Mary
FHL Film Number: 1657546
Reference ID: item 5 p 65
you know i could have sworn i checked the 1700s but , your right lol
Hi ,merry , i'm trying to establish Richard walkers Death , so we can see at least how old he was .I think he was in Blackrod In 1841 as there is a richard walker in goodmans fold on the blackrod census . so he was still alive then presuming it is him . I then look at burials , I couldn't see any for him after that time around the wigan , Blackrod area . There are only two , that stand out more than others on the burials on Family search . there is one for 1843 in Wigan ,no mention of age , and in 1852 a death in Bolton , which blackrod could have come under but no mention of age on the site . The others are all liverpools and places further away . So it's hobsons at the moment . I don't know if ancestry will give the age of death ? anyway it's worth trying to find that out otherwise I'm stuck looking for him .As you said walker is a common name . So it makes even harder . Let me know anyway .thanks
Ther is also death in 1861 in Wigan . can't find it in the chrich indexes , but that would make him 81 /82 like you proposed .
hi ,i thought i'd search the wigan onlines to see if there was a birth around 1778/79 . there is a thomas walker , baptised 1780 to lanslet and Mary formerly Barton . wallgate Wigan . Just a thought that is name could be thomas richard . it's a long shot .
See posts #9-#14 re Richard Walker.
You say some of the death registration entries you have looked at don't give an age. You need to use the GRO site for death registrations before 1866 - the same site as for the pre-1911 mmn information for births:
https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/#0
It's free.
Hi ,I did find a richard Walker death 1861 age 82 In Hindley which is just outside of wigan . This could be him .How do i go from here , will his death certificate show his exact birth ?
The 1861 death registration is posted in #13 on this thread. Further info including hs place of birth from the census is in post #14.
No, his death certificate will not show his place of birth, exact or otherwise. That information was only required for death certificates from 1 April 1969 and even then, the place of birth will only be as accurate as the information given by the informant.
You need to read the webpages here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190216081224/https://home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/indexbd.htm
There is information about what you can expect to find on England/Wales certificates and how you can interpret that information to help with your research.
i have seen all the births from the post you mentioned , in standish , which isn't far from upholland as my relatives live there. I think that it may be the family but obviously richard is missing .
hi ,merry i've tried to sign in to FMP . to see the man you have mentioned in post 14 , so i'm afraid i can't see it at the moment can you help please ? thanks
1851 Census
Aberdeen Farm, Blackrod
Richard Walker, head, widower, 72, farm labourer, born Lancashire, Standish
In 1841 he was a collier living at Goodman's Fold, Blackrod. Both times living alone.
hi ,merry ,thanks i saw him at goodmans fold on the 1841. but didn't see the one of him in Blackrod in 1851 . i think this is our Richard .
hi Merry , my friend in the U.S ,has just sent me a copy of a poor law document Pemberton . she thinks regarding Richard walker and Ellen , and Five children . i would send it to you but don't know how as i can't see an attachment sign . Now it looks like them .As it mentions cecily , age fifteen the document is dated 1819 . But there are children jane james and william Margeret . i can't read it all ,as the writing is in old english . Is this them ? it would be better if you could see it ,Perhaps . thanks
Is this it?
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/6820/4424787_00510/949808?backurl=&ssrc=&backlabel=Return
Upon the appeal of the Inhabitants of the Township of Upholland in the said County to the Order made by James Alexander Hodson and Joseph Bevan Esquires, two of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace and Quorum in and for the said County, under their Hands and Seals, bearing date the twentyfifth Day of June last, for the removal of Richard Walker and Ellen his wife and Cecily, Margaret, Jane, James and William their children poor Person out of the Township of Pemberton into the Township of Upholland both in the said County as by the same order this Court with the consent of both the said Parties set aside.
In your last post you said the document mentioned that Cecily was aged fifteen, but I don't see that anywhere.
