Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
11 Sep 2013 15:46 |
Ah well.
I have been in anticipation since ordering my Holborn Certificate - sadly it is all wrong. This Elizabeth's father is not Charles but Robert, hoped the mother would be Sarah but not, so I have to accept it is a dead end
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
6 Sep 2013 22:54 |
Evening Gwyn
Thank you for looking and finding that marriage for me, so it looks like that is the connection, not sure why the 1881 shows Fishmonger Smith as initial S if he was Henry, but can't worry too much about that. Love the name of the witness William Tingey Mole!
Now just have to wait and see if the Holborn birth cert for Elizabeth Smith gives me Charles Smith as her father. It is looking as it if it may all tie in.
J-A
|
|
Gwyn in Kent
|
Report
|
6 Sep 2013 22:24 |
Yes the image is there..........
Name: Elizabeth Price Smith Spouse Name: John Mole Jefferies ....................iron founder Record Type: Marriage Event Date: 15 Jan 1855 Parish: Hoxton St John Borough: Hackney Father Name: Henry Smith ............fishmonger Spouse Father Name: John Jefferies ........postman Register Type: Parish Register
The couple are bachelor and spinster, both of full age and both of Fleming Street The groom signed, Elizabeth made her mark.
Witnesses William Tingey Mole, Wm Bullan ( both signed ) and Eliza Mole , who made her mark.
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
6 Sep 2013 15:44 |
I am just following another trail in this saga and having looked at the 1881 Census posted by Choccy on the 10th April decided to try to follow the Jefferies also living at White Street with the Smiths.
I have found a marriage in Shoreditch in March 1855 (1c 268) between Elizabeth Price Smith and John Mole Jefferies and wonder if there is an image on London marriages - I am interested to know if her father is the S Smith Widower Fishmonger on the 1881, if anyone is able to check for me please?
Thank you
J-A
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
3 Sep 2013 10:46 |
I am fed up because I am stuck with too many of these difficult to confirm ancestors - so it is time to take a chance! However before I do I have a general question (which hopefully I can explain clearly)
Is there any relevance in the order that names are sorted and appear in a FreeBMD search?
For example, I am searching for Elizabeth Smith c1869/1870. If I look at the information I have (age at marriage in August 1888 =19 so born c1869, on 1891 Census (taken 5th April) she is shown as born 1870) I am anticipating she was born between 6th April and 5th August . So with that in mind I did my search for 1869 and 1870 looking particularly at London and MIddlesex. Still too many Smiths. BUT, concentrating on June and September 1869 Quarters I still come back to this selection because it seems to include Parish of St Luke:
Births Sep 1869 (>99%) Smith Elizabeth Holborn 1b 737 (I STILL LIKE THIS ONE) Smith Elizabeth Edmonton 3a 184 Smith Elizabeth Hackney 1b 475 Smith Elizabeth Hackney 1b 457 Smith Elizabeth Mile End 1c 543 Smith Elizabeth W. London 1c 27 Smith Elizabeth Ada L Camberwell 1d 577 Smith Elizabeth Charlotte Lambeth 1d 420 Smith Elizabeth Jane Greenwich 1d 731 Smith Elizabeth Jessie Holborn 1b 712 Smith Elizabeth Mary Chelsea 1a 223 Smith Elizabeth Sarah Stepney 1c 440 Smith Elizabeth Sarah Poplar 1c 635
So back to my question: Is there any relevance in the order that names are sorted and appear in a FreeBMD search?
I can see they are sorted alphabetically - Surname, First Name(s) but then the sorting does not follow usual conventions (I would expect Elizabeth in Edmonton to appear before the ones in Hackney, and then Holborn. I would also expect the two Hackney ones to be sorted further by volume and page so for them to appear like this:
Smith Elizabeth Edmonton 3a 184 Smith Elizabeth Hackney 1b 457 (457 comes before 475) Smith Elizabeth Hackney 1b 475 >>>>Smith Elizabeth Holborn 1b 737 (I STILL LIKE THIS ONE) Smith Elizabeth Mile End 1c 543 Smith Elizabeth W. London 1c 27
Sorry - explanation all got a bit long - if there is any relevance is it because Elizabeth Smith registered in Holborn was born at end of Q2 or early Q3? Or am I just clutching at straws?
