Ahh, Anne, I wonder if my descendents would make the same assumptions about my wife and I if they couldn't find us home during the first three years of our marriage.  Me out at sea searching for a lost fisherman all night, coming home in the late morning; my wife coming home from the hospital just after noon, where she'd been in the lab all night running blood samples (toxicology tests) on seven people injured in an auto accident.  There are more than just crying babies keeping us from our sleep and our beds.     Lou ________________________________ From: Anne Cole <duncalf@one-name.org> To: 'Bart Simon' <thewanderer@iburst.co.za>; eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:16 PM Subject: Re: [LIN] [MARKHAM-UK]  George Markham b:1823 Louth Lincs [!!!] The census asked for all those who slept in the house on the night that the census was taken, not who was there during the daytime! I am reminded of the chap who handed in a blank form. He told the enumerator that his wife had been delivered of twins the night before and no-one had slept in the house since! (sorry!) Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society -snip-

Hi List, I've found an entry in the Stamford Mercury in April 1835, reporting the death on my 3x great grandfather Edward Carey. It say's he was a Bailiff for the Bishop of Kildare at Frithville. Anyone got any idea where the Bishop of Kildare would have lived in Frithville. Regards, Richard Brothwell

MGC: [Corrections]: [The informant (the person registering T.E.M.'s birth) is R. Markham (not G. Markham), Eastgate, Louth.]: I must add here that Rebecca Markham, separate from being at the John Smith residence on 1851 Census day, when she registered the birth on birth registering day, she was of Eastgate Louth. If she were not living with friends or family, she could herself along with her husband, be living in Eastgate. [Go and see where Nicol Hill is. Then see where 33 Easgate is, about one block away.]: 33 Easgate would be about 30-50 metres away or so from where John + Frances Markham lived in Nicol Hill just around the corner. Nicol Hill is a very short road, very short, it is unquestionable that your Markhams of Nicol Hill would have known and been neighbours to Thomas Ward Markham. TWM b:25-11-1819 [Holy Trinity, Kingston Upon Hull, Yorkshire, England] and m:06-01-1847 there too, just like your GM:1823 m:26-02-1849. I have just got mee email. Aaaichh !!! I can't believe my eyes. Thomas England Markham is 6 MONTHS OLD. Thomas England Markham BORN (!!!) : 08-10-1850, then on the night of the Census: 30-03-1851: Would be 9 days short of being exactly SIX MONTHS OLD. Thank you Ma'am .... .... - S.K.M. - [!!!] ================================

MGC: In the 1861-81-91 Census Rebecca (Markham) gives her place of b. to be Middle Rasen. In the 1841 Census one George Markham is in the same household as John + Frances Markham in Nicol Hill. Go and see where Nicol Hill is. Then see where 33 Easgate is, about one block away. In the 1851 Census (!!!) when RM + GM are both not at home, here in 33 Eastgate at the home of John Smith Cabinet Maker, we find one 'visitor' Maria Markham aged 30, a Harness? Makers wife, born in Rasen. She has a son named Thomas Markham who must be a baby. Under MALE age column for this Thomas Markham is written a word I can't read clearly, but might be 'bona' (Meaning: 'Good' i.e. Good health.). The preceding column was titled 'Health'. He isn't written as even one year old, just 'bona'. I can only suspect Thomas Markham is a baby under 1 year of age and in good health !!!. Your Thomas Markham would be about 6-7 months old at this time. I don't have any other person to fit this bill just yet, and I would say this is your Thomas (England) Markham !!!. That is him !!!. === Census 1851: 33 Eastgate : John Smith (Head) Cabinet Maker. Maria Markham Visitor 30 Harness? Makers wife, born Rasen. Thomas Markham “bona” (?), born Louth. NOTE: IT IS 33 EASTGATE LOUTH !!!. === The word bona? is also written between two "bona". He's a baby. Rebecca is consistent to be b:c1821 in Rasen. I have just seen this too now: DougH himself told me that: [The informant (the person registering T.E.M.'s birth) is R. Markham (not G. Markham), Eastgate, Louth.]. OF EASTGATE LOUTH !!!. It would be precisely 33 Eastgate Louth. Further, we now have GM's occ., a Saddler / Harness Maker. Two and one of the same thing. Following DougH's logic: === As for George expiring before 1861, not likely. Rebecca acknowledges his presence in 1861 with "married". By 1871 however, she's head of the household - guess George wasn't expected home. As for servants, none apparent until 1871 when by then Thomas E. was bringing home a salary and presumably they could afford Maria Sugden (13) as a general domestic servant. As for the rest of John & Frances' family: by 1851 they're all on Lee Street, with mother Frances. John by then is dead and as we know George is gone. With several incomes they have a servant (Mary Reynolds, 16) and two boarders. === We can assume that GM:1823 d:1861-71. This then rules him out to be the other GM who d:1902. Thomas England Markham is b:08-10-1850 (Louth St. James?) and chr/bap:02-05-1851 at Louth Wesleyan Chapel. Those are his two dates. I agree, this Louth Wesleyan Chapel the next place to visit. I think you will find part of Francis Markham's dates here too. He is probably GM:1823's uncle. Your Markhams are still living in this region today I suspect. I suspect GM:1823 is b. in Louth, we will have to search the registers there. I do suspect he is b. further up towards that Walkergate area or direction. The family then moved after he was born. Stay in Louth for him firstly. === This Francis Markham is connected to Paternoster Row London side. If GM:1823 is not the son of John + Frances Markham, and only residing with them at census time 1841, then he must be a son of one of John Markham's brothers or thereabouts. I haven't followed this one up yet: George Frederick Markham Baptism: 13 Apr 1823, Paternoster Row, London. === This [Louth Wesleyan Chapel] must be the [Louth Centenary Methodist Church] I suspect ?. I was just about to end here and post off, but decided to Google Map this place, I first got some spot in America, then some spot on East Coast Lincs., and then .... OK, I got the spot in Louth, and where is it?, about [3 Nichol Hill, Louth, United Kingdom], the Louth Methodist Church !!!. Your GM:1823 must be bapt. here ?. It is in the same road that his father is living in !!!. 33 Eastgate is only a few metres around the corner !!!. That's how close this is. Lastly, GM:1823 must be around this area. Louth male Markhams often were known by their second names, and Rebecca is also being known as 'Maria'. But once again DougH, my should be my Thomas Ward Markham, is Manager in Nichol Hill Louth, and your Markhams are once again in the same road as mine. Your [Markham Thos. clerk, Westgate pl.] where Rebecca was in her youth. - S.K.M. - [!!!] ===============================