In post #2 of this thread we have the following children:
The first four bap at Upholland:
Mary bap 1798
Betty bap 1800
Cecily bap 1803 bur 1803
Cecily bap 1804
Then All Saints, Wigan (post #3):
Ellen bap 1806 bur 1813 (I' assuming now that this is that Ellen's burial as she isn't included on the removal order)
I just found the youngest two children mentioned on the removal order (Lancs OPC):
Baptism: 20 Aug 1815 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
James Walker - 1 Son of Richard Walker & Ellen
Born: 5 Jun
Abode: Standishgate
Occupation: Miner
Baptised by: Edwd. Hill
Register: Baptisms 1813 - 1816, Page 246, Entry 1962
Source: LDS Film 1885676
Baptism: 1 Mar 1818 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
William Walker - 2 Son of Richard Walker & Ellen
Born: 1 Dec 1817
Abode: Pemberton
Occupation: Miner
Baptised by: Edwd. Hill Curate
Register: Baptisms 1816 - 1819, Page 171, Entry 1365
Source: LDS Film 1885676
So now there's Margaret and Jane to find, probably between 1804/6 and 1815. This one looks promising, but I can't see anything for Jane 1810-1815:
Baptism: 18 Mar 1810 Christ Church, Parbold, Lancashire, England
Margaret Walker - Daughter of Richd. Walker & Ellen
Born: 17 Mar 1810
Abode: Parbold in the Parish of Eccleston
Register: Baptisms 1809 - 1812, Page 16, Entry 66
Source: Original register at Lancashire Archives
There's another order for August 1819 moving the family from Pemberton to Radcliffe.
Ah, now I've found the document with the ages - I hadn't realised there was more than one.
It has the ages of all the children.
Cecily 15
Margaret 9
Jane 6
James 4
William 18 months.
You said the doc was difficult to read, but almost all of it is typed, so maybe if there's a part you are struggling with you could say what it is, because it seems a waste for me to type it all out when it's typed already! I only use three fingers, so it takes ages!! Persumably you only have the one doc, but there are several just for 1819 - I've not looked for other years.
The document I've got must be the first one before the removal , It starts To the churchwardens and overseers of the poor township of pemberton in thecountyof lancaster and the overseers of the poor of the township of upholland .its saying they haven't gained legal settlement in pemberton . so perhaps they are being removed to upholland on you document . But it does give cecily age Fifteen or thereabouts . and the others ages .Ill look again to see if i can glean the ages. well done as usual , great work . Maybe at some stage i may be able to follow james and william .
Perhaps next time you are able to go to a library you need to checkout this Ancestry database more thoroughly as thre may well be further records for Richard and family;
Lancashire, England, Quarter Session Records and Petitions, 1648-1908
hi ,sorry merry it is an original document she has sent ,it's not typed out ,so some of it wasn't legible. Don't forgot i have not got ancestry , i have to use what ever resources i Have . You can get a lot more than I . So now there also is a removal of them to Radcliffe how awful for them .
The document I've got must be the first one before the removal , It starts To the churchwardens and overseers of the poor township of pemberton in thecountyof lancaster and the overseers of the poor of the township of upholland .its saying they haven't gained legal settlement in pemberton . so perhaps they are being removed to upholland on you document . But it does give cecily age Fifteen or thereabouts . and the others ages .Ill look again to see if i can glean the ages. well done as usual , great work . Maybe at some stage i may be able to follow james and william .
See posts #49 and #50
there isn't any chance of the library ,i've been told they are closed till mid august .
there isn't any chance of the library ,i've been told they are closed till mid august .
That's only a month!
i look forwards to it has i can peruse all the new novels as well .
hi ,Was searching for william walker , And came across this census 1861 accrington
William Walker born Wigan 1817 age 44 Mary Walker born Ireland age 42 stepson John Barnett age 15 born Ireland . richard Barnett age 10 born Wigan . Catherine goliger age 40 born ireland Patrick Goliger age 17 born ireland catherine Goliger born wigan age 10 margeret born wigan age 8 I can't find richard on the wigan online parish clerks . but the name could be wrong it could be burnett or something like that . And the goliger .could be gallagher. Resident place accrington . abbey st
You were right that Family Search has transcribed the surname incorrectly from the census image. The easiest way to work out if this might have happened if you don't have access to the image is to look for the same person in other places:
In 1851 he is recorded as Richard Barrat aged 4 months b Wigan. Mother Mary Barrat is 32 b Ireland which matches with Mrs Walker in 1861. Richard's father is Richard Barrat aged 40.
