Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Why would he take on a large family?

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Sally

Sally Report 4 Feb 2010 22:34

hello my moher was 1 of 12children so that was 14 living in a two up two down railway cottage
sally

Tawny

Tawny Report 4 Feb 2010 21:42

Thank you all for replying . It is possible that James loved Esther and that is why he was willing to take on all her children at a young age.

Tawny

Tawny

Tawny Report 4 Feb 2010 08:11

Esthers' first husband was a general labourer, her second husband is given as working with horses on a farm in 1901. Esthers stepson from her second marriage is apprenticed to a saddle maker in 1911 and went on to open a saddlers in Windsor. James is a coal porter.

Tawny

Battenburg

Battenburg Report 4 Feb 2010 01:56

Have you got any of the death certs for the previous husbands. Losing 3 in a short time sounds suspicious to me.

Hope she wasnt another Mary Ann Cotton lol

Linda in the Midlands

Linda in the Midlands Report 4 Feb 2010 00:41

My great x 3 grandfather was 21 when he married the first time to 34 year old widow with 3 children, they had 1 child together, then after she died he married for the 2nd time to another widow she had 7 children and they had 1 together

Madmeg

Madmeg Report 4 Feb 2010 00:15

SIX rooms. In 1956, when I was four years old, we lived in a cottage with just TWO rooms. Higher up the terrace was a family of 8 in the same size cottage. 1956, remember. 6 rooms was RICH. Never mind if they owned it or not.

Tawny

Tawny Report 3 Feb 2010 23:00

James is not living in the cottage in 1901. It is not clear in 1911 wether the cottage is owned or rented.

Tawny

Battenburg

Battenburg Report 3 Feb 2010 22:56

Yes Sylvia. Six rooms was a mansion. The 2up 2 down house I was born in had 2 families of 6 living there in 1881

SylviaInCanada

SylviaInCanada Report 3 Feb 2010 22:50

Was he living there in 1901?

The 1911 census doesn't say whether they own or rent does it?





sylvia

Tawny

Tawny Report 3 Feb 2010 22:42

In 1901 she was a widow with six children. Esther had her sixth child in 1898 and her first husband died in 1899. Esther married her second husband in 1902 and he died in 1905. Esther then married James in 1906. She was not living in the cottage in 1901.

SylviaInCanada

SylviaInCanada Report 3 Feb 2010 22:31

A cottage with SIX rooms


they were indeed better off than most people!

.......... because that doesn't include every room in the "cottage". It counts the kitchen, but not a scullery, bathroom, office or shop.


where was she living in 1901? How soon after the previous husband died were they married?



sylvia

Tawny

Tawny Report 3 Feb 2010 22:13

James and Esther were living in a cottage with six rooms in 1911. I have confirmed two children for Esther and James. Nora was born in 1909 and Kenneth in 1912. Esther was born in 1869 and I think Kenneth was the last child Esther had.

Tawny

Battenburg

Battenburg Report 3 Feb 2010 22:09

Its not unusual for an older man to marry a younger women especially if he has 9 kids to look after. Also she might have been scared she would be " left on the shelf"

I visited Beamish Museum where they have a dentist room set up. The " dentist" said if a woman wasnt married by the time she was 21 her father would take her to have all her teeth removed to make her more marriageable because then it wouldnt cost the prospective husband money .

Now you know why they are all in a rush of to be married at 18

Battenburg

Battenburg Report 3 Feb 2010 22:01

Have you found them on the 1911 census?. It may say how many children they had together

SylviaInCanada

SylviaInCanada Report 3 Feb 2010 22:00

money?


Did she have any money or property, such as land or a house?



maybe he loved her?



sylvia

Tawny

Tawny Report 3 Feb 2010 21:36

They married in 1906 and the first child I have for them is a daughter Nora born in 1909 but it is possible she may have lost a baby before Nora was born.

Battenburg

Battenburg Report 3 Feb 2010 21:34

Perhaps she was pregnant and he was an honourable man so felt obliged to marry her. Not like today,cut and run

Tawny

Tawny Report 3 Feb 2010 21:28

One of my ancestors Esther married a man called James who was 17yrs younger than her and only 20 when they married. This was Esthers third marriage and she had all nine children from the two previous marriages living with her. The Eldest of her children was 17 and the youngest was 2. Why would James take on so much at a young age?

Tawny