Archive for nmfhssouthport.myfreeforum.org North Meols (Southport) Family History Society
 

Donate to our new server appeal.

       nmfhssouthport.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Q to T
André

My families (Rimmer, Rymer, Sumner, Sawyer, Tasker)

I'm looking for any information on the following families (their children, their grandchildren + spouses and parents of spouses):

Robert BLUNDELL & Alice RIMMER married 25-10-1848 North Meols
Peter RIMMER & Ellen (MILLER) TASKER married 09-07-1828 North Meols
James MEADOW(S) & Isabella SUMNER married 14-11-1814 North Meols
Thomas WINROW & Elizabeth/Betty SAWYER married 03-10-1810 North Meols
Elizabeth/Betty (SAWYER) WINROW remarried to James MARSHALL 16-09-1823 Formby
Ellen MILLER & Henry TASKER married 28-10-1806 North Meols
Barnaby MARSHALL & Mary RYMER married 30-01-1810 North Meols
Thomas RYMER & Alice HOWARD married 10-09-1788 North Meols
Thomas SUMNER & Ellen CADWELL married 30-06-1794 North Meols
Thomas SAWYER & Priscilla JOHNSON married 05-11-1777 North Meols
James MARSHALL & Jane RYMER married 21-07-1766 North Meols
Thomas RIMMER/RYMER & Ann BALSHAW married 01-02-1785 North Meols
SeaCopRimmer

......... amd add a few days

However - the Meadows connection rings bells - will reurn :?:
André

SeaCopRimmer wrote:
......... amd add a few days

However - the Meadows connection rings bells - will reurn :?:

By the way, I'm not asking anyone to search for me (busy doing that myself since I joined Ancestry.com), but maybe somebody out there already has a lot of info on any of these families? It may look like a lot, but I've only the one granddad from North Meols and he himself had just three grandparents from the North Meols & Ormskirk area.

There are more Meadows under M to P
tomtasker

I recognize many of the names you listed.  You should check the Park database done by my friend Joyce Otterstrom.  She has over 18,000 names in her database, and it's pretty much confined to the North Meols, Lancashire area.  Go to www.rootsweb.com and under Family Trees enter "Park" in the database search box.  The research is amazing, including wills and bastardy court records, etc.  Good luck.
Dotty

Yoo hoo...

The Park database has a link which is available on the Park thread on this forum.

Joyce has been a boon to me and my family history but I believe you yourself have also been a huge help, Tom, and for that I thank you.

Andre, I am just getting to these families on my tree so I have no 'flesh to add to the bones' yet.  I shall watch and wait!

Dotty    
BrianG

Andre
I think you have links to my database already. Much of it is of course based on Joyce's work, but Tom & I have been busy extending the lines towards 1900 - Meadow(s) Bartons, Sumners, Spencers &  Taskers our speciality
Brian

(PS Thomas Sumner & Ellen Cadwell are my GGGGgrandparents - if you manage to track down Ellen's origins shout very loudly!)
André

BrianG wrote:
Andre
I think you have links to my database already. Much of it is of course based on Joyce's work, but Tom & I have been busy extending the lines towards 1900 - Meadow(s) Bartons, Sumners, Spencers &  Taskers our speciality
Brian

(PS Thomas Sumner & Ellen Cadwell are my GGGGgrandparents - if you manage to track down Ellen's origins shout very loudly!)


I was working on the Taskers in the census returns the other day (the descendants of Henry Tasker and Ellen nee Miller) and will continue with them in the coming week.

I'm still thinking that Ellen Cadwell could be the daughter of Robert Cadwell/Caddel and Isabella but since our Ellen is born 1791-ish according to the census of 1851, she doesn't seem to fit in where she should. There is also no son named after a Robert.

Thomas SUMNER & Ellen CADWELL are my GGGGG-grandparents via Isabella Sumner, Mary Meadows and Edward Parker, Elizabeth Parker, etc.

Andre
BrianG

André wrote:

I was working on the Taskers in the census returns the other day (the descendants of Henry Tasker and Ellen nee Miller) and will continue with them in the coming week.