Richard's birth reg has yet another spelling:
BARRITT, RICHARD LEE
GRO Reference: 1850 D Quarter in WIGAN UNION Volume 21 Page 873
Here's the death of his father:
BARRETT, RICHARD 43
GRO Reference: 1854 S Quarter in WIGAN Volume 08C Page 42
You said you couldn't find Richard on Wigan's OPC pages, but might that be because they don't have any RC records?
've not seen a marriage between William Walker and Mary Barrett (any spelling) between 1854 and 1861 in Wigan or Haslingden districts, but I haven't looked anywhere else.
I'm assuming you are hoping William Walker, Richard Barrett's step-father, is your William, son of Richard and Ellen Walker mantioned earlier in this thread?
You are going to need to either find a marriage for this William to see who he names as his father, or eliminate William Walker baptised in Wigan in 1821, son of John and Elizabeth, as these two Williams are too close in age for comfort!
thank you as always the Star great work as usual . . Family search doesn't show the full census .so ancestry is streets ahead on that count .
No marriage showing up on Lancs BMD 1854-1861.
thank you as always the Star great work as usual . . Family search doesn't show the full census .so ancestry is streets ahead on that count .
That's why you need to learn other methods if you don't have access to the page. For instance, if you use FreeBMD and search Richard Ba*t in Wigan for 1850-1851 there is only the one birth registration and that is the one I posted here earlier. Birth registrations are less likely to have errors than census records (think about how the information is collected and recorded), so once you know his name is likely to be a speling of Barrett and not a spelling of Barnett you have a better chance of finding him on the earlier census on Family Search which I know doesn't always like to give you all the variables!
thanks merry will search using variable names.
hi I thought i'd search the 1851 for richard Barrett when he was still alive . two came up One west yorkshire and the other living in Liverpool . A lot of irish people moved over to liverpool Sex Age Birthplace
Richard Barrett Head Male 36 Ireland
Mary Barrett Wife Female 30 Ireland
James Barrett Son Male 9 Wigan, Lancashire
Elizabeth Barrett Daughter Female 6 Liverpool, Lancashire
Thomas Barrett Son Male 4 Liverpool, Lancashire
Patrick Barrett Son Male the birth dates don't seem to tally , but there's one child born in wigan .
I posted the spelling used and the ages of the parents in post #60:
In 1851 he is recorded as Richard Barrat aged 4 months b Wigan. Mother Mary Barrat is 32 b Ireland which matches with Mrs Walker in 1861. Richard's father is Richard Barrat aged 40.
They were living at Castle Yard, Wigan.
I checked the 1841 census ther is a group of eleven people mostly irish , living in Bradshaw gate wigan . Richard barrat and mary are their with a child James doesn't give age of child . So i presume the child's only a few months old .
Surely, given the 1851 family have children Thomas 14, Michael 10 and John 8 all born in Ireland, they are going to be in Ireland in 1841?
James (the son in the other family in 1841) is aged 2 months.
I checked the 1841 census ther is a group of eleven people mostly irish , living in Bradshaw gate wigan . Richard barrat and mary are their with a child James doesn't give age of child . So i presume the child's only a few months old .
In post #66 you actually mention this family in the 1851 census - they are the family in Liverpool!
hi merry , i don't know anything for definite if the family in liverpool if it's them are not as i agree , with you as they would have been in Ireland if that was their family . But i wanted to check another scenario. just to make sure .As the ones you found in post 60 seem correct . But if there son John was born in Ireland . he isn't on that list . so it may not be them .
the list of people on the census 1841 , mary barratt is 20 richard Is 30 .
we know that william walker was born in pemberton in 1817 to Richard Walker and ellen Gaskell. christening allsaints wigan 1st march 1818 so we know that's him .
we know that william walker was born in pemberton in 1817 to Richard Walker and ellen Gaskell. christening allsaints wigan 1st march 1818 so we know that's him .
We know the baptism in 1818 is your William and we know a Willam is living with Mary who was previously Mrs Barrett and originally Mary Lee from Ireland. What we don't know is whether this William Walker is the same person as the 1818 baptism. As I said before in post #61, without this William's marriage cert it's probably going to be very difficult to prove he is your William. As a very minimum, you need to eliminate the other William Walker baptised in Wigan a couple of years after your William (post #61).
