RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Durham => Topic started by: evesl on Thursday 16 March 06 09:53 GMT (UK)
-
Can anyone help trace Ruth Spensley (chr. 05.12.1862) Sunderland and married James Yeoman (b. 1860) in Sunderland. Can't find any trace on census after her marriage. James was a sailor. Did she go off travelling with him I wonder. I know they had children but haven't any details. Any help really appreciated. Thanks
-
1891 BishopWearmouth RG12/4132 f59 p25
Sorry can't read street name
James Yeoman Head Marr 30 mariner Sunderland
Ruth Yeoman wife marr 28 Sunderland
Eleanor daur 6months Sunderland
-
Hi
There is this possibility for 1901:
RG13/4716 Folio 47 Page 18 Sch 120
10 New Durham Road, Sunderland
George YEOMAN Head M 65 Master Mariner (Retired) Yorkshire York
Alice YEOMAN Wife M 61 Durham City
Ruth YEOMAN Daur M 38 Durham City
Alice YEOMAN GrandDaur 8 Durham City
George YEOMAN GrandSon 5 Durham City
Clearly if Ruth is married these are not her parents. You will know from the Marriage Certificate if this could be James' father. Alice appears to be George's second wife, so may not be James' mother.
If Ruth is their daughter I haven't found her with them on any previous Census.
Regards
Helen K
-
Hi,
If James mother and father were possibly George and Alice(1881 census?) could this be Ruth
1901 census Rg13/4716 26/47/18
10 New Durham road,Sunderland.
George Yeoman head mar 65 Master mariner retired Yorks.,York
Alice " wife mar 61 Durham city
Ruth " daur. mar 36 " "
Alice " grandaur. 8 " "
George " grandson 5 " "
No sign of Eleanor.Perhaps they meant daughter in law and as she is married perhaps husband away at sea.
Regards
Cathy
-
Many thanks SooCatt, Helen K and cath151 - a great help !
-
evesl,
Let me trow in a couple of snippets that might clear up a few things or even confuse matters.
Yorkshireman George Yeoman married Ellen/Elleanor Ward in 1857 (reg Easington District). They have a son James born 1860.
Yorkshireman John Spensley married Alice Batson in 1860
(reg Sunderland). They have a dtr Ruth circa 1863.
In 1875 George Yeoman married Alice Spensley
(reg Sunderland)
On Census 1881 George/Alice, and family including 21 yr old James. live at 35 Maple St, Sunderland.
So too do a "head-less" family of young Spensleys, including Ruth,aged 18.
I will assume that Alice Yeoman is Ruth's mother, Alice Spensley nee Batson.
In 1889 in Sunderland James Yeoman and Ruth Spensley marry. On Census 1891 they are in West Moor St, (4132-59-25) very close to George/Alice (4132-55-17)
On Census 1901 at 10 New Durham Rd ( 4716-47-16)
Ruth is in the houseld of George ( her father-in-law) and Alice (her mother). With mariner James Yeoman, away at sea as Cathy conjectured.
Interesting to note thast the "English Naming Pattern" had it that when a manmarried asecond wife, the firstdtr born of the new unionshould be given the first name of the deceased wife !
Michael Dixon
-
Dixymick - thank you so much. I didn't realise Alice Spensley (nee Batson) had married twice and that stepson James and stepdaughter Ruth were the two married in 1889. Your info seems to be spot on, except for one minor assumption you made - Ruth was not named for her deceased stepmother, but for her Grandmother (Ruth Robson b. 1804 Yorks). Ruth Robson must have been a special lady as several subsequent family members had Robson included in their names; for example William Robson Spensley was my maternal Grandfather, and one of his nephews was called Robson Spensley. Thanks again you are a star !
-
evesl,
The typing of my last para was awful, worsened by the fact that keyboard is sticking cos I tipped a cup of tea into it
But I did not assume that Ruth was named after her deceased stepmother. ( I had noticed the earlier Ruth on the Spensley line)
What I meant was that Ellenor Yeoman born circa 1878, dtr of George and Alice, was named after George's previous wife, Eleanor/Ellen Ward ( as was the convention)
Ruth Yeoman, nee Spensley, born circa 1863, did not have a stepmother ??.... her mother was Alice Batson/Spensley/Yeoman... was alive as late as Census 1901..........do you agree ??
Michael Dixon
Do you have all the censuses for the Yeomans and Spensleys ?
-
Hi Dixymick
Yes I do agree. The confusion arose because I had not researched the Yeoman line, only the Spensleys. Ruth's mother was definitely Alice Batson/Spensley/Yeoman. But do I understand you correctly - did Ruth marry her stepbrother ? I don't have the relevant census copies yet. How much info do you have on this Spensley line ? I have got back to William Spensley (b.1763 West Witton Yorks) married to Mary Croft (b. 1767 West Witton Yorks) who had a son George Spensley (b. 1797) married to Ruth Robson (b. 1804). I am completely stuck in that I cannot find any parent listed for William Spensley and therefore cannot get any further back. If the family moved to West Witton from elsewhere in yorkshire I will be struggling, as there are hundreds of Spensleys Spenslays Spenserleys etc etc in Yorkshire! regards eve sl
-
Eve,
No I am not further back to before C1851.
"Did Ruth marry her step-brother ? "
I am going to be careful in answering this, mainly because I am not sure of the legal status of "step-brother or step-sister" ??
But Step 1 ...her widowed mother ( Alice Spensley nee Batson) married widower George Yeoman (who had a son James) in 1875.
Step 2...On Census 1881 George, Alice Yeoman and 21 yr old James Yeoman etc are in one "household" at 35 Maple Street, Bishopwearmouth, Sunderland (4987-42-77)
At the same address is another "household" consisting of four of Alice's Spensley children, including 18 yr old Ruth Spensley.
Step 3....In 1889 James Yeoman marries Ruth Spensley.
So yes, Ruth married the son of her mother's second husband... and James married the daughter of his father's second wife !
Ouch.
Michael Dixon
-
Hi dixymick Michael
Thanks for unravelling all that. I'm sure it would have all passed over my head as I am fairly new to this. I may (probably will) have further queries in the future, but I am about to be parted from this computer for a while (going into hospital). So thanks a million - you are a double star - and watch this space !
eve
-
This is what current matrimonial law says about similar situations...
"Step-relatives may marry provided that they are both over 21 years of age.
The younger of the couple must at no time before the age of 18 years, have lived in the same household as the older person.
Neither must the younger of the two, have been treated as a child of the older person's family "
But I don't know how the law stood in 1880s !
Michael Dixon
-
I'd be most interested to know of any details and sources you have for this Spensley family.
When William and Mary married at WW, William was of Aysgarth. They baptised a son Timothy the following year at Aysgarth......they were living at Carperby.
Somehow I think they must fit into my family (I have both Spensley and Croft links).
Christine
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pointe/4320
-
Hi Christine
Hope I haven't got your hopes up too much. My Spensley's (Spenseley's) are from Scargill/ Barningham - George and Ruth (Robson). Whilst trying to find George's parents came across William Spensley & Mary Croft as parents of a George (at christening 1797 Barnard Castle.) and 'your' William Spensley & Mary Croft of West Witton. I have no idea if either are relevant - probably not. George and Ruth's sons moved north to Durham area and Sunderland. If your family are connected to the Sunderland Spensley's we are of the same family. If you have any information on the Scargill/Barningham Spensleys, in particular the parents of George Spensley (married Ruth Robson 1823 in Barningham) I would love to hear further from you.
regards
eve