Genealogy Chat

Hi guys! thank you so much for all your help! can't believe my great great grandmother was the un-wed mother of 3 ... and people complain about the youth of today :)

i really appreciate the time and effort you have put into my little dilema!

Thanks again!

Debbie

I guessed as much, Kath...a pity Debbie hadn't mentioned that the father was not named. It would have saved a lot of searching for marriages...........

Cheers

Reg

Hi Reg,

There is no father listed on the birth certificate - and it is definitely an occupation and not a maiden name after the mother's name. The word "formerly" that would accompany a maiden name is nowhere to be seen.

Kath. x

I note that in all her postings, Debbie has not made any mention of the name of the child's father............which leads one to assume that the child was illegitimate. This would be borne out by the fact that the mother's occupation was recorded on the birth cert............not something which would normally occur if she had a husband.

Reg

This is Harriet on the 1891 census (again she has been mistranscribed by Ancestry and they also have her age wrong, but the image has a cross through her age but it is quite possibly 14 which would be right):-

Name: Harrell Drinkwater
Age: 20
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1871
Relation: Servant
Gender: Female
Where born: Upton Snodsbury, Worcestershire, England

Civil Parish: St Peter The Great
Ecclesiastical parish: St Peter
Town: Worcester
County/Island: Worcestershire
Country: England

Street address:

Occupation:

Condition as to marriage:

Education:

Employment status: View Image

Registration district: Worcester
Sub-registration district: South West Worcester
ED, institution, or vessel: 23
Neighbors: View others on page
Household Members: Name Age
Harrell Drinkwater 20
Alice E Sutton 30
Beatrice M Sutton 4
Ethel M Sutton 3
Thomas K Sutton 28

Source Citation: Class: RG12; Piece: 2326; Folio 78; Page 21; GSU roll: 6097436.

Kath. x

This looks like your Harriet in the 1881 census (Ancestry has transcribed her age as 11, but I think it is actually 4 on the image which would be right going by the 1901 census):-

Name: Harriet Drinkwater
Age: 11
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1870
Relation: Daughter
Father's Name: William
Mother's Name: Emma
Gender: Female
Where born: Upton Snodsbury, Worcestershire, England

Civil Parish: Upton Snodsbury
County/Island: Worcestershire
Country: England

Street address: Village
Education:

Employment status: View Image
Occupation: Scholar

Registration district: Pershore
Sub-registration district: Upton Snodsbury
ED, institution, or vessel: 4
Neighbors: View others on page
Household Members: Name Age

Ann Drinkwater 15
Emma Drinkwater 42 - occupation is Gloveress)
Harriet Drinkwater 11 (4 on image)
Mary Drinkwater 9
Thomas Drinkwater 14
William Drinkwater 43

Source Citation: Class: RG11; Piece: 2931; Folio: 34; Page: 9; Line: ; GSU roll: 1341702.


Kath. x

Debbie,

I've replied to your email and I think the family you found in the 1901 census is the right one. Harriet IS an unmarried daughter. Her maiden name is Harriet Drinkwater and on the certificate it has her down as Harriet Drinkwater, a Gloveress (which is her occupation and NOT her maiden name). In 1901 her older sister Mary was also a gloveress (a glove maker working from home).

Kath. x

Theer are a number of other Drinkwater births in Pershore about that time - is one of them a sibling that might have a more legible name?

Have you tried the Pershore registry office - give them a call and ask if they would look at the original for you - sometimes works!!

There is a Harriet Drinkwater married in Pershore 1911 - if she remarried it might explain why you cant find a death - and the marriege cert should give a father

Peter

well at least the name exists which is progress from earlier this evening :)

Ancestry's sole example of the name:

Name: John Henry Gloveress
Year of Registration: 1872
Quarter of Registration: Apr-May-Jun
District: Bideford
County: Devon
Volume: 5b
Page: 511

Hi Debbie,

Have pm'd you.

i'm sorry Ivy, i'm not sure i know what you mean

Have sent you my email address for tomorrow.

You don't say what the father's first name is but there are these two marriages on FreeBMD both to Harriet's:-

Marriages Mar 1892
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DRINKWATER William Upton upon Severn 6c 377

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marriages Sep 1898
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Drinkwater Alfred Sydney W Bromwich 6b 1319


Kath. x

i've found the family on the 1901 and the 1891 census, trouble is my Grt Grandmother, Lily appears to have been raised by her grandparents, her mother was called Harriet, there is a Harriet mentioned in the 1901 census as living there but is described as the daughter of my grt grt grt grandparents, not the daughter-in-law as would be expected if she married into the family.

will try and scan the certificate tomorow :)

sorry, its the mother's maiden name. the birth was in 1897 in Pershore and unfortunatly it seems to be a strange situation. appears this lady - Harriet married into the family, Drinkwater, but looking back til 1870 i can't find any record of a Drinkwater marrying a Harriet. Have also searched death records up till 1950 for a Harriet Drinkwater but that has also been fruitless.

Debbie

Are you able to scan the certificate and send it by email? If so let us know and I will send you my email address.

Kath. x

If you can put up some details about your Gt Grandmother maybe she can be found on a census and her mother can be traced from there.

Hello, i've just received a birth registration document for my Grt Grandmother to find out who her mother was, however, her maiden name is very hard to read!

it appears to be Gloveress or Gloveness but i can't see anything on this site or in the BDM records that looks much like it.

can anyone help with any tips on how to read the writing or possible variations of the surname? any help will be very gratefully received as this branch of the family tree is proving to be quite frustrating!

Thank you!

Debbie