Also, going back to Richard and Ellen's settlement document - you never said which part of it you couldn't read. I'm posting the image here to be sure we are talking about the same document as in post #54 you said it wasn't typed, but most of this one is!
https://deauqq.db.files.1drv.com/y4m6RmpcHsG7kltqHlQ0TFlfVs0bQcv93TOxNuQDMxbd8bLsQX Xl6F6FUdG0FV60r2-bGB9S4IYL4ZAICV-2A60NAAiCYtrdGEDhvsIufkROSkFI09lhHw8i4YS_CTXJd-aI1Sd1vzQbV6q61IxG_V_U-lVrT6Pe4y_QvO3t4f3OzrAKZhOX74bQAdZVw8py_g9pwKvrJSv u7CV5f80JToYnw?width=690&height=1024&cropmode=none
Merry i couldn't read some of it , when i said it wasn't a typed document i did mean a modern copy . you know we can't all be as good as you when we are doing this . i am a novice . Just trying my best with the search engines i use . No doubt you can bring up documents that i can't . But i do appreciate your help .
I'm only asking you which part you can't read, and if this is the right document. If you tell me which part you can't read I can type it out. Remember I'm only a typing novice with my three fingers!!
kiterunner
15-07-20, 09:17
Technically, it isn't typed but typeset!
kiterunner
15-07-20, 09:27
Since I can touch-type, lol!
County of Lancaster, to wit.
To the Church-wardens and Overseers of the Poor of the Township of Pemberton in the said County of Lancaster, and to the Church-wardens and Overseers of the Poor of the Township of Upholland in the said County and to each and every of them.
UPON the Complaint of the Church-wardens and Overseers of the Poor of the said Township of Pemberton unto us whose Names are hereunto set and Seals affixed, being two of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace and Quorum in and for the said County of Lancaster, That Richard Walker and Ellen his Wife and their five Chidlren to wit, Cecily aged fifteen years or thereabouts Margaret aged nine years or thereabouts Jane aged six years or thereabouts, James aged three years or thereabouts and William aged two years or thereabouts
have come to inhabit in the said Township of Pemberton not having gained a legal Settlement there; nor produced any Certificate owning them to be settled elsewhere; and that the said Richard Walker and his said Wife and their said Children are become actually chargeable to the said Township of Pemberton We the said Justices, upon due Proof made thereof, as well upon the Examination of the said Richard Walker upon Oath, as otherwise, and likewise upon due Consideration had of the Premises, do adjudge the same to be true; and we do likewise adjudge, that the lawful Settlement of them the said Richard Walker and his said Wife and their said Children is in the said Township of Upholland in the said County of Lancaster. We do therefore require you the said Church-wardens and Overseers of the Poor of the said Township of Pemberton or some or one of you, forthwith to convey the said Richard Walker and his said Wife and their said Children from and out of your said Township of Pemberton to the said Township of Upholland and them to deliver to the Church-wardens and Overseers of the Poor there, or to some or one of them, together with this our Order, or a true Copy thereof, at the same Time shewing to them the Original; And we do also hereby require you the said Church-wardens and Overseers of the Poor of the said Township of Upholland to receive and provide for them as Inhabitants of your said Township GIVEN under our Hands and Seals, the twenty-fifth Day of June in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Eight Hundred and nineteen.
James Alexr Hodson (Seal)
J Bevan (Seal)
Fair enough - I was only trying to establish whether we were both looking at the same document. I don't even know that the one Qwackers has is from Ancestry.
Thanks for typing it out anyway, Kate.
a big thanks to Kiterunner for your typing . I'm afraid my eyes have deteriorated during lockdown . Looking at the document makes me feel so sad , that the family were treated like a piece of rubbish to be moved at will ,As i thought that ellen's parents were living in Pemberton . and they probably wanted to settle near them . Although it's only a few miles away to Upholland it would have been a big upheaval nether the less . .But it looks like it was the norm for that time ,
hi , can we not judge william born pemberton in 1817 christened in 1818 in wigan as being the correct one . as we have the settlement paper to say they were living in pemberton at his birth . ?
