I too have found one like this in my tree. The groom gave a name and occupation for his father at his marriage. When I eventually found the man/boy back through the censuses I discovered he was living with his grandparents, noted as grandson, in each census. The grandfathers name and occupation exactly match that given on the marriage certificate. A check of his birth cert. confirmed he was illegitimate, mothers name only on the birth cert. The family were renowned builders of a certain type of fishing boat in the North East of England and were prominent in the town where they lived so hiding up an illegitimate birth would have been important to them I imagine. The grandmother was just young enough to have a child at that time. But her daughters name appears on the birth cert of the boy. The mother married a couple of years later but did not take her illegitimate son to live with her and her husband so I can only assume that the husband was not the boys father and perhaps the mother never told her husband that she had already got a son by someone else, who knows? Regards Jenny DeAngelis. Spain. <<I think that perhaps her mother was EMMA BAILEY and she gave her grandfathers name as her father on the wedding certificate as her bought her up. Is this a logical theory? Thanks in advance Karen >>

Hi Michael You say you have checked the "most obvious" places for the burial. It would be helpful if you could let us know which these are, so we can suggest some others. Best wishes Caroline > -----Original Message----- > From: essex-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:essex-uk- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of michael@allbrook.com > Sent: 12 August 2008 10:26 > To: Essex-UK@rootsweb.com > Subject: [Ess] Oakden > > My great great grandparents Elizabeth and Robert Oakden were living at > the > Bakers Alms Houses in Leyton when she died on 25 June 1876. He had > moved > out and is described as dying in Walthamstow on 15 January 1878. No > address > just an area. > I have checked the burial grounds that appear the most obvious to me > including the City of London Cemetery. > Can anyone tell me where I should look for their burials? I suspect > they > were Church of England. I have a sneaky suspicion that he, at least, > had > an excessive enthusiasm for alcohol! > Michael Allbrook > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Any problems, please contact the List Admin: Essex-UK- > admin@rootsweb.com > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ESSEX-UK- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message

Not wishing to offend anyone but could it be that some children were born out of incest? Or would it be more likely that if this was the case then the grandfather or father of the child's mother wouldn't have admitted to it? Regards Diana

My great great grandparents Elizabeth and Robert Oakden were living at the Bakers Alms Houses in Leyton when she died on 25 June 1876. He had moved out and is described as dying in Walthamstow on 15 January 1878. No address just an area. I have checked the burial grounds that appear the most obvious to me including the City of London Cemetery. Can anyone tell me where I should look for their burials? I suspect they were Church of England. I have a sneaky suspicion that he, at least, had an excessive enthusiasm for alcohol! Michael Allbrook

As the 1834 Poor Law joined neighbouring areas up into regions called Unions, a Union House would indeed be a workhouse. -----Original Message----- From: essex-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:essex-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Karen Massey Sent: 11 August 2008 20:51 To: essex-uk@rootsweb.com Subject: [Ess] Union House Orsett PS the address on the birth certificate with EMMA BAILEY as the mother was Union House Orsett. Any ideas if this was some sort of workhouse? Many thanks yet again!! From: karen_staines@hotmail.com To: essex-uk@rootsweb.com Subject: Grandfather named as father on marriage cert? Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:30:32 +0100 My ancester Sarah Ann Bailey was born in Orsett around 1850 and i want to trace her parents. On the census i found her living with her grandfather WILLIAM BAILEY but never with her parents. I ordered 2 birth certificates that i though it could be, one was definatley wrong whilst the other gave the mother as EMMA BAILEY and Father as Unknown. William Bailey had a daughter called Emma so this is possible. I also ordered Sarah's wedding certificate and the father named on it was WILLIAM BAILEY. The grandfather WILLIAM also had a son called WILLIAM. Confused yet??!! The second william would have only been 14 when Sarah was born. I think that perhaps her mother was EMMA BAILEY and she gave her grandfathers name as her father on the wedding certificate as her bought her up. Is this a logical theory? Thanks in advance Karen Win £3000 to spend on whatever you want at Uni! Click here to WIN! _________________________________________________________________ Make a mini you on Windows Live Messenger! http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/107571437/direct/01/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Any problems, please contact the List Admin: Essex-UK-admin@rootsweb.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ESSEX-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.0/1602 - Release Date: 09/08/2008 13:22 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.0/1602 - Release Date: 09/08/2008 13:22