Regarding the 1851 census return: The address is Eastgate, Louth. No house number is given. 33 is the schedule number, i. e. the 33rd household that is listed in that enumeration district. The child Thomas is "6 mo" i.e. 6 months old. Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk -----Original Message----- From: eng-lincsgen-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:eng-lincsgen-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Bart Simon Sent: 15 May 2012 21:35 To: RW ENG-LINCS; RW UK Subject: Re: [LIN] [MARKHAM-UK] George Markham b:1823 Louth Lincs [!!!] MGC: In the 1861-81-91 Census Rebecca (Markham) gives her place of b. to be Middle Rasen. In the 1841 Census one George Markham is in the same household as John + Frances Markham in Nicol Hill. Go and see where Nicol Hill is. Then see where 33 Easgate is, about one block away. In the 1851 Census (!!!) when RM + GM are both not at home, here in 33 Eastgate at the home of John Smith Cabinet Maker, we find one 'visitor' Maria Markham aged 30, a Harness? Makers wife, born in Rasen. She has a son named Thomas Markham who must be a baby. Under MALE age column for this Thomas Markham is written a word I can't read clearly, but might be 'bona' (Meaning: 'Good' i.e. Good health.). The preceding column was titled 'Health'. He isn't written as even one year old, just 'bona'. I can only suspect Thomas Markham is a baby under 1 year of age and in good health !!!. Your Thomas Markham would be about 6-7 months old at this time. I don't have any other person to fit this bill just yet, and I would say this is your Thomas (England) Markham !!!. That is him !!!. === Census 1851: 33 Eastgate : John Smith (Head) Cabinet Maker. Maria Markham Visitor 30 Harness? Makers wife, born Rasen. Thomas Markham “bona” (?), born Louth. NOTE: IT IS 33 EASTGATE LOUTH !!!. === The word bona? is also written between two "bona". He's a baby. Rebecca is consistent to be b:c1821 in Rasen. I have just seen this too now: DougH himself told me that: [The informant (the person registering T.E.M.'s birth) is R. Markham (not G. Markham), Eastgate, Louth.]. OF EASTGATE LOUTH !!!. It would be precisely 33 Eastgate Louth. Further, we now have GM's occ., a Saddler / Harness Maker. Two and one of the same thing. Following DougH's logic: === As for George expiring before 1861, not likely. Rebecca acknowledges his presence in 1861 with "married". By 1871 however, she's head of the household - guess George wasn't expected home. As for servants, none apparent until 1871 when by then Thomas E. was bringing home a salary and presumably they could afford Maria Sugden (13) as a general domestic servant. As for the rest of John & Frances' family: by 1851 they're all on Lee Street, with mother Frances. John by then is dead and as we know George is gone. With several incomes they have a servant (Mary Reynolds, 16) and two boarders. === We can assume that GM:1823 d:1861-71. This then rules him out to be the other GM who d:1902. Thomas England Markham is b:08-10-1850 (Louth St. James?) and chr/bap:02-05-1851 at Louth Wesleyan Chapel. Those are his two dates. I agree, this Louth Wesleyan Chapel the next place to visit. I think you will find part of Francis Markham's dates here too. He is probably GM:1823's uncle. Your Markhams are still living in this region today I suspect. I suspect GM:1823 is b. in Louth, we will have to search the registers there. I do suspect he is b. further up towards that Walkergate area or direction. The family then moved after he was born. Stay in Louth for him firstly. === This Francis Markham is connected to Paternoster Row London side. If GM:1823 is not the son of John + Frances Markham, and only residing with them at census time 1841, then he must be a son of one of John Markham's brothers or thereabouts. I haven't followed this one up yet: George Frederick Markham Baptism: 13 Apr 1823, Paternoster Row, London. === This [Louth Wesleyan Chapel] must be the [Louth Centenary Methodist Church] I suspect ?. I was just about to end here and post off, but decided to Google Map this place, I first got some spot in America, then some spot on East Coast Lincs., and then .... OK, I got the spot in Louth, and where is it?, about [3 Nichol Hill, Louth, United Kingdom], the Louth Methodist Church !!!. Your GM:1823 must be bapt. here ?. It is in the same road that his father is living in !!!. 33 Eastgate is only a few metres around the corner !!!. That's how close this is. Lastly, GM:1823 must be around this area. Louth male Markhams often were known by their second names, and Rebecca is also being known as 'Maria'. But once again DougH, my should be my Thomas Ward Markham, is Manager in Nichol Hill Louth, and your Markhams are once again in the same road as mine. Your [Markham Thos. clerk, Westgate pl.] where Rebecca was in her youth. - S.K.M. - [!!!] =============================== ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In late April I posted a message about my ancestor, Richard Gill, having his name carved into the entry way to Helpringham Church with the date 21 May 1724, and asked if anyone knew if there were any records of the Church Wardens in Helpringham. The wonderfully helpful Anne Cole gave me a couple of suggestions from Lincs to the Past and I wrote to the Archives, and today I received a reply. Richard Gill was a Parish Officer from 1705 until his death in 1737, and in 1724 he was Church Warden, so at least part of the puzzle has been solved. So a very sincere "Thank You" to Anne for your help. Elizabeth Gill in Melbourne LFHS Member C0212.