The baptism you mention is for your William, son of Richard and Ellen, along with the settlement document.
I've just looked further at the family recorded as John and Elizabeth Walker with a son called William bap in Wigan in 1821 and living at Wallgate. The good news may be that though this child's entry is transcribed as Walker, I have now found the image of the original entry and it looks like either Walker or Walket. This could just be a slip of the pen, but their other children seem to be baptised as Walket or Walklet and other variations.
Then there is this burial:
William Walklett b abt 1820 bur 3 Jul 1830 Wigan which might be the same child, though the burial it says he is the child of Elizabeth Walklett with no mention of a father (should be John). I've looked to see if there were two William Walkletts baptised around the same time, one legitimate and the other illegitimate, but I can't find a second child. Of course the name is ripe for mistranscription, as we have already seen!
The next problem is, that even if we exclude William Walken bap 1821 we still have more than one William Walker born around 1817 on the census records:
1841 William Walker aged 25 living at Hindley. He seems to possible have an older wife (Ann aged 35) and two children, John 7 and William 2. He is a cotton spinner.
1851 There are two William Walkers. One is aged 26, wife Jane, two children julia 4 and Elizabeth 2, living at Parr. He is an iron moulder b Wigan. The second William Walker looks more like he could be the chap who is later with Mary Lee. He is aged only 28 on this census, a miner b Wigan. He is single and living in Wigan.
1861 Iron moulder William and his wife Jane and family have moved to Liverpool. The other William on this census is the one with Mary Lee in New Accrington aged 44, so if he is the same person as was living in Wigan in 1851 his age is nearer to what we want here, but we don't know which age (if either) are correct.
1871 At the moment nothing for this census.
1881 There is a widower, Wm Walker aged 63 living as a lodger in Clayton le Moors. B Wigan, occupation Rag dealer.
So, clearly there should be more entries for the various Williams as I've not even stepped into the dodgy transcriptions/bad spellings territory at all yet. I'm wondering if it would have been better to try searching harder for a marriage for the William who is with Mary Barrett/Lee, as that would prove things one way or another.
I don't like it when people don't seem to want to be eliminated properly!
William and Jane Walker who moved to Liverpool can be eliminated as at their 1846 marriage he said his father was George Walker dec'd.
I still haven't found a marriage for William Walker to Mary Barrett/Lee. I'm wondering about reasons they might not have married.... (I'm bothered when people don't marry at this time in history when there doesn't seem to be an obvious reason for not marrying)
We know that Richard Barrett died, so Mary was a widow, so that's not an issue.
Maybe there was a problem because William was Cof E and Mary was probably RC.
William could have married someone else between 1851 (if that's him single in Wigan) and when he got together with Mary (probably after the death of Richard Barrett) and maybe William's wife was still living.
Anyway, I can't do any more now as I have to go and pick up my groceries.....
hi ,i agree they were my thoughts that they may have not got married , i don't know how common it was at that time ,with regards to r.c and c.e getting married . it may have been quite difficult .
i will try and find a marriage , but like you said it could be quite difficult ? thanks
I don't think three of the four marriages for a William Walker between 1851 and 1861 in Wigan Registra tion District are for your William (various reasons - wrong father, wrong age (by a lot) etc). There is one in 1858 that is a Register Office or Registrar Attended wedding and there's no images to view. The bride was called Mary McCanna. I don't see any reason for her to be an alternative name for Mary Barrett and I don't think she was previously married (no second index entry on LancsBMD)..
There are no marriages for Mary Bar*t in the same district between 1854 and 1861.
I actually saw the mary mccanna ,and did think about it for a moment , Could i try and find a marriage to richard Barratt that's if she was married to him. it's ireland. but there are some irish records . i'm presuming she mayor have married him but don't know as read . I'll look at the records see if i can turn up something . thanks once again for your great work
kiterunner
16-07-20, 16:29
This could be Mary in 1871, back to being a Barrett, though the age isn't very clear:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/7619/images/LANRG10_4143_4145-0469?treeid=&personid=&rc=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=dNx57975&_phstart=successSource&pId=27986163&backurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ancestry.co.uk%2Fsearch% 2Fcategories%2F1871uki%2F%3Fname%3Dmary%26birth%3D 1819_ireland_3250%26birth_x%3D2-0-0_1-0%26location%3D3257.3250%26name_x%3D1_1%26priority %3Dunited-kingdom%26residence%3D_accrington-lancashire-england-united%2Bkingdom_84757%26residence_x%3D0-0-0_1-0
If it is her then it looks as though she and William didn't get married.
hi ,yes i agree , she may not have married william but just have used his name . maybe that's why we can't find a marriage .