Whichever it is, I think I have to order the Holborn one - I cannot see any others that fit the other details I have so closely.
J-A
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
14 Aug 2013 13:42 |
OK Potty
Thank you for looking for me. I will keep the marriage and the birth on my possible/potential list.
J-A
|
|
Potty
|
Report
|
14 Aug 2013 11:20 |
Sorry, nothing coming up in London marriages for any combination of the names.
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
13 Aug 2013 21:08 |
Good Evening
I just feel like giving myself a headache with Smiths and thought I would have another go with Elizabeth!
Could someone check for me please to see if there is a marriage transcribed (London Marriages) for this entry in Holborn - hopefully Charles Smith to Sarah Wilton?
Here are the FreeBMD results (trying 1864 as the first child was born 1865):
Marriages Mar 1864 (>99%) Adams James Holborn 1b 701 Robberds Katherine Holborn 1b 701 >>>>>>>>>>>Smith Charles John Holborn 1b 701 >>>>>>>>>>>Wilton Sarah Holborn 1b 701
Obviously not sure if it is my Elizabeth's father Charles marrying but am following through on Choccy's post on 10/4/2013 of the 1871 and 1881 Census and hope to find out if an address on the marriage is White Street - as shown on both Census years
The reason I am going for the Holborn one is because my Elizabeth Smith was born in 1869/1870, on the 1901 she is shown as born St Lukes E.C (although on the 1891 it shows St George in the East).
Just trying to narrow it down a bit - if I try for a birth cert without GRO Refs I am afraid that the 3 year search range 1869-1871 or 1868-1870 with the name Elizabeth Smith born London, father Charles will be too likely to give far too many results.
If any details on the marriage cert (if available) give any support then I will feel more inclined to send off for this Elizabeth Smith birth (Holborn Sept 1869). Not conclusive proof it is my Elizabeth but...............
Thank you
J-A
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
17 Apr 2013 15:53 |
Thanks for trying Potty
|
|
Potty
|
Report
|
17 Apr 2013 15:44 |
Was hoping Priscilla's MN would be Smith, but this is the only marriage I can find. Henry's occupation is stone mason, though, London, England, Marriages and Banns, 1754-1921 about Henry John Jones Name: Henry John Jones Estimated Birth Year: abt 1851 Age: 25 Spouse Name: Pricilla Webster, umbrella maker Spouse Age: 22 Record Type: Marriage Event Date: 1 Oct 1876 Parish: St Bartholomew, Moor Lane Borough: City of London Father Name: William Jones Spouse Father Name: John Webster Register Type: Parish Register
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
17 Apr 2013 15:42 |
Thanks Chris - nothing jumps at me there, oh well - will just put her on a Smith pile
J-A
|
|
Chris Ho :)
|
Report
|
17 Apr 2013 15:39 |
1891 EWEN, Charles W Head Married M 25 1866 Packer Stepney, London EWEN, Lauretta Wife Married F 28 1863 Whitechapel, London FLEETWOOD, Alfred G Head Married M 28 1863 General Labourer Stepney, London FLEETWOOD, Isabella Wife Married F 33 1858 Rotherhithe, London RG number: RG12 Piece: 311 Folio: 42 Page: 14 Sub District: Mile End Old Town Eastern Enumeration District: 34 Ecclesiastical Parish: Trinity Stepney Municipal Borough: Address: 14, Single Street, Mile End Old Town County: London
Chris :)
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
17 Apr 2013 14:41 |
A clue, a clue (maybe) - I have another address to research from the Birth Certificate - 14 Single Street, Mile End.
The birth date is July 1891. Would someone be kind enough to see what is happening at 14 Single Street for the 1891 Census please? I have the family French at 31 Northampton Street ,Bethnal Green for Census night - am hoping perhaps Elizabeth went to her family to give birth (she already had one child aged 2).
Thank you
J-A
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
10 Apr 2013 20:12 |
Choccy
Thank you, it certainly looks possible, but as you say no way of knowing, although her father (Charles) was not shown as deceased on the cert - not that that means anything of course!
I might just have to mark her as a 'dead end' for the time being.