  The 1841 census is available to all, either visit local family history centre or subscribe to Ancestry, Find My Past or whatever you else is available on line. You will still only get the information as previously told, which others are giving you from their paid subscriptionsHave you looked at non conformist records for George's bapt? ________________________________ From: Bart Simon <thewanderer@iburst.co.za> To: RW ENG-LINCS <ENG-LINCSGEN@rootsweb.com>; RW UK <MARKHAM-UK@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, 14 May 2012, 23:36 Subject: [LIN] Fw: [MARKHAM-UK] George Markham b:1823 Louth Lincs [!!!] [*The 1841 census itself w.r.t. dates, that is probably normal. I think we can expect however, that they at least have the body count right.]: I got the one for 1841 for Rebecca England,could I please get the FULL text 1841 for the one for this George Markham maybe at home with parents John + Frances Markham ?. I don't have this, and would to read it. This would answer my question as to how you know there is a GM son of your John + Frances Markham. That would do it for me. It is not uncommon at all for offspring to be born in different towns. I went through two full sets of records yesterday for Louth St. James, and no GM1823 or thereabouts (+-20 years). GM1823 as we can call him for now, could also be b:1823, 1825, 1827, 1829-31. - S.K.M. - [!!!] ======================================

So clearly the George MARKHAM who married in 1849 is the same one born in 1824(ish) in Louth and who is with presumed parents John and Frances in 1841 Also clear is the father of Thomas England MARKHAM as given by the mother was George MARKHAM a Saddler (there is nothing unusual in a mother registering the birth by the way) Army Accoutrements included leather belts for soldiers and horse harness, bridles etc Registrations of deaths of George MARKHAMs 1848 to 1851 (ages not recorded in index at that period) Deaths Mar 1848 Markham George Louth 14 426 (4 year old buried at North Elkington which is covered by Louth eg dist) Deaths Jun 1848 Markham George Michael Gainsbro' 14 253 (6 year old buried at Gainsborough) Deaths Dec 1849 Markham George Bradford Y 23 141 (5 month old buried at Bradford St Peter 14th Nov 1849) Markham George Headington 16 50 (there is a birth registered in the same quarter district which may or may not be connected) Markham George Foster Chelsea 3 46 (1 year George F MARKHAM buried at St Lukes Chelsea 1849) Deaths Jun 1851 Markham George Buckingham 6 258 (there is a birth registered in the same quarter district which may or may not be connected) There does not appear to be another George MARKHAM born circa 1824 in Louth area in the census Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > MGC: Taking liberty to forward email to this list. SKM. > > [Observation]: The d. date you have for GM1823 being d:1902 Woolwich, this > date and place makes others think you have THEIR GM1824 the Accoutrement > Maker. What if GM1823 just simply died BEFORE Thomas England Markham b:1850 > was born and Rebecca Markham never remarried ?. ** [DougH: Thomas England > Markham's GRO issued birth certificate shows his father as George Markham > 'saddler'. Very interestingly, and the possible importance of this just hit > me; the informant (the person registering his birth) is R. Markham (!!! not

The 1841 census is available to all, either visit local family history centre or subscribe to Ancestry, Find My Past or whatever you else is available on line. You will still only get the information as previously told, which others are giving you from their paid subscriptions Have you looked at non conformist records for George's bapt? ________________________________ From: Bart Simon <thewanderer@iburst.co.za> To: RW ENG-LINCS <ENG-LINCSGEN@rootsweb.com>; RW UK <MARKHAM-UK@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, 14 May 2012, 23:36 Subject: [LIN] Fw: [MARKHAM-UK] George Markham b:1823 Louth Lincs [!!!] [*The 1841 census itself w.r.t. dates, that is probably normal. I think we can expect however, that they at least have the body count right.]: I got the one for 1841 for Rebecca England,could I please get the FULL text 1841 for the one for this George Markham maybe at home with parents John + Frances Markham ?. I don't have this, and would to read it. This would answer my question as to how you know there is a GM son of your John + Frances Markham. That would do it for me. It is not uncommon at all for offspring to be born in different towns. I went through two full sets of records yesterday for Louth St. James, and no GM1823 or thereabouts (+-20 years). GM1823 as we can call him for now, could also be b:1823, 1825, 1827, 1829-31. - S.K.M. - [!!!] ======================================