We really need to try and find the William who appears in 1881 on the 1871 census. If he is the same man who was with Mary in 1861 then we need to try and establish what he means when he says he is a widower in 1881. If he was never married to Mary and they had gone their separate ways before her death (I don't know when she died at the moment) then that would be unusual to say he was a widower if she then died. Did he marry someone else at some point perhaps, or dd the householder just assume he was a widower because he didn't have a wife in tow?
will try and see what i can find thanks
This is very likely to be the death of the Mary Barrett kiterunner found:
Deaths Dec 1879 (>99%)
Barrett Mary 63 Haslingden 8e 81
and therefore probably the death of the so-called Mrs Walker from 1861.
I don't think three of the four marriages for a William Walker between 1851 and 1861 in Wigan Registra tion District are for your William (various reasons - wrong father, wrong age (by a lot) etc). There is one in 1858 that is a Register Office or Registrar Attended wedding and there's no images to view. The bride was called Mary McCanna. I don't see any reason for her to be an alternative name for Mary Barrett and I don't think she was previously married (no second index entry on LancsBMD)..
There are no marriages for Mary Bar*t in the same district between 1854 and 1861.
Of course, for completeness we should be checking out marriages in Blackburn district and Haslingden district as we know this William we are checking out had lived in those districts as well as Wigan. There are rather a lot of marriages if it's a 30 year span to check (I only did the first ten years for Wigan district), so another reason to find him in 1871 as it could help shorten that task!
hi ,think that is mary and her death in Haslingdon it isn't too far away from accrington . where she was living with a William It's only approx five miles away . so that's a plus we know she was in that area .
Her death may not have been in Haslingden itself. That's Haslington Registration District, not just Haslingden
Accrington is in Haslingden district. Remember reg districts can cover a lot of places. If you need to know which places are in a district it's probably easiest to use FreeBMD as they have full lists of the coverage with dates.
Like this (Haslingden district coverage)
https://www.ukbmd.org.uk/reg/districts/haslingden.html
Yes i know what your saying, I know all of the areas around there some of them come under hydeburn . and rossendale . I've looked through the B.M.D marriages . and can't find one that fits mary .the only one which seems like a mary with an irish name is the mary mccanna . in Wigan 1858 . As we know her husband was dead . at that time .
We think he may have married someone else, not Mary Barret/Lee. So, we are looking for a marriage between the correct William Walker and any spouse between 1851 and 1881. If we could find him in 1871 we might be able to shorten the timeframe.
the name is very common ,and there are lots of marriages i found in lancashire there were a few in Haslinden , but because it's on family,it gives three names ones a male spouses, william married either margeret blears or alice broadley haslingden 1862 ,it doesn't mention ages . william age 50 in the 1867married ann tootell in farnworth that's the right age william married either a margeret jones or Elizabeth Rudd in Wigan 1853 ,dont know their ages . william 1863 haslinden either ellen sanger or elizabeth howarth william 1868 wigan eitherann makinson or hannah Young .
there are pages and pages .of William walkers and family search isn't the best there's an odd one with photos but a lot is guess , who he married . I've tried to put age of birth etc , but sometimes it doesn't pick up on that .
kiterunner
17-07-20, 15:45
Lancashire BMD is a better site to search for marriages on, because it will tell you who married who.
I was wondering if this could be the son of mary Barratt Richard marriage 1859 , to either annie barratt or Hannah cowgill it may give us a clue if mary still lived in Haslingden .
william married either margeret blears or alice broadley haslingden 1862 ,it doesn't mention ages .