J-A
|
|
Choccy
|
Report
|
10 Apr 2013 19:14 |
?? no way of really knowing -
1871
RG number RG10 Piece: 408 Folio: 34 Page: 33 Reg. District: Holborn Sub District: Whitecross Street Parish: St Luke Enum. District: 15 Ecclesiastical District: City/Municipal Borough: Address: White St, St Luke, London County: London, Middlesex
SMITH, Charles Head M 37 1834 Middlesex (Labourer) SMITH, Sarah Wife F 28 1843 Middlesex SMITH, Charles Son M 6 1865 Middlesex SMITH, Henry Son M 5 1866 Middlesex SMITH, Annie Daughter F 3 1868 Middlesex >>>>SMITH, Elizabeth Daughter F 1 1870 Middlesex
1881
RG number RG11 Piece: 366 Folio: 83 Page: 39 Reg. District: Holborn Sub District: Whitecross Street Parish: St Luke Enum. District: Ecclesiastical District: City/Municipal Borough: Address: 10, White Street, St Luke County: London, Middlesex
SMITH, S Head Widower M 73 1808 Fishmonger London, London, Middlesex JEFFERIES, J Head Married M 46 1835 Iron Moulder Lincoln, Middlesex JEFFERIES, Elizabeth Wife Married F 48 1833 London, London, Middlesex JEFFERIES, John Son Single M 18 1863 Type Founder London, London, Middlesex SMITH, Sarah Head Widow F 37 1844 Artificial Florist St Lukes, Middlesex SMITH, Charles Son Single M 16 1865 Type Founder St Lukes, Middlesex SMITH, Henry Son Single M 14 1867 Type Founder St Lukes, Middlesex SMITH, Ann Daughter Single F 12 1869 Scholar St Lukes, Middlesex >>>>>SMITH, Elizabeth Daughter Single F 11 1870 Scholar St Lukes, Middlesex SMITH, Antono Son Single M 9 1872 Scholar St Lukes, Middlesex SMITH, Sarah Daughter Single F 7 1874 Scholar St Lukes, Middlesex SMITH, Mary Ann Daughter Single F 4 1877 Scholar St Lukes, Middlesex
|
|
JannieAnnie
|
Report
|
10 Apr 2013 19:07 |
Gins, Gwyn and George - Thank you all for your input on the witnesses - the Jones connection looks good as it was the same profession - I suppose James Kray could be the other one - it looks a short name.
Reggie thank you for your suggestion of searching for a baptism - I can try that, I am getting the Birth Cert as a matter of course to confirm I am going in the right direction and also, hope against hope, the address on the cert might lead me somewhere. Will search for a baptism for her.
J-A
|
|
Gwyn in Kent
|
Report
|
10 Apr 2013 18:59 |
Good find George :-)
|
|
George_of_Westbury
|
Report
|
10 Apr 2013 18:52 |
The other witness to me looks like Priscilla Jones,?
This is a priscilla living at the same address as on the maqrriage record, so could she be related?
1891 census transcription details for: 44, Thomas Street, Whitechapel, Whitechapel Church Print Close National Archive Reference: RG number: RG12 Piece: 279 Folio: 68 Page: 20 Reg. District: Whitechapel Sub District: Whitechapel Church Parish: Whitechapel Enum. District: 4 Ecclesiastical District: City/Municipal Borough: Whitechapel Church Address: 44, Thomas Street, Whitechapel, Whitechapel Church County: London Name Relation Condition Sex Age Birth Year Occupation , Disability Where Born JONES, Henry Head Married M 39 1852 Umbrella Maker Stepney, London JONES, Priscilla Wife Married F 34 1857 Boot Maker London JONES, Henry Son M 10 1881 Stepney, London
George
|
|
Gwyn in Kent
|
Report
|
10 Apr 2013 18:40 |
44 Thomas Street Whitechapel was address at marriage for Elizabeth
Is a witness Priscilla INES or JONES..?
Gwyn
|
|
ErikaH
|
Report
|
10 Apr 2013 18:37 |
I don't think a child's birth cert will help if you are looking to find her before she married.
And bear in mind that there were no penalties for not registering births until 1875...so hers may not have been registered.
Your best bet is to look for a baptism for her.......
|