Yes, very plausible. It would suggest that the mother (daughter) was unmarried at the time of birth, so to save face her parents stepped in and tried to cover up the tracks. I have an ancestor who I believe was really the daughter of her eldest sister rather than her (grand)parents as stated on the B cert; the elder sister married who I suspect the father is about a year later and went on to have a very numerous family with him - but I suspect that her eldest might never have known who her real parents were. What put me onto the scent was finding the eldest daughter living with her grandparents when the child was a few months old, but listed at the end of the household with the occupation of Servant. In other words, she must have been in disgrace! Lawrence -----Original Message----- From: essex-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:essex-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Karen Massey Sent: 11 August 2008 20:31 To: essex-uk@rootsweb.com Subject: [Ess] Grandfather named as father on marriage cert? My ancester Sarah Ann Bailey was born in Orsett around 1850 and i want to trace her parents. On the census i found her living with her grandfather WILLIAM BAILEY but never with her parents. I ordered 2 birth certificates that i though it could be, one was definatley wrong whilst the other gave the mother as EMMA BAILEY and Father as Unknown. William Bailey had a daughter called Emma so this is possible. I also ordered Sarah's wedding certificate and the father named on it was WILLIAM BAILEY. The grandfather WILLIAM also had a son called WILLIAM. Confused yet??!! The second william would have only been 14 when Sarah was born. I think that perhaps her mother was EMMA BAILEY and she gave her grandfathers name as her father on the wedding certificate as her bought her up. Is this a logical theory? Thanks in advance Karen _________________________________________________________________ Win New York holidays with Kellogg’s & Live Search http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/107571440/direct/01/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Any problems, please contact the List Admin: Essex-UK-admin@rootsweb.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ESSEX-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.0/1602 - Release Date: 09/08/2008 13:22 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.0/1602 - Release Date: 09/08/2008 13:22

The New Poor Law of 1834 meant that able bodied poor could only receive assistance in workhouses. Parishes generally formed unions to build new workhouses. The following site is very useful for workhouse information: http://www.workhouses.org.uk Orsett Union House is covered at: http://www.workhouses.org.uk/index.html?Orsett/Orsett.shtml Ray Karen Massey <karen_staines@hotmail.com> wrote: PS the address on the birth certificate with EMMA BAILEY as the mother was Union House Orsett. Any ideas if this was some sort of workhouse? Many thanks yet again!! From: karen_staines@hotmail.com To: essex-uk@rootsweb.com Subject: Grandfather named as father on marriage cert? Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:30:32 +0100 My ancester Sarah Ann Bailey was born in Orsett around 1850 and i want to trace her parents. On the census i found her living with her grandfather WILLIAM BAILEY but never with her parents. I ordered 2 birth certificates that i though it could be, one was definatley wrong whilst the other gave the mother as EMMA BAILEY and Father as Unknown. William Bailey had a daughter called Emma so this is possible. I also ordered Sarah's wedding certificate and the father named on it was WILLIAM BAILEY. The grandfather WILLIAM also had a son called WILLIAM. Confused yet??!! The second william would have only been 14 when Sarah was born. I think that perhaps her mother was EMMA BAILEY and she gave her grandfathers name as her father on the wedding certificate as her bought her up. Is this a logical theory? Thanks in advance Karen Win £3000 to spend on whatever you want at Uni! Click here to WIN! _________________________________________________________________ Make a mini you on Windows Live Messenger! http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/107571437/direct/01/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Any problems, please contact the List Admin: Essex-UK-admin@rootsweb.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ESSEX-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