We can eliminate that one:
Name: William Walker
Gender: Male
Marriage Date: 15 May 1862
Marriage Place: Salesbury, Lancashire , England
Father: Henry Walker
Spouse: Alice Broadley
yes so richard married hannah cowgill checked lancs bmd . if he is mary's son
william age 50 in the 1867married ann tootell in farnworth that's the right age
Eliminated:
Name: William Walker
Gender: Male
Marital status: Single
Age: 50
Birth Date: 1817
Marriage Date: 25 Apr 1867
Marriage Place: Farnworth (Near Prescot), Lancashire, England
Father: William Walker
Spouse: Ann Tootill
william married either a margeret jones or Elizabeth Rudd in Wigan 1853 ,dont know their ages .
Fathers details not given for either of these two, but they are both recorded as being aged 21, so too young:
Name: William Walker
Gender: Male
Marital status: Single
Age: 21
Birth Date: 1832
Marriage Date: 3 Apr 1853
Marriage Place: Wigan, Lancashire, England
Spouse: Elizabeth Rudd
know their ages . william 1863 haslinden either ellen sanger or elizabeth howarth william 1868 wigan eitherann makinson or hannah Young .
Can't find the first of these two (could check LancsBMD to see if it's a registrar marriage) but the second one to Ann Makinson shows father Thomas Walker.
I was wondering if this could be the son of mary Barratt Richard marriage 1859 , to either annie barratt or Hannah cowgill it may give us a clue if mary still lived in Haslingden .
Sadly not, as this Richard's father was Thomas Barratt.
kiterunner
17-07-20, 16:30
I think I found Richard Barrett jr the other day but didn't post the details - will have another look.
kiterunner
17-07-20, 16:36
Yes, he married an Ellen Ireland in 1871 in Accrington - the "England Select Marriages" transcription on Ancestry says his father was Richard Barrett. That probably comes from FamilySearch. This is him on the 1871 census:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/7619/images/LANRG10_4143_4145-0217?treeid=&personid=&rc=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=dNx58005&_phstart=successSource&pId=27981098&backurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ancestry.co.uk%2Fsearch% 2F%3Fname%3Drichard_barrett%26birth%3D1850_wigan-lancashire-england-united%2Bkingdom_85024%26father%3Drichard_barrett% 26mother%3Dmary%26residence%3D1851_wigan-lancashire-england-united%2Bkingdom_85024%26residence2%3D1861_accring ton-lancashire-england-united%2Bkingdom_84757
4 Lee Court, New Accrington
Richard Barrett Head Mar 20 Cotton Spinner Lancs Wigan
Ellen Do Wife Mar 20 Cotton Rover Do Preston.
thank you , so we you have eliminated those marriages i mentioned will have a look again at the long list of william walker marriages . But that's a positive , that you have found richard , as he was in new accrington . which again isn't far from Haslingden area .
Found Two william walkers on 1841 census in wigan ,one with a family of woodcocks and one with his own family of walkers his wife being ann 10years older than him,could one of these be him ?
See post #82 for the William with 'wife' Ann. I've now found them in 1851 (they are a couple - no relationshps on the 1841) still as a family in Balderstone, so he is eliminated.
The other William with the Woodcock family has been transcribed by Ancestry as Walkins, which is why I haven't listed him before. He is a collier, so that's better than the William from post #82.
hi merry , regarding Richard walker In post 14 you sent links to fmp and ancestry but i can not get them . i was wondering if you could send me a shot of those please . as i'll still searching for richard walkers birth place . we know he died in Blackrod . so it would be good if i could see what you posted from those sites Thanks
They are both the same image. At the time I'd assumed you would have access to one or the other.
1851 Census
Blackrod township, address Aberdeen
Richard Walker head widower 72 farm labourer born Lancashire Standish.
Noone else in the household.
EDIT - you already asked me for this before and I replied in post #44 of this thread, two years ago).
hi merry thanks for that my ipad is old so some sites are not functioning properly you mentioned perhaps a birth for richard in standish but none come up ? did you see it somewhere ?
I said (post #15)
but no Richard that I can see at the moment
And if you keep reading the thread onwards from post #15 you will see we have already discussed the 1851 census before, plus Richard and whether he is the right man etc.
thanks , merry will keep searching .
vBulletin® v3.8.7 PL3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.