If you want to take a shortcut anytime feel free to check my stuff - the Rootsweb or Tribalpages trees are up-to-date I think, though still plenty more people to chase.

Quote:

I'm still thinking that Ellen Cadwell could be the daughter of Robert Cadwell/Caddel and Isabella but since our Ellen is born 1791-ish according to the census of 1851, she doesn't seem to fit in where she should. There is also no son named after a Robert.

Possibly - seem to recall I thought that the 1791 "slot" in Richard/Isabella's family was already occupied, but there aren't many other options; and if she was from "out of area" I'm sure the 1851 census would have mentioned it.
Brian
Yvonne

Question re Lawrence/Laurence Sumner 1867

Brian and or Andre

I have Laurence 1867 on my tree, son of Robert and Isabella according to census.
Laurence married into my Howard line

Question, have you any idea who Robert's parents are?

I have found a marriage of a Robert and Isabella Campbell in 1861 but that was in Manchester.

Robert on census was born c1838 but cannot see him on 'Park'
BrianG

Hi Yvonne
I don't think I have any of them...if Robert was c 1838 & is not on Park, maybe he was an outsider
Brian
André

BrianG wrote:
If you want to take a shortcut anytime feel free to check my stuff - the Rootsweb or Tribalpages trees are up-to-date I think, though still plenty more people to chase.
Brian


Thanx Brian, I'll make sure I do that as I go along.
Andre
BrianG

André wrote:
I'm still thinking that Ellen Cadwell could be the daughter of Robert Cadwell/Caddel and Isabella but since our Ellen is born 1791-ish according to the census of 1851, she doesn't seem to fit in where she should.
Andre

I agree Robert & Isabel are the prime candidates for Ellen's parents. Her birth year should be around 1771/2 by the 1851 census  (not 1791, she was 79 in 1851)
In the Robert & Isabel production line 1772 is clearly taken by daughter Isabel (chr 7 Jun 1772). However there is another daughter Isabel chr 20 Jan 1788; and I cannot see the death of the first Isabel. Could the first one be a mistake in the register? putting the mother's name in twice??
Just a thought
B
Dotty

Hello

Hi Andre

I have been looking up my St Helens ancestors this week and have had a very good response from their website.      

You have been so good to our forum visitors and I really hope you're successful with your search too, good luck and good hunting!  

TTFN

Dotty    
Bez

BrianG wrote:

In the Robert & Isabel production line 1772 is clearly taken by daughter Isabel (chr 7 Jun 1772). However there is another daughter Isabel chr 20 Jan 1788; and I cannot see the death of the first Isabel. Could the first one be a mistake in the register? putting the mother's name in twice??
Just a thought
B


Hi Brian

I have come across this a lot - the most likely explanation is that the bit of paper that the burial details were written down on before someone entered them into the register simply got lost.  I have lots of lines with no burial record for a child but there is another one later on with the same name.  I know SeaCop can cite one instance of a family with 2 living children who had identical names, but my experience has been that where that happens, the first child with that name has died.  Sometimes you get three and even four with the same name.
SeaCopRimmer

I agree with Bez - generally the first-named has died and the next male/female to be born takes that name;  the instance I have of two 'living' same namers is that the eldest had left home - so the house was without a William
Jane

My Grandma had 2 brothers called Sidney. But the eldest was known as Arthur (his middle name). Obviously her parents really wanted a boy called Sid
BrianG

ah well it was worth a try  
My great-grandfather Nathan Jackson (of whom we have spoken before!) was their third attempt at the name.
Maybe they lost Isabel's burial note AND Ellen's christening - very careless
B
Dotty

Good morning

Hello everybody...it's blurry cold out today.

Hi seacop, good to hear from you.

Well, on a personal note I have had two David's...we liked the name but they had a different second name!  That is the most logical explanation, Brian.

Dotty    
Bez

The other ways to check are with the census and through marriage and burial records - looking for the age of the person - especially the burial records as we all know what happens to the census (they add a few or lose a few years here and there).  Marriage records can be especially frustrating when they just say "of full age".