MGC: Taking liberty to forward email to this list. SKM. [Observation]: The d. date you have for GM1823 being d:1902 Woolwich, this date and place makes others think you have THEIR GM1824 the Accoutrement Maker. What if GM1823 just simply died BEFORE Thomas England Markham b:1850 was born and Rebecca Markham never remarried ?. ** [DougH: Thomas England Markham's GRO issued birth certificate shows his father as George Markham 'saddler'. Very interestingly, and the possible importance of this just hit me; the informant (the person registering his birth) is R. Markham (!!! not G. Markham !!!), East Gate, Louth. Maybe George had made himself scarce before Thomas E. was born!]: You see even here GM1823 is not there. GM1823 has died before his son is born or too ill (TEM b:08-10-1850) ?. I would suggest you look for a d. cert. for 1849/50 for GM1823 too. You see Doug, doesn't TEM have servants in his household, is that correct ?. You see, if TEM was a school teacher and had servants, it would mean he was well enough off to keep and pay servants, he would also be able to 'keep' his mother too. [*The 1841 census itself w.r.t. dates, that is probably normal. I think we can expect however, that they at least have the body count right.]: I got the one for 1841 for Rebecca England, could I please get the FULL text 1841 for the one for this George Markham maybe at home with parents John + Frances Markham ?. I don't have this, and would to read it. This would answer my question as to how you know there is a GM son of your John + Frances Markham. That would do it for me. It is not uncommon at all for offspring to be born in different towns. I went through two full sets of records yesterday for Louth St. James, and no GM1823 or thereabouts (+-20 years). GM1823 as we can call him for now, could also be b:1823, 1825, 1827, 1829-31. Is there a GM1823 b. in Middle Rasen to fit the bill ?. [ACCOUTREMENT MAKER / ACCOUTRE - Supplier of military accessories]. A Saddler might also be Saddler + Harness Maker ?. Also: Look at Walkergate compared to 36 Eastgate, a jump. I think RM is well enough off by now. What used to be at 36 Eastgate ?. Also: Please can you answer me here: DougH Once Said : <<< Susannah Markham, School Teacher, [1851 Census: Head of household with mother and two brothers at home. Occupation: School Teacher.] >>> : Well, her known brothers are GM1823 (Saddler) - JM1824 - TM1828, mother Frances (Curtis) Markham. Which brothers were there ?. FRANCIS MARKHAM : There is actually one FM nearby: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/kevin.grantham/Individual/i472.htm#i5856 Francis Markham m. Theodosia Spenser (Of Louth Park, Lincs). FM b:Abt. 1800 or so. For FM I have a note: [aka: 'James']. Some of the kids are bn:Louth, bap/chr [Paternoster Row Wesleyan Methodist Registry, London, England]. [George Frederick Markham Baptism: 13 Apr 1823 Paternoster Row, London, father: George Markham mother: Mary Ann]. Unfinished, must go. - S.K.M. - [!!!] ====================================== -----Original Message----- From: Doug Harper Subject: Re: [MARKHAM-UK] [LIN] George Markham b:1823 Louth Lincs [!!!] George Markham (the one b. 1771): burial at St. James, Louth on Dec 15, 1846. I will be ordering the GRO certificate (probably today) to see what further info it contains. Note his son John survives him by 3 years (buried April 23, 1850). George and Rebecca's marriage in Hull (Feb 26, 1849) ages: both "full" George's profession: Saddler (this is key per below) George's father: John Markham, Coachman (again key) Rebecca's father: John England, Bar (or Bee) Keeper (the writing on this document is faint) unfortunately the "residence at time of marriage" for both is almost unreadable. I agree the information coalesces nicely around a birth date of 1823-11/12 (+/- 1 month) for George. And that does leave enough room for him to be a legitimate son of John & Frances. My struggle is still why his parents married in St. James, then 22 months later started the baptisms of their next 3 children, at the same church. Where is George's birth record - he was born mid-way though that 22 month period? I agree Ken, that George probably wasn't adopted, just not sure and may never be until we have the DNA evidence. After 1851 remains an equal mystery. According to census records George wasn't in Louth. He didn't father anymore children, at least with Rebecca. Later census records (1861, 1871) show only Thomas E. residing with his mother. I guess he could have sent money home. It's at this point I wish I'd been interested in genealogy while my grandmother was still alive. Lastly, your key question: "How did you get to place GM as a son of John Markham + Frances Curtis ?" - the marriage certificate referenced above which shows both George's and father John's professions as we expect them to be from the 1841 census; -*The 1841 census itself w.r.t. dates, that is probably normal. I think we can expect however, that they at least have the body count right. -*Thomas England Markham's GRO issued birth certificate shows his father as George Markham "saddler". Very interestingly, and the possible importance of this just hit me; the informant (the person registering his birth) is R. Markham (not G. Markham), East Gate, Louth. Maybe George had made himself scarce before Thomas E. was born! - but I didn't stop there. As I searched parish records I looked for the other George Markhams, even other Georges (considering that he might have adopted, born in Louth and beyond, within a year of so of 1823/4. None fit. For instance, the George Markham born in Walesby, that we though some time ago might be a candidate, was not mine. He shows up elsewhere, happily married (I'd hope) in the 1861 census. ** That said I'm going to look at two more pieces of hard evidence: the death certificate of his grandfather George and of course George's own death certificate from 1902. I'll be interested Ken, in seeing what you have on other Louth Markhams, in particular the Francis Markham who witnessed John & Frances marriage (a brother of John perhaps?). There's a Francis in the 1841 census who has promise but no family shown. For the parish registers I have a Francis (bricklayer) & Theodosia with children (from LDS films 1541997/8): Ann (bapt. Sept 25, 1830) Hannah (bapt. May 27, 1833) Martha (bapt. July 23, 1840) at three years old - this crowd didn't rush things! Elizabeth (bapt. Dec 26, 1841) John (bapt. Jan 9, 1848) - with father Francis still laying bricks to the point of maybe not having time to get back to church. Doug Harper Toronto, Canada _____________

