In message <[email protected]>, Donald Tomkinson <[email protected]> writes >In 1631 Thomas Tomkinson was appointed a "searcher and sealer of >leather" in Newcastle under Lyme. I'd be grateful for an explanation >of the duties of the office. Tagging the skins as submitted by size and quality, as first, second, third, rough, really shoddy but will do for pauper's slippers.- so the prices charged matched the quality and no one could put one over on a short sighted buyer by turning a damaged edge under. >I assume that it was connected with >assessing the qualities of leather. Would it also imply that Thomas >was a cordwainer or a tanner? On the whole, I would expect a highly experienced tanner to be appointed - though, of course, a highly experienced shoe maker would have good standards in judging quality. > -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

In message <[email protected]>, Donald Tomkinson <[email protected]> writes >Is it possible to give a probable age for the commencement of an >apprenticeship in 1636, for the trades of a tanner and and also a >cordwainer? Normally speaking, 14 was the age for apprenticeship to a normal craft trade. The standard length of apprenticeship was 7 years, after which there would be a period as journeyman, worked for a master and paid by the day, then, if his father could finance the move, he might become a master himself. > >Also, Martin Tomkinson, son of Thomas Tomkinson, cordwainer, was >apprenticed to Richard Hayward, freemason, in 1636. Was "freemason" a >stone mason at that time? Yes - it is complicated by the later meanings, but it appears that a free mason was an independent master, but not a static one located in one ton always; he tended to be one who moved from one contract job to another. (Windsor Castle today, Hampton Court three years later, Longleat four years after that). It is worth trying State Papers Domestic, since if he ever worked on one of the royal palaces or similar public building, his contract fee and even extra perks may be mentioned. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

I have a copy of a removal order, from 1725, in which the churchwardens and overseers of the poor are commanded 'to remove and convey the said Mary Beaves and Anne Beaves from the said parish of St Saviour Southwark to the said parish of East Grinstead.' There is no mention of family relationships or status in the order but I believe (from a will) that Mary and Ann were quite young girls (baptisms not yet found). My question is, what is the youngest age at which children could be treated separately from their parents (who I believe were still alive at the time)? Could the word 'convey' in the order imply that they were too young to travel unaccompanied? Of course, this may not be 'my' Mary and Anne. Brian Steadman

To Admin I cant find the rootsweb link page for subscribing and unsubscribing you were listed under miscanlaneous but have vanished Chris Glass

In message <[email protected][206.172.98.42]>, John and Margaret Moore <[email protected]> writes >Can anyone tell me when the English habit of referring to the eldest >daughter as Miss Smith and her younger sisters as Miss Frances Smith, >Miss Elizabeth Smith, etc. died out? I ask because I seem to have >found an early 20th -century example here in Canada. It died out for practical purposes by 1910/1914, when the large households of unmarried adult daughters were declining. But I recall a household of three unmarried sisters in their 70-80s in the 1940s, known as Miss Marsh, Miss Carrie and Miss Annie. Miss Marsh used to complain about it in a mild way - 'No one ever calls me Mary now except the girls'. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

Thank you John, I take your point but as this is not really a subject for this list I will say no more except that I deduced my opinion from various Freemasonry web sites. Many Thanks Roy -----Original Message----- From: John [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 13 August 2006 20:28 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [OEL] SEALER OF LEATHER At 20:06 13/08/2006, Roy wrote: >Whether or not this indicates a founding before Christ is debateable >and certainly thought provoking but whilst Freemasonry has no >affiliation to Stone Masonry, a Stone Mason may well be a Freemason in his own right. Er, no Roy, a free mason was exactly that, a mason free from ties to a master. Have you never wondered why the Freemasons paraphernalia includes the working tools of a mason? In 1636 a freemason would most certainly be nothing other than a worker in stone as the masonic orders had yet to come into being. John ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== To UNSUBSCRIBE from list mode -- Send the one word UNSUBSCRIBE to [email protected] -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.9/416 - Release Date: 10/08/2006

At 20:06 13/08/2006, Roy wrote: >Whether or not this indicates a founding before Christ is debateable and >certainly thought provoking but whilst Freemasonry has no affiliation to >Stone Masonry, a Stone Mason may well be a Freemason in his own right. Er, no Roy, a free mason was exactly that, a mason free from ties to a master. Have you never wondered why the Freemasons paraphernalia includes the working tools of a mason? In 1636 a freemason would most certainly be nothing other than a worker in stone as the masonic orders had yet to come into being. John