I have a 2x gr uncle whose wife was called Ellen.  On one census she suddenly lost a lot of years and it turned out that she had died inbetween censuses and he had married again - to another Ellen, so that method isn't quite foolproof but when children are still at home it should be a good indication.
BrianG

Bez wrote:
The other ways to check are with the census and through marriage and burial records - looking for the age of the person - especially the burial records as we all know what happens to the census (they add a few or lose a few years here and there).  Marriage records can be especially frustrating when they just say "of full age".

Census records for Ellen are:
1841, age 70 - living with James & Betty Halsall (Betty Sumner is her daughter) She remarried (& widowed again) and is listed as Ellen Wright
1851, age 79 - still with James & Betty
1861 - missing presumed dead
There are 5 x Ellen Wrights in the bmd for 1851-61
If anyone can spot her in the burials, presumably as Ellen Wright (& anyone else in with her, who could be Wrights, Sumners or Halsalls) there are at least two people here who would be very grateful)
Brian
Bez

Not buried at St Cuthbert's anyway.  There are 4 Ellen Wright's in that time frame but the oldest of them is only 66.  It would have to be one of the other Southport Churches which had a graveyard - no cemetery until December 1865.

It wasn't Chapel Street Burial Ground either - there is only one Ellen Wright, aged 5, who died as a consequence of catching fire.
BrianG

Bez wrote:
Not buried at St Cuthbert's anyway.  There are 4 Ellen Wright's in that time frame but the oldest of them is only 66.  It would have to be one of the other Southport Churches which had a graveyard - no cemetery until December 1865.

It wasn't Chapel Street Burial Ground either - there is only one Ellen Wright, aged 5, who died as a consequence of catching fire.

hmmm....
presumably that accounts for the 5 in the civil bmd records
Our Ellen really does not want to be found
Thanks for looking
Brian
Jane

I have checked Christchurch - not there. No Ellen Wright for that time frame

Holy Trinity
One buried June 1853 aged 31 & half
Nov 1857 - an infant


When I looked for burial records to transcribe there were only the 3 graveyards available in Lancashire Record Office
BrianG

hang on - I make that 7 burials so far but only 5 registrations  
Jane

Um that is odd.................maybe some were missed from the GRO index.

Or the infants didn't need to be registered. No breathe, no registration needed but they were buried in an existing grave with other family members.

Unless anyone else knows anything different

Ah husband just said maybe they died elsewhere but buried in Southport..........so they would be registered in a different region.
baxtersp

Although the Civil Registration Index starts in 1837, it wasn't made compulsory to register births and deaths until 1875 when the Birth and Death Act 1874 became law.
BrianG

I reckon they buried her in the back yard
Bez

baxtersp wrote:
Although the Civil Registration Index starts in 1837, it wasn't made compulsory to register births and deaths until 1875 when the Birth and Death Act 1874 became law.


According to the staff at the GRO registration was compulsory from 1st January 1874.

But that is a good point - it may simply not have been registered.

That, of course, applies to any birth, marriage or death record which you may be trying to find prior to 1874 - my original query at the GRO was for a marriage - there was a church ceremony but it wasn't registered and I wondered if it was legal.  The answer is that it was perfectly legal at that time (1850's) as registration wasn't compulsory then.  The marriage wasn't registered because the parties concerned were very poor and couldn't afford to pay the registrar to attend the RC church where the marriage took place.  C of E marriages were registered automatically.

You might also consider spurious birth registrations where children who were never actually born were registered when the registrars or their assistants went out and knocked on doors to find any new births which should be registered. They were payed 1/- per registration so some of them increased their earnings by entering fictitious children.
Bez

BrianG wrote:
I reckon they buried her in the back yard


Still perfectly legal today, Brian.  You just need to have the correct paperwork, the permission of the landowner, and you mustn't pollute a water course.  Also you mustn't bury so many people that it constitutes a change of use for the land.

We have the Quakers to thank for that.
Dotty

Wow...

Well that was an interesting few posts...      

Dotty

       nmfhssouthport.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Q to T
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum