#21
|
||||
|
||||
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.
__________________
KiteRunner Family History News updated 21st May Lancashire Non-conformist records new on Ancestry |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
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 ??????
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
That's interesting, so where is the other Ellen in 1861? (Not that I've looked for her)
__________________
Merry "Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010 |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Merry "Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010 |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Yes she could have had Ellen and then married Joseph . In 1855 .
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Yes on the birth reg of Ellen in 1854. Mothers name is the same , so Ellen was illegitimate.
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
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.
__________________
KiteRunner Family History News updated 21st May Lancashire Non-conformist records new on Ancestry |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
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).
__________________
Merry "Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
I think it is correct as Prescot isn't that far from rainford , Great stuff
|
|
|