Good Evening - Could this be someone who not only seals (tans) leather but also trades in hides, searching for the best before tanning. Freemasonry is the oldest of associations that exist I believe, and the thinking is as in the following quote: "The principles of FREEMASONRY are founded on the choosing of Abraham the Father of Judaism - ISLAM- CHRISTIANITY, to follow the MASONIC path of there being one Creator of the Universe." Whether or not this indicates a founding before Christ is debateable and certainly thought provoking but whilst Freemasonry has no affiliation to Stone Masonry, a Stone Mason may well be a Freemason in his own right. Kind Regards Roy LD Cox Family Historian Member of SA&NHS Member No. 1066 (And all That!) Web Site: www.coxresearcher.com/index.htm I also use www.archivecdbooks.com and www.localhistory.co.uk/ambra for my research -----Original Message----- From: Norman Lee [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 5:01 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OEL] SEALER OF LEATHER Sounds more like a tanner, doesn't it. I think perhaps the best thing is to look for a web site for the guilds of each occupation. They may well have the history. Apprenticeship for some began at seven and you became a journeyman at 21, although I wait for correction on this. I think that the freemason may have been an occupational status title but, again, I'd look to find a guild site for stone masons. I believe the Duke of Sussex was the man who originated the society of freemasons but don't know when that began. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Tomkinson" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 4:07 PM Subject: [OEL] SEALER OF LEATHER > In 1631 Thomas Tomkinson was appointed a "searcher and sealer of > leather" in Newcastle under Lyme. I'd be grateful for an explanation > of the duties of the office. I assume that it was connected with > assessing the qualities of leather. Would it also imply that Thomas > was a cordwainer or a tanner? > > Don Tomkinson > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > THREADED archives for OLD-ENGLISH: > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 268.10.9/416 - Release Date: 10/08/2006 > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== OLD-ENGLISH Web Page http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.9/416 - Release Date: 10/08/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.9/416 - Release Date: 10/08/2006

Sounds more like a tanner, doesn't it. I think perhaps the best thing is to look for a web site for the guilds of each occupation. They may well have the history. Apprenticeship for some began at seven and you became a journeyman at 21, although I wait for correction on this. I think that the freemason may have been an occupational status title but, again, I'd look to find a guild site for stone masons. I believe the Duke of Sussex was the man who originated the society of freemasons but don't know when that began. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Tomkinson" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 4:07 PM Subject: [OEL] SEALER OF LEATHER > In 1631 Thomas Tomkinson was appointed a "searcher and sealer of > leather" in Newcastle under Lyme. I'd be grateful for an explanation > of the duties of the office. I assume that it was connected with > assessing the qualities of leather. Would it also imply that Thomas > was a cordwainer or a tanner? > > Don Tomkinson > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > THREADED archives for OLD-ENGLISH: > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 268.10.9/416 - Release Date: 10/08/2006 > >

In 1631 Thomas Tomkinson was appointed a "searcher and sealer of leather" in Newcastle under Lyme. I'd be grateful for an explanation of the duties of the office. I assume that it was connected with assessing the qualities of leather. Would it also imply that Thomas was a cordwainer or a tanner? Don Tomkinson

Is it possible to give a probable age for the commencement of an apprenticeship in 1636, for the trades of a tanner and and also a cordwainer? Also, Martin Tomkinson, son of Thomas Tomkinson, cordwainer, was apprenticed to Richard Hayward, freemason, in 1636. Was "freemason" a stone mason at that time? I would appreciate any information. Don Tomkinson

I wasn't aware that it had died out, although I suspect that the degree of strict compliance has reduced with the increased usage of christian names. Charles Hancock London Quoting John and Margaret Moore <[email protected]>: > Can anyone tell me when the English habit of referring to the eldest > daughter as Miss Smith and her younger sisters as Miss Frances Smith, > Miss Elizabeth Smith, etc. died out? I ask because I seem to have > found an early 20th -century example here in Canada. > > Regards, > John Moore --------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through http://www.easynetdial.co.uk