The simple answer is to buy the 1849 marriage certificate I would never advocate buying every certificate there is available but sometimes you just have to bite the bullet Yorkshire BMD gives that the marriage was at Holy Trinity Hull, perhaps you might try the PRs for the marriage Unless you have the certificate that gives Georges father as John and occupation something like Coachman and Georges occupation as Saddler or Army Accroutrement maker, you have very little to suggest this is the right George MARKHAM There are certainly strong clues, such as Rebecca with Frances MARKHAM in 1861 but you need more than that Why would they marry in Hull and not in Middle Rasen or Louth? was it where George was working or were they getting away from prying eyes Another would be the birth cert for Thomas England MARKHAM , who is given as the father and his occupation? and what address is recorded (if there is one) or have you checked the PRs for Louth to see if Thomas England MARKHAM was baptised end of 1850, start of 1851? Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > [You say you have the marriage certificate for the 1849 marriage ?. George > MARKHAM to Rebecca ENGLAND]: No, I only have the basic info. > What did George give for his occupation ? > What did George give for his fathers name and occupation ? > What was the address given at the time of marriage ? > Can we answer these questions above....

MGC: Firstly, thank you to each person who has helped me on and off this list. I spent the entire afternoon going through the one website. Secondly: WALKERGATE - LOUTH: Check it out on Google Maps Doug, and see the road from both ends in 'Street View'. The name itself, is a give away, 'Walkers' or 'Fullers' of textiles. Census 1841: Walkergate : Rebecca England 20 Dressmaker. This is the correct Rebecca England, there are a few of them. [It should be Ann Traves 15 at the bottom.]. I also note this area is part of: [Hundred: Louth Eske Hundred (Wold Division) ]. Also noted: [George Markham, Saddler] his brother Thomas Markham must be the [Thos. Markham, clerk, Westgate pl.]. Not far away from Westgate at the end of Eastgate is the St. James's Church [Also named Louth St. James]. In 1837 a Baptist Chapel/Church was built in Walkergate Louth. It is in this St. James Church that the father John Markham, Coachman is : [Louth St. James bp:1803-03-17 John son of George Markham + Mary. [Pg.43]. JM d:1850 at 6 Lee Street Louth. So now we have George + Mary Markham as parents. I see you have one George Markham b:1771 (Louth Eske Hundred, Wold Div'n), can you give me the full dates and details you have on this person ?(***). === OFF- LIST: [You say you have the marriage certificate for the 1849 marriage ?. George MARKHAM to Rebecca ENGLAND]: No, I only have the basic info. What did George give for his occupation ? What did George give for his fathers name and occupation ? What was the address given at the time of marriage ? Can we answer these questions above.... === I went through two full online registers today, there are more Markhams about than we know of in Louth. You might have to go and check page by page several registers. = Louth St. James m:1797-07-16 Dinah wife of John Curtis. Louth St. James m:1795-08-03 Thomas Markham + Elizabeth Dixey. [Markmas, Markam]. Louth St. James bur:1803-03-20 Robert child of Robert Markham (+ Mary?). Louth St. James bp:1805-10-19 Thomas son of John Markham + Mary. More offspring there. = (***): I will wait for this... ... ... = [John + Frances Markham m:1823-01-20 in St. James, Louth, witnessed by Francis Markham and Elias Fields.]: I did not know you had this. Excellent info and most suitable for GM:1823. From my previous post I pointed out that in April 1901 GM was 77 years old, probably turning 78 years old. So if GM:1823's parents were m. in January 1823, it is more than likely, if not the case, GM1823 will be b. say Nov. 1823 to Dec. 1823, or say outside Oct. 1823 to Jan. 1824. I guess he is b:1823-11/12 (+-1 month). [Witnessed by Francis Markham and Elias Fields]: FRANCIS MARKHAM, this is male. We have to know who they are. My current feeling is that your GM:1823 is NOT adopted. He is actually fitting precisely where he should be after I have the m. info for his parents. Secondly: Something happened to GM:1823 about 1651 or so. I say this because even if he ''travelled about'', his wife was always back in Louth, so there should have been more offspring recorded there, surely ?. Yes, let us go for the Francis Markham, I will go there too. [In 1841 the George MARKHAM in Louth is a Saddlers apprentice]: Who was he apprenticed to ?. [NOTES]: Doug, I have to ask the question and a comment. COMMENT: I can see the tree we are climbing, and most of that seems quite fine as we go on. QUESTION: How do you get [George Markham, Saddler] to connect to John Markham + Frances Curtis?. Please answer. Secondly, the [Susannah Markham b:1826] who is [1851 Census: Head of household with mother and two brothers at home. Occupation: School Teacher.]: Who are the 2 brothers ?. Or to make this simple: How did you get to place GM as a son of John Markham + Frances Curtis ?. I am just rolling through what I have, what !!! SINGLE !!! piece of information anywhere makes this George Markham a son of John Markham + Frances, or a brother to John Markham + Frances offspring ?. I am also struggling on how you have placed him here. How did you place him here ?. - S.K.M. - [!!!] =============================

