Here is my situation:
My 3g-grandfather, Charles Keep, lived in Childrey, Berkshire, all his life. He appears in every census from 1841 to 1881, except 1871 which I haven't managed to find yet. In every case, he was living in Childrey as an agricultural labourer, except in 1861 when he was a carter.
His eldest son, my 2g-grandfather, Reuben, married in Marylebone in 1865. Charles appears on the marriage register as a farmer (what a great step up!). So far, everything is straight forward.
I then started looking for Reuben's siblings on the censuses. Some were easy to find but his sister Martha, had me baffled. According to the 1851 census, she was born around 1848. This ties with a birth registered in Wantage in the first quarter of 1848. In fact, she is the only Martha Keep registered in Wantage in a twenty year period 1839-1859 (the period covering the births of all Charles' children).
I cannot find Martha after the 1851 census. There is no death registered in Wantage. Here comes the interesting part: a Martha Constance Keep (don't know where the Constance comes from) married Richard Hambley, butcher, in Battersea in 1869. On the 1871 census, Richard and Martha Hambley are visitors in the home of George and Mary Evans. Martha is listed as being born in Childrey, as are two others in the household: Mary Evans, whose birth tallies with one of the three females called Mary Keep registered in Wantage in the twenty-year period previously mentioned; and 13yo Anne Keep, sister in law of George Evans, and therefore, presumably, sister of Mary Evans. There is only one Ann Keep registered in Wantage in that same period and her birth date fits exactly with my 2nd-great-grand aunt.
So here I have three women, all born in Childrey according to the census, all apparently with the same maiden name, and all birth dates fit with the registration in Wantage. One would think that would be enough but...
the wedding register of Richard Hambley and Martha Keep says that her father was Charles (correct), a bailiff. I cannot reconcile this in my head even though all the other evidence is pointing towards this being the correct Martha, Mary and Ann. In fact, given that there is only one Martha and one Ann registered in twenty years almost makes it perfect!
Should I just ignore the "bailiff" as incorrect information? How would the curate have come to that conclusion?
~~~~~~
To complicate matters, I have a further question about Reuben's wife's father in the marriage register. As I've already said, Reuben's father, Charles, was upgraded on the register from labourer to farmer. His wife, Sarah Ann Hillier, was listed as Henry Hillier, footman. If this occupation was also "upgraded", what was his likely occupation?
The reason I ask is that Sarah Ann appears in every census after her marriage, 1871-1911. All of them show that she was born in Clapham/Wandsworth area (I'm an Aussie so these are just points on a map to me) in about 1844 (one gives an age which would make it 1834). I have looked for the registration of a birth or a christening of a Sarah Ann Hillier (Hellier, Hellyer) on the south side of the Thames in that time frame (1844 and 1834), with a father called Henry. I found one that seemed to fit, but that Sarah Ann Hillier was the daughter of a boot-maker who employed many people, and she went on to marry Mr Timewell.
I cannot find Henry Hillier, footman, on any census (although I've found a few man-servants on the 1841 census). I cannot find Sarah before her marriage although there are a few possibilities. Interestingly, although she married in Marylebone, and lived all her married life in the St Pancras area, the eldest child, my great-grandfather, was born in Lambeth. The second child, George William, was registered in Wandsworth and the third, Louisa, was registered in Lambeth, although the censuses show Clapham, Royton or Brixton as her place of birth. I assumed Sarah had gone "home" to have the baby but getting the exact address (23 Glyn Street) from Charles' birth certificate didn't help me! All subsequent children are registered in St Pancras so perhaps her mother had died?
Any suggestions or comments on any or all of these questions?
My 3g-grandfather, Charles Keep, lived in Childrey, Berkshire, all his life. He appears in every census from 1841 to 1881, except 1871 which I haven't managed to find yet. In every case, he was living in Childrey as an agricultural labourer, except in 1861 when he was a carter.
His eldest son, my 2g-grandfather, Reuben, married in Marylebone in 1865. Charles appears on the marriage register as a farmer (what a great step up!). So far, everything is straight forward.
I then started looking for Reuben's siblings on the censuses. Some were easy to find but his sister Martha, had me baffled. According to the 1851 census, she was born around 1848. This ties with a birth registered in Wantage in the first quarter of 1848. In fact, she is the only Martha Keep registered in Wantage in a twenty year period 1839-1859 (the period covering the births of all Charles' children).
I cannot find Martha after the 1851 census. There is no death registered in Wantage. Here comes the interesting part: a Martha Constance Keep (don't know where the Constance comes from) married Richard Hambley, butcher, in Battersea in 1869. On the 1871 census, Richard and Martha Hambley are visitors in the home of George and Mary Evans. Martha is listed as being born in Childrey, as are two others in the household: Mary Evans, whose birth tallies with one of the three females called Mary Keep registered in Wantage in the twenty-year period previously mentioned; and 13yo Anne Keep, sister in law of George Evans, and therefore, presumably, sister of Mary Evans. There is only one Ann Keep registered in Wantage in that same period and her birth date fits exactly with my 2nd-great-grand aunt.
So here I have three women, all born in Childrey according to the census, all apparently with the same maiden name, and all birth dates fit with the registration in Wantage. One would think that would be enough but...
the wedding register of Richard Hambley and Martha Keep says that her father was Charles (correct), a bailiff. I cannot reconcile this in my head even though all the other evidence is pointing towards this being the correct Martha, Mary and Ann. In fact, given that there is only one Martha and one Ann registered in twenty years almost makes it perfect!
Should I just ignore the "bailiff" as incorrect information? How would the curate have come to that conclusion?
~~~~~~
To complicate matters, I have a further question about Reuben's wife's father in the marriage register. As I've already said, Reuben's father, Charles, was upgraded on the register from labourer to farmer. His wife, Sarah Ann Hillier, was listed as Henry Hillier, footman. If this occupation was also "upgraded", what was his likely occupation?
The reason I ask is that Sarah Ann appears in every census after her marriage, 1871-1911. All of them show that she was born in Clapham/Wandsworth area (I'm an Aussie so these are just points on a map to me) in about 1844 (one gives an age which would make it 1834). I have looked for the registration of a birth or a christening of a Sarah Ann Hillier (Hellier, Hellyer) on the south side of the Thames in that time frame (1844 and 1834), with a father called Henry. I found one that seemed to fit, but that Sarah Ann Hillier was the daughter of a boot-maker who employed many people, and she went on to marry Mr Timewell.
I cannot find Henry Hillier, footman, on any census (although I've found a few man-servants on the 1841 census). I cannot find Sarah before her marriage although there are a few possibilities. Interestingly, although she married in Marylebone, and lived all her married life in the St Pancras area, the eldest child, my great-grandfather, was born in Lambeth. The second child, George William, was registered in Wandsworth and the third, Louisa, was registered in Lambeth, although the censuses show Clapham, Royton or Brixton as her place of birth. I assumed Sarah had gone "home" to have the baby but getting the exact address (23 Glyn Street) from Charles' birth certificate didn't help me! All subsequent children are registered in St Pancras so perhaps her mother had died?
Any suggestions or comments on any or all of these questions?