My mother always taught me that this was the correct way to address people. I think that sons were addressed Mr. Smith and then Mr. John Smith or similar. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "John and Margaret Moore" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 9:39 PM Subject: [OEL] Miss Smith and Miss Frances Smith > Can anyone tell me when the English habit of referring to the eldest > daughter as Miss Smith and her younger sisters as Miss Frances Smith, Miss > Elizabeth Smith, etc. died out? I ask because I seem to have found an > early 20th -century example here in Canada. > > Regards, > John Moore > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > Going away for a while? > Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! > [email protected] > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 268.10.9/416 - Release Date: 10/08/2006 > >

Can anyone tell me when the English habit of referring to the eldest daughter as Miss Smith and her younger sisters as Miss Frances Smith, Miss Elizabeth Smith, etc. died out? I ask because I seem to have found an early 20th -century example here in Canada. Regards, John Moore

Hello Paul I believe that migration to towns was far more complex than poor people being attracted by promises of wealth. Of course, I realise that there were poor people in the countryside too but one of the reasons for migration into the towns was surely not just poverty. The new industry there promised better wages and more prosperous living and different opportunities for all sorts of activities. However, where there are greater concentrations of population you are bound to get larger numbers of every sort, including paupers. You have only to look at the size of the London workhouses compared with the country ones to see that a place like the Isle of Skye was less likely to produce large numbers of pauper apprentices. That is why I was suprised to notice that it was one of the main sources for my local mill together with London's East Enders. One of the main selling points when a mill was advertising for investors was the accommodation for workers and the work force it could attract and rely upon. However, you don't have to be poor in order to work there. When cotton spinning mills were developed, they required a workforce they could put out to for handloom weaving, a skilled occupation. These weavers became quite prosperous. It wasn't until weaving was mechanised that handloom weavers became desperately poor, turned to Luddism and questions were asked in Parliament. The early cotton mills were mostly in rural places where they could take advantage of water power. Their poverty had little to do with the countryside and was more a problem of newer industrial development supplanting old. My other grandfather had a perfectly good job in Lewes but found that he could earn better money and develop his career in London and so migrated there. As far as I can tell, he was never one of the rural poor. He just wanted to better himself. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Prescott" <[email protected]> To: "Norman Lee" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 7:26 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] missing baptisms > Audrey: > >> When Paul talks of Dickens' descriptions of London life and its >> deprivations, >> suggesting that there was plenty of work to be had where men could earn >> reasonable wages and poverty was not so prevalent as he, Dickens, showed >> in >> his novels, he may be right to a certain extent. > > I don't claim that poverty was not as prevalent as Dickens says. I do > claim that, however bad it was in the towns, it was even worse in the > countryside. And my evidence is that people moved voluntarily from the > countryside to the towns in vast numbers. > >> However, my family history >> tells tales that could have come straight from one of Dickens' novels. > > Mine too; and well into the 20th century too. > > Best wishes > > Paul Prescott > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 04/08/2006 > >

There are of course many different church organisations in all countries of the UK, both catholic and protestant, Anglican and otherwise. There are also long-standing congregations of other faiths. In England, the established church is the Church of England, which is a member of the Anglican Communion. See http://www.anglicancommunion.org/tour/index.cfm. This site has links to church organisations in many parts of the world. There are also Roman Catholic churches and cathedrals in England, hence the words of the song (about Liverpool) "if you want a cathedral, we've got one to spare". The situation is different in Scotland - as Nuala says, the Church of Scotland is not Anglican, However, there is "The Scottish Episcopal church", which is Anglican - with cathedrals and bishops. One of their cathedrals is in Glasgow! There are also Anglican churches and cathedrals for both "The Church in Wales" and "The Church of Ireland". Peter Brunning Cambridge, England [email protected] http://www.brunning47.demon.co.uk/peter.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elizabeth Atherton" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] Cathedrals Well there you go. I'd seen cathedrals - Glasgow is a fine example, and assumed that the same arrangement applie as in England & Wales. ... ----- Nuala wrote: Yes they do have some cathedrals, Dunblane and Glasgow come to mind, but no bishops and the congregation of each church chooses it's own minister from those who apply and spend some time preaching and getting to know the people of the parish. The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland meets in Edinburgh and each year picks a Moderator who serves for one year only.