PS the address on the birth certificate with EMMA BAILEY as the mother was Union House Orsett. Any ideas if this was some sort of workhouse? Many thanks yet again!! From: karen_staines@hotmail.com To: essex-uk@rootsweb.com Subject: Grandfather named as father on marriage cert? Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:30:32 +0100 My ancester Sarah Ann Bailey was born in Orsett around 1850 and i want to trace her parents. On the census i found her living with her grandfather WILLIAM BAILEY but never with her parents. I ordered 2 birth certificates that i though it could be, one was definatley wrong whilst the other gave the mother as EMMA BAILEY and Father as Unknown. William Bailey had a daughter called Emma so this is possible. I also ordered Sarah's wedding certificate and the father named on it was WILLIAM BAILEY. The grandfather WILLIAM also had a son called WILLIAM. Confused yet??!! The second william would have only been 14 when Sarah was born. I think that perhaps her mother was EMMA BAILEY and she gave her grandfathers name as her father on the wedding certificate as her bought her up. Is this a logical theory? Thanks in advance Karen Win £3000 to spend on whatever you want at Uni! Click here to WIN! _________________________________________________________________ Make a mini you on Windows Live Messenger! http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/107571437/direct/01/

My ancester Sarah Ann Bailey was born in Orsett around 1850 and i want to trace her parents. On the census i found her living with her grandfather WILLIAM BAILEY but never with her parents. I ordered 2 birth certificates that i though it could be, one was definatley wrong whilst the other gave the mother as EMMA BAILEY and Father as Unknown. William Bailey had a daughter called Emma so this is possible. I also ordered Sarah's wedding certificate and the father named on it was WILLIAM BAILEY. The grandfather WILLIAM also had a son called WILLIAM. Confused yet??!! The second william would have only been 14 when Sarah was born. I think that perhaps her mother was EMMA BAILEY and she gave her grandfathers name as her father on the wedding certificate as her bought her up. Is this a logical theory? Thanks in advance Karen _________________________________________________________________ Win New York holidays with Kellogg’s & Live Search http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/107571440/direct/01/

Does anyone know how to reach Neal Haze, we exchanged emails in the past but I have been out of commission for a long time and would like to resume my research. His William Thomas Metcalfe married my Mahala Googe and they moved from Brightlingsea to Deptford. Reposting surnames: GOOGE, FRENCH, COPSEY, PATRICK, METCALFE, CUTTING AND WOODS etc Thank you all. Betty Googe Dickson

In a message dated 11/08/2008 20:31:22 GMT Standard Time, karen_staines@hotmail.com writes: I think that perhaps her mother was EMMA BAILEY and she gave her grandfathers name as her father on the wedding certificate as her bought her up. Is this a logical theory? I have a similar case, it was not unusual for a grandfather, brother or uncle to be named as father on a marriage certificate, It was a way of covering up illegitimacy. Regards, Jennifer

"Meagre Harvest" by A F J Brown, published by Essex Records Office 1990 and available on line from them at £8.95 They have a quantity in stock. David

I would like to have more information about this account. Is it included in a book? Thank you. Carolyn On 8-Aug-08, at 1:51 PM, David Parker wrote: > I am reading an account of the struggles of Essex Farm workers > during the period 1750 to 1914. > > In the early chapters it talks of a fire in 1822 at Great Clacton > causing £1,200 damage and at Dovercourt. Incendiarism was used as a > protest in an effort to avoid identification. In reference of the > Swing Riots, some eight years later, it mentions a fire at Ramsey, > with the arrest of several prisoners, and then continues "Besides > Ramsey eleven other villages were affected, particularly Great and > Little Clacton, Great Holland, Kirby, Tendring Thorpe-le-Soken, and > Walton. An eye witness reported "Kirby and Clacton are in a complete > state of insurrection, some of the labourers declaring that they > could help themselves and they would do so.' This exaggeration was > probably occasioned by the sight of the whole labouring population > parading without hindrance through their villages: at least a > hundred marched at Great Holland, 140 at Little Clacton, 150 at > Tendring, 200 at Ramsey and 300 at Walton" > > This is the area in which my wife's ancestors were living and > working and maybe rioting. I can find no record of any of them > being arrested, charged, tried or sentenced for any riotous > behaviour, but bearing in mind the living and working conditions, > the passions and the numbers involved I would be surprised if they > had not been included at least in the marching. Can anyone suggest > where I can search to learn if any were more active. > > Thank you > > David. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Any problems, please contact the List Admin: Essex-UK-admin@rootsweb.com > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ESSEX-UK-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message

