RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => Surrey Lookup Requests => Surrey => England => Surrey Completed Look up Requests => Topic started by: Roy G on Saturday 02 August 08 08:48 BST (UK)
-
Sorry about this, I have been actively researching the Betchleys on both the Sussex & Surrey sides of Rootschat, and although I am most grateful for the feedback, the question that is uppermost in my mind has yet to be answered.
Did my James transported for 14 years to Taz from East Grinstead in 1819 and reported to have died out there in 1840, somehow return to be in Croydon in time for the birth of his first child in 1837 and still be there to be included on the 1841 - 1881 censuses?
I now realise that a new tack is called for so I am looking for his marriage to Elizabeth Esther something or other, from Chelsham circa 1836, which could have been in Chelsham where she was born.
Alternatively, (and this may prove more difficult) I am also looking for the baptism of an Elizabeth Esther something or other in the Chelsham records around 1809. Sorry but I have no idea whether Chelsham was a small or large parish in 1809.
Too much to ask I know, but perhaps some kind Rootschatter out there will respond to the challenge and have a go.
Roy G
-
Hi Roy
This is an interesting one!
I've checked the Surrey Marriage Index and there is no marriage there. So that can be crossed off the list.
Kerry
-
I've also tried the Sussex Marriage Index as James came from East Grinstead, but sadly nothing there either :-\
Have you seen the birth certificate for the first child? Do that throw up any clues?
Kerry
-
Thanks for your interest and work Kerry.
Suddenly another source has