The George Markham that you have identified as yours on the 1901 census is in London on the 1851 census BUT he is listed with a wife Harriett aged 23, born in Somerset. Details are: HO107/1481/269 St Martin's in the Fields, Westminster 23 Buckingham Street Geo. Markham, Head, Mar, 27, Army Accoutrement Maker, Louth, Lincoln Harriett " Wife, Mar, 23, Bath, Somerset This gives rise to three possibilities: 1 The man you have identified is not the right George Markham. 2 This is the correct man but he has married again bigamously. 3 He has lied on the census form and he and Harriett are simply living together. 2 and 3 are perfectly possible. As has been said before, divorce was very expensive and complicated and before 1857 could only be achieved by an Act of Parliament, so couples simply separated and remained married. It was easy to marry bigamously, especially away from your previous home or in a big city, as no checks were made. FreeBMD does not list a George Markham marriage to a Harriett between 1841 and 1851. As regards 1, since Rebecca and George never appear together on the censuses, how can you be sure that the George Markham born in Louth is the right one? Do you have other evidence of the place of birth of Rebecca's husband or some other way of tying the two together? I am not saying that he is the wrong one but it is so important to verify everything. Before I accept any "fact" as true I insist on at least 2 separate verifications, preferably 3. If I can't achieve that level of proof, then I do not regard it as definite. Regards Lesley Aveyron France -----Original Message----- From: Bart Simon Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 10:48 PM To: RW UK ; RW ENG-LINCS Subject: [LIN] George Markham b:1823 Louth Lincs [!!!] MGC: George Markham m:1849 Rebecca England. His wedding certificate was also signed by one Thomas Hewson (!). Where is he for the inbetween Census ?. In 1901 he seems to be in chookie. On 31-03-1901 he says he is 77yrs and b:1824(?) in Louth Lincs. His brother John Markham b:25-11-1824 Louth Lincs., so GM must have been 77yrs turning 78 yrs, i.e. GM will be b:April to Dec 1823 in LOUTH ?. The person who wrote the record must have written a calculation: 1901-77=1824. But GM was 77yrs old in March 1901, he should be turning 78yrs later on in that year ? [1901-78=1823]. I also notice Rebecca Markham GM's wife: 1841: England Rebecca 1821 Lincolnshire Louth, Louth 1851: ? 1861: Markham Rebecca 1821 Middle Rasen Louth, Louth 1871: Markham Rebecca 1821 Lincolnshire Louth, Louth 1881: Markham Rebecca 1823 Middle Rasen Louth, Louth 1891: RM d. 6 days after census. Too sick to participate. Not recorded. 1841: Markham George 1826 Lincolnshire Louth, Louth (?) 1901: Markham George 1824 Louth Woolwich, London (Inmate) Whilst she seems to be recorded in Louth, GM is not there, or is he ?. Is GM in jail already ?. Quite funny, GM's ''Head of Household'' in 1901 is the Chief of the Prison Services. His son Thomas England Markham b:1850 Louth. After this b:1850, where is GM until 1901 ?. I see RM is seemingly out of Louth in 1851 during census time, is it possible GM went to jail already by 1851 until he died 1902 probably in jail Woolwich London ?. Did RM just live in Louth and did not divorce or remarry ?. Is Thomas England Markham an only child, seems like it ?. If GM was b:1824, it would have to be Jan 1824. http://www.familysearch.org/eng/search/Census/household_record.asp?HOUSEHOLD_CODE=1881BR_651098&HOUSEHOLD_SUB=1&frompage=99 But .... .... .... The problem seems to be here is that George Markham's wife as you have it, Rebecca (England) Markham, you have her bur:11-04-1891 in Louth. This George Markham (Saddler) who is in chookie 1901-77=1824. But the George Markham (Army & Navy Accoutrement Mkr) (widower) who is boarder with Caroline E. Greenwood (Widow) in Lambeth, is Census 1881-50=1831, b:1831 in Louth Lincs. These must be two separate GM's ?. Well, 1826+5yrs=1831 I guess. To make this post simple, leave out for now the George Markham (Army & Navy Accoutrement Mkr), and take the rest as I gave it. Once again, did any of the birth records or other give any indication as to the mother's name for your GM who m. Rebecca England ?. [Census: 1881, Only Rebecca that may be right recorded as married but the head and living alone as a dressmaker.]: Maybe she just stayed at home ?. - S.K.M. - [!!!] =============================

Hi Lou and all >From Histpop Census of England and Wales, 1901 50 of 53 in section Instructions issued to local officers for the taking of the census of 1901 (53 pages) Enumeration in public and charitable institutions 6. The Governor, master, or chief resident officer of every prison, workhouse, hospital, or lunatic asylum, and of every public or charitable institution which may be determined upon by the Registrar-General, shall be the enumerator of the inmates thereof, and shall conform to such instructions as may be sent to him by the authority of the Local Government Board for obtaining the returns required by this Act, so far as may be practicable, with respect to the inmates. ======================== The way the person responsible described the inmates of the institution does vary though, more often they are inmates but sometimes they were Prisoners, Paupers, Patients, or other terms Or a combination of the above such as Pauper Inmate or Pauper Patient None of the terms were meant to mean anything other than a method of categorising people for the census But much would depend on the person filling in the form as I said before Little if anything was checked to verify the information was correct Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > You will find people in hospitals, workhouses and the like variously > described as Inmates, patients or whatever -snip- The term "inmate" was used for people in Poorhouses but it didn't have the same connotation as today's prison inmates. It wasn't a pejorative expression, although being in a poorhouse was considered a pretty bad experience. Lou

Hi Bart It gets funnier as it goes along this one <g> A few snippets then onwards :-) The way the people are described in the census was largely up to the person filling in the schedule That would normally be the householder, but in institutions often a clerk or other person was designated by the master or head of household, unlike the USA where the enumerator went round and took the information verbally You will find people in hospitals, workhouses and the like variously described as Inmates, patients or whatever There were guidance rules laid down but in true British fashion they were often ignored or misinterpretted As the household schedules were collected up and taken home for transcribing onto the pages we see online today, there is much room for error, ages , names, birthplaces could all easily be misread, the enumerator would not have time to recheck anything so what he took it to be on the schedule was what he entered In my experience, the further the birthplace from the enumeration the more mistakes appear to have crept in, for example the enumerator in a Lincolnshire town may have heard of most places in Lincolnshire but chances are the further the birthplace was away from the enumerated place, the less likely it was that he had heard of it before Depending upon the answers I posed regarding the marriage, I may change my opinion but for now I would suggest that the George MARKHAM who was born in Louth circa 1823 , the son of John and Francis who was a Saddlers apprentice in 1841..... was a bit of a lad The part I am unsure of is if he is the same man you say married Rebecca ENGLAND in Hull in 1849 What I can say is the man who was in the workhouse in 1901 is the same man as follows My suggestion is that for whatever reason he split up with his wife Rebecca and took up with a Harriet 1851 England Census about Geo Markham Name: Geo Markham Age: 27 Estimated Birth Year: abt 1824 Relation: Head Spouse's Name: Harriett Markham Gender: M (Male) Where born: Lincoln, Louth, Ireland (actually it is Louth Lincoln) Civil parish: St Martin in the Fields County/Island: Middlesex Country: England Registration district: St Martin In The Fields Sub-registration district: Charing Cross ED, institution, or vessel: 2l Neighbors: View others on page Household schedule number: 27 Piece: 1481 Folio: 269 Page Number: 5 Household Members: Name Age Geo Markham 27 Army Accoutrement maker Louth Lincoln Harriett Markham 23 Bath Somerset HO107; Piece: 1481; Folio: 269; Page: 5; GSU roll: 87806. ========================== 1861 England Census about George Markham Name: George Markham Age: 37 Estimated Birth Year: abt 1824 Relation: Head Spouse's Name: Harriet Markham Gender: Male Where born: South Lancashire (Louth Lincolnshire?) Civil parish: Westminster St Anne Ecclesiastical parish: St Anne County/Island: Middlesex Country: England Registration district: Strand Sub-registration district: St Anne Soho ED, institution, or vessel: 16 Neighbors: View others on page Household schedule number: 184 Piece: 176 Folio: 135 Page Number: 28 Household Members: Name Age George Markham 37 Army Accout't maker South Lancashire (I would suggest the enumerator has misread Louth Lincolnshire) Harriet Markham 34 Bath Somerset Henre F News 34 Frederick Gray 29 Rose Gray 19 RG 9; Piece: 176; Folio: 135; Page: 28; GSU roll: 542586. ===================== 1871 England Census about George Markham Name: George Markham Age: 47 Estimated Birth Year: abt 1824 Relation: Head Spouse's Name: Harrieta Markham Gender: Male Where born: Leicestershire, England (hard to read but Lincolnshire) Civil parish: St Martin in the Fields Ecclesiastical parish: St John Town: London County/Island: London Country: England Registration district: Strand Sub-registration district: Long Acre ED, institution, or vessel: 7 Household schedule number: 149 Piece: 355 Folio: 51 Page Number: 29 Household Members: Name Age George Markham 47 Army Accoutrement maker Lincolnshire Harrieta Markham 44 Somerset Bath RG10; Piece: 355; Folio: 51; Page: 29; GSU roll: 824609 possible death for Harriet England & Wales, FreeBMD Death Index: 1837-1915 about Harriet Markham Name: Harriet Markham Estimated Birth Year: abt 1826 Date of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec 1873 Age at Death: 47 Registration district: Strand Inferred County: London Volume: 1b Page: 421 Which would explain why he gives widower as his condition in 1881 ========================== It would appear that Georges mother sided with Rebecca as they are together whilst George is in London from at least 1851 I think you have the 1881, 1891 & 1901 all of which give his occupation as Army Accoutrement maker Throughout this little adventure I have only come across one George MARKHAM born in Louth betwen 1821 & 1831 and the above is that man I believe If George was the eldest it may be that he was baptised in his mothers Parish even though he may have been born in Louth Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > MGC: > > [Firstly the George MARKHAM who was born circa 1824 Louth in the 1901 census > is not in prison but in the Woolwich Union (ie the workhouse).]: > === > Census 1901: 31 Mar 1901, Plumstead, London, Middlesex, England. > George Markham b: 1824 Louth, Lincolnshire. > age: 77, Inmate. *********************** > birthplace: Louth, Lincolnshire.

I truly support Nivard's comments about the inaccuracies of enumerators. My mother and her siblings were born to a second wife, the first having died. The first wife's children were considerably older so that there were older teenagers in the household at the same time as a 2 and a 4 year old. In the 1901 census the two little ones were entered as grand-children of their father. Happy hunting!   Diana Robinson (nee Gardner) Now in Rochester, NY, USA -----Original Message----- From: Nivard Ovington [mailto:ovington1@sky.com] Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 3:45 PM To: Bart Simon; eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LIN] George Markham b:1823 Louth Lincs [!!!] PART TWO Hi Bart It gets funnier as it goes along this one <g> A few snippets then onwards :-) The way the people are described in the census was largely up to the person filling in the schedule That would normally be the householder, but in institutions often a clerk or other person was designated by the master or head of household, unlike the USA where the enumerator went round and took the information verbally You will find people in hospitals, workhouses and the like variously described as Inmates, patients or whatever There were guidance rules laid down but in true British fashion they were often ignored or misinterpretted As the household schedules were collected up and taken home for transcribing onto the pages we see online today, there is much room for error, ages , names, birthplaces could all easily be misread, the enumerator would not have time to recheck anything so what he took it to be on the schedule was what he entered In my experience, the further the birthplace from the enumeration the more mistakes appear to have crept in, for example the enumerator in a Lincolnshire town may have heard of most places in Lincolnshire but chances are the further the birthplace was away from the enumerated place, the less likely it was that he had heard of it before

Hi Bart With a view to keeping it simple You say you have the marriage certificate for the 1849 marriage ? George MARKHAM to Rebecca ENGLAND What did George give for his occupation ? What did George give for his fathers name and occupation ? What was the address given at the time of marriage ? I will reply separately regarding George MARKHAM in the intervening census Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK)

MS = male servant FS = female servant ________________________________ From: Lesley O'Connell <lesleyo@tesco.net> To: Bart Simon <thewanderer@iburst.co.za>; eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com Sent: Sunday, 13 May 2012, 16:08 Subject: Re: [LIN] Rebecca England in Census 1841: Aged 20 years of Louth lincs[!!!] Rebecca is not with her family but appears to be in some sort of lodging house; all the other people are young. Details are Walkergate Joseph Cash 25 Carrier Y Desdemona Cash  20    Y John Harrison  20 M S  Y Henry Green  20 M S    Y Richard Dales 15 M S    Y Rebecca England 20 Dressmaker Y Ann Tranes? 15 F S        Y As you probably know,  in the 1841 census the ages of adults were rounded to the nearest 5 years,  but usually down, so most are probably older than shown. Regards Lesley Aveyron, France -----Original Message----- From: Bart Simon Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 1:31 AM To: RW UK ; RW ENG-LINCS Subject: [LIN] Rebecca England in Census 1841: Aged 20 years of Louth lincs[!!!] MGC: OK, let us try to keep this simple, and if we don't have the answer, keep the question. Can we get the full text or info from the record from the Census 1841 where it gives one Rebecca England to be 20 years old in Louth, and where we can see who else is there, parents etc. Who is in the household and so on ?. This is a stopping point .... .... .... - S.K.M. - [!!!] =================================== ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Rebecca is not with her family but appears to be in some sort of lodging house; all the other people are young. Details are Walkergate Joseph Cash 25 Carrier Y Desdemona Cash 20 Y John Harrison 20 M S Y Henry Green 20 M S Y Richard Dales 15 M S Y Rebecca England 20 Dressmaker Y Ann Tranes? 15 F S Y As you probably know, in the 1841 census the ages of adults were rounded to the nearest 5 years, but usually down, so most are probably older than shown. Regards Lesley Aveyron, France -----Original Message----- From: Bart Simon Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 1:31 AM To: RW UK ; RW ENG-LINCS Subject: [LIN] Rebecca England in Census 1841: Aged 20 years of Louth lincs[!!!] MGC: OK, let us try to keep this simple, and if we don't have the answer, keep the question. Can we get the full text or info from the record from the Census 1841 where it gives one Rebecca England to be 20 years old in Louth, and where we can see who else is there, parents etc. Who is in the household and so on ?. This is a stopping point .... .... .... - S.K.M. - [!!!] ===================================

Re workhouses, my ggggrandfather was in one in his old age and died there. His body was collected by his son's family and I and my cousin assume he was in there for the care available. I have been on the Workhouse list and read there that people often used it as a hospital, especially for having their children, as the same doctors and surgeons worked there as in the hospitals, which most people couldn't afford. So George Markham may have been there for care in his old age. Regards Jan Marchant ----- Original Message ----- From: "Victor Markham" <victor@markham.me.uk> To: "Bart Simon" <thewanderer@iburst.co.za>; <markham-uk@rootsweb.com> Cc: <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 9:28 AM Subject: Re: [LIN] [MARKHAM-UK] George Markham b:1823 Louth Lincs [!!!] >I have been reading an article about the workhouse. This was about a > book that has been written. > The article states that a lot of people were on parish relief. If they > were fit to work they were expected to. If they wouldn't work they would > no longer get parish relief and instead placed in the workhouse. It was > a way to persuade people to come off parish relief (or state benefits in > modern day jargon). Those listed as an inmate in the workhouse would be > because they have no means of support. This could be why George Markham > is an inmate in the workhouse. > > The book is called 'I'm a pauper get me out of here' by Tony Cherry and > is available from Thornbury and District Museum > (www.thornburymuseum.org.uk) > > Victor > > On 13/05/2012 12:09 AM, Bart Simon wrote: >> MGC: >> >> [Firstly the George MARKHAM who was born circa 1824 Louth in the 1901 >> census >> is not in prison but in the Woolwich Union (ie the workhouse).]: >> === >> Census 1901: 31 Mar 1901, Plumstead, London, Middlesex, England. >> George Markham b: 1824 Louth, Lincolnshire. >> age: 77, Inmate. *********************** >> birthplace: Louth, Lincolnshire. >> record type: Institution. >> registration district: Woolwich. >> sub-district: Plumstead East. >> ecclesiastical parish: St. Nicholas. >> civil parish: Plumstead. >> county: London, Middlesex. >> === >> It tells me he is aged 77yrs INMATE. I would understand that to mean your >> behind em bars ?. He's in chookie. >> >> [He appears in 1891 as a widower]: Well the GM:1823's wife Rebecca >> (England) >> Markham d:1891. So that would be correct.