Currently my mind is buzzing with the details of 3 different aspects of my research – which is why this blog is so useful to me . It forces me to organise my thoughts into a coherent written form and also acts as a printable record. Of course, I do have myriad pieces of paper with various bits of information on them floating around, but after a few days I find I a) cannot read my own writing and/or b) haven’t the faintest idea what it is all about anyway.
So here goes – the first matter in hand is that I have discovered more children belonging to James & Anne Hooker, so I will be amending my previous blog to incorporate them.
The second matter is that I have received the certificates regarding Emma Edwards/Sharp & family and there is a very interesting tale to be told there.
The third matter is a revival of interest in William Henry Hooker born 1793. My contact Sam & I have suspected he may have been the brother of our elusive ancestor Robert and more information on him may help us with Robert. I have found some more information on him, and although it is not conclusive, it does take us a little nearer…
Now I know all my avid readers will be positively agog by now, so I will deal with these matters as soon as possible 🙂
Recently I had the great pleasure of meeting up with my contact Sam who was in Adelaide for a few days. Needless to say, with our mutual interest in the Hooker families, we had plenty to talk about and the time just flew by. Inspired by her visit, I have decided to tackle once again the task of sorting out, if at all possible, the relationships between the many Hookers living in London in 1841.
So far, I have identified 1 family – that of James Hooker born 1771 in Shoreditch (a watchmaker by profession) and his wife Anne (1776-1838).
Their children are as follows:- (1841 or 1851 census details are in brackets)
1795 – James, born St. Luke – (1841 nothing, 1851 – born 1796, living in Shoreditch, watchmaker).
1797 – Anne Charlotte, born Finsbury – no further information.
1799-1814 – Joseph, born Finsbury, died Shoreditch.
1802 – Charles, born Finsbury – (1841 nothing, 1851 – born 1802, living in Stoke Newington, corn chandler).
1805 – William, born Shoreditch – no further information.
1808-1809 – Newman, born Shoreditch, died Shoreditch.
1811 – George, born Shoreditch – (1841 – born 1811, living in Shoreditch, artificial flower maker)
1814 – Henry, born Shoreditch – (1841 – born 1811, living in Shoreditch, type founder)
1816 -Joseph Thomas, born Shoreditch – (1841 – born 1821, living in Shoreditch, type founder)
1818-1819 -Rosetta, born Shoreditch, died Shoreditch.
1821 – Edward, born Shoreditch – (1841 – born 1821, living in Shoreditch, watchmaker)
The 1841 census takers often rounded ages up or down to the nearest 5 (another Jaunay pearl of wisdom, see previous post) so the ages do not always correspond with parish records.
I am trying very hard to resist the temptation to follow the children through to later years, or to explore backwards from James & Anne. For the moment, I want to sort out family relationships in the 1841 census – something both Sam & I think could be quite illuminating. Our ultimate aim, of course, is to see if we can fit our ancestor Robert Hooker, whose birth & parents remain elusive, into one of these families.
I recently attended an excellent lecture on researching Scottish family history given by Graham Jaunay . He is an Adelaide genealogist and what he doesn’t know ain’t worth knowing, as they say. Amongst the huge amount of information he gave us, there was a little pearl of wisdom re the 1841 censuses – that is, in those censuses, if you weren’t at home when the census man called, you weren’t counted at all. This explains why I have been unable to find various people eg James Hooker born 1821.
I think I may have found out why my maternal great grandparents (George Hutchings and Elizabeth Sarah Edwards) seemed to totally disappear after 1881. I sent away for a possible death certificate for George and when it came back it revealed he had died in the Maidstone Lunatic Asylum in 1898, so I checked the 1891 census for the same location and discovered that only the initials of inmates were included in the census, hence his not showing up on my previous searches. I found a suitable candidate there, so that took care of George.
As the two of them had never actually married, I decided to resume my search for Elizabeth Sarah under her maiden name, as I had found nothing under the name of Hutchings after 1881 (despite her appearing in previous censuses with that name). I still could find no sign of her in the later censuses and no death notice either, so I guessed she may have changed her name and the most common reason for that with a female is, of course, marriage.
I then found a marriage to a James Eaton Barty, a widower, which fitted the bill – her name, place of birth, date of birth and name of father all fitted and she was listed as a spinster, which technically she was, despite having lived with George for many years and bearing a number of children to him (including my grandfather Aaron Edwards).
So, that is how two people can apparently disappear from the records – and I think that mystery is solved.
I will put all this on my growing family tree on Ancestry.com and hope that someone there will recognise James Eaton Barty (he does appear on some of the family trees there) and confirm my deductions.
I have decided to stop working on my father’s side for now and turn my attantion to my mother’s. I began my family history research with my mother’s side many years ago so it will be interesting to see how much more information is available now and to check on the research I did then – I’m sure I will come across a few inconsistencies. I am suddenly re-enthused!
I have received the death certificate for William. Interestingly, his home address was given as 19 Allerton Street, East Road, City Road – is this the same as 19 Allerton Street Hoxton New Town, where his wife and family lived for many years? It seems very likely (Sam, where are you when I need you? ) – if it is, then it shows he was still in touch with his family despite his absences in previous censuses.
Even more interesting, when I described the cause of death “exhaustion of dementia and senile decay with cerebral softening” to a retired doctor friend of mine, she said “did he have syphilis?” As we think his father and brother did die from this disease, it seems very likely he did too – and he died in Friern Barnet Lunatic Asylum!
Perhaps his previous absences could be explained by an investigation of this hospital’s records, but I’d have to go to London to access them!
I will be putting all details and copies of certificates (also have his wife’s death cetificate) online soon, my main computer is out of action at the moment.
A blast from my past!
This man has resisted all my efforts to find him after 1851. In later censuses his wife is the head of the household, but is described as married, not widowed, so he must be around somewhere. I have a possible death for him in 1889, so I will send for the certificate and then move on, before I go mad!
Ok, it’s November and I’m back at it again – have to start from scratch as I seem to have forgotten a lot. This time I’ll work backwards, starting with Robert Hooker and Elizabeth Cleaver and try to expand the family tree on Ancestry.com.
My many avid readers may have noticed a lack of activity on this blog since about May – sorry to say, this will continue for another few months, hope to be back in November with renewed enthusiasm. Can you stand the waiting? 🙂
Family matters. 