He himself is almost old enough to marry, the legal age for boys being only 14 at that time, so yes, he would have been old enough provided he understood what it was he was witnessing. Geo. Hello Tony, > The problem I have is that in 1700, Thomas would have only been around > 13. Would that have been old enough to act as a Witness?

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 15:12:12 +0100 "Chris Dickinson" <chris@dickinson.uk.net> wrote: Hello Chris, > Fair enough. I had a suspicion I was about to be corrected :-) :-) It would only have required me to find one instance of Sarah Maria. The extra 406 were a bonus. :-)) -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" I'm spending all my money and it's going up my nose Teenage Depression - Eddie & The Hot Rods

Brad Rogers wrote in reply to my: > >> Although |Sarah Maria| wouldn't today be a double forename, |Sarah > > Between 1984 and 2005, 407 people have been registered with the name(s) > Sarah Maria. Admittedly, it's not as popular combo as Sarah Jane, at > 17,753 for the same period. Fair enough. I had a suspicion I was about to be corrected :-) Chris

On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 12:31:06 +0100 Tony Pottrell <editor@pyroport.com> wrote: Hello Tony, > The problem I have is that in 1700, Thomas would have only been around > 13. Would that have been old enough to act as a Witness? Yes. The criterion for being a witness is that the person understand what they're witnessing; Be it marriage, will, or whatever. I know of people with marriage witnesses as young as seven in their ancestry. I'm not 100% certain, but suspect that the only reason we don't see young witnesses to wills these days is due to the possibility of some legal challenge, whereby only lawyers would win. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" Going round on the Circle Line trying to find a way out Titanic (My Over) Reaction - 999

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 13:54:13 +0100 "Chris Dickinson" <chris@dickinson.uk.net> wrote: Hello Chris, > Although |Sarah Maria| wouldn't today be a double forename, |Sarah Between 1984 and 2005, 407 people have been registered with the name(s) Sarah Maria. Admittedly, it's not as popular combo as Sarah Jane, at 17,753 for the same period. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" Watching the people get lairy I Predict A Riot - Kaiser Chiefs

My thanks to everyone for their comments on this question. Tony suggested another parish and I did check Dovercourt. The parish records for Harwich are awful for many years. Obviously completed ages after the event as, at best, not in chronological order and both baptisms and marriages with a gap where the surname should be. The worst is a comment by a vicar in the late 1600s who noted that many years of burials had never been entered. Another example are years where there are many births and deaths but in other close years, only a few, which appears to indicate entries were not included. Having said that the registers for the years in question are not too badly kept. Jo suggested two burials of Sarahs and I had checked both but the parents were different and anyway both these burials were after the second Sarah was born. I think I'll go along with the majority suggestion that they simply named two daughters the same, for whatever reason. This family appeared to follow a naming pattern; first son after the father, second son after a grandfather, first daughter after the mother and second daughter after a grandmother. So the first Sarah named after the mother and the second Sarah named after both grandmothers - Sarah and Mary. Thanks again Diane

Diane Wynne wrote: <snip> > I think I'll go along with the majority suggestion that they simply named > two daughters the same, for whatever reason. <snip> I haven't followed this thread, but I think that you originally stated that the children were named |Sarah| and |Sarah Maria|. These aren't the same. Although |Sarah Maria| wouldn't today be a double forename, |Sarah Jane| would. Chris