Audrey: > When Paul talks of Dickens' descriptions of London life and its > deprivations, > suggesting that there was plenty of work to be had where men could earn > reasonable wages and poverty was not so prevalent as he, Dickens, showed > in > his novels, he may be right to a certain extent. I don't claim that poverty was not as prevalent as Dickens says. I do claim that, however bad it was in the towns, it was even worse in the countryside. And my evidence is that people moved voluntarily from the countryside to the towns in vast numbers. > However, my family history > tells tales that could have come straight from one of Dickens' novels. Mine too; and well into the 20th century too. Best wishes Paul Prescott

I hadn't thought of that one, John. You're probably right. But he had been in and out of the infirmary from his admittance at the age of not quite two. It was quite encouraging to see him surviving until 18. After that, he disappears from our records. He was the only child to remain in the workhouse. Of the others, the baby, who was a few days old when admitted, remained in the infirmary until she was around a month old and was then transferred to Dr. Barnardo's - their home called Babies' Castle at Hawkhurst in Kent. She died at two and a half months. The older two children, who had been toddlers when their father deserted their mother, were stronger and were released from the "Workhouse School" quite quickly. The girl, then aged ten, was taken into Barnardo's several months later and eventually shipped to Canada. The older boy went to live with his grandparents. His father was also living there but only for a short time. Not long afterwards, helped by his uncle, the boy ran away to sea. The errant "husband" married, describing himself as bachelor on his wedding certificate. Of these four children, two had been left for their mother to care for alone, the other two were disclaimed by the man named as father on their birth certificates and both those admitted to Barnardo's were signed onto the Canada list. In the case of the baby, anytime up till her 21st birthday - something she really didn't need. Their mother had died on admittance into the infirmary from the effects of childbirth. We knew that the children were starving when they were admitted to the workhouse. My grandad told us they were. He also told us how different starving felt to just being hungry. It wasn't until a few years ago that we discovered the details of what had happened, after my grandad was long dead, having survived until he was 86. When Paul talks of Dickens' descriptions of London life and its deprivations, suggesting that there was plenty of work to be had where men could earn reasonable wages and poverty was not so prevalent as he, Dickens, showed in his novels, he may be right to a certain extent. However, my family history tells tales that could have come straight from one of Dickens' novels. I believe that he got a lot of his material from Mayhew's "London Labour and the London Poor". Wherever you get concentrations of population, you are likely to also get extremes and the whole gamute of circumstances from the desperately poor to the very wealthy influential. Fortunately, there were also philanthropists at work. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "John" <[email protected]> To: "Norman Lee" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 2:16 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] missing baptisms > At 12:59 05/08/2006, Norman Lee wrote: >>One of my great uncles spent his life in and out of one of these, finally >>discharged into apprenticeship at the age of 18, although the workhouse's >>records weren't too good and had him down as 15. He probably looked like a >>15 year old due to starvation in early childhood. > > Or more likely, nobody would take an apprentice at 18 years, the workhouse > knowingly lied about his age. > > John > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 04/08/2006 > >

At 12:59 05/08/2006, Norman Lee wrote: >One of my great uncles spent his life in and out of one of these, >finally discharged into apprenticeship at the age of 18, although >the workhouse's records weren't too good and had him down as 15. He >probably looked like a 15 year old due to starvation in early childhood. Or more likely, nobody would take an apprentice at 18 years, the workhouse knowingly lied about his age. John

Realise this, Paul, but the population of the Isle of Skye is rather sparse, isn't it. It was less a question of the poverty, more of the numbers, that surprised me. While I agree that there was plenty of work in London, this doesn't take into account one parent families, men who deserted their "wives", leaving several children with virtually no support except what a worn out woman could supply. When she finally died, they were not only without support but also in a very poor condition. A number of London's hospitals began life as workhouse infirmaries. One of my great uncles spent his life in and out of one of these, finally discharged into apprenticeship at the age of 18, although the workhouse's records weren't too good and had him down as 15. He probably looked like a 15 year old due to starvation in early childhood. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Prescott" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 9:07 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] missing baptisms > Audrey: > >> I have always found that amazing as I can't imagine so many paupers >> being produced by such a rural place as the Isle of Skye. > > It's a common misconception that the poor were in the towns. I think this > derives from all the stories from Victorian times (Charles Dickens, etc) > about how hideous the towns were (which they were by today's standards). > > But at the time of the industrial revolution people flocked from the > countryside to the towns. Why? Because they were better off. The > countryside wasn't idyllic; it was a place of seasonal work and low wages, > particularly after enclosure in England. For all the Satanic mills and > dangerous coalmines, people in the towns had regular work, 52 weeks a > year, at wages far above those in the countryside. > > Best wishes > > Paul Prescott > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 04/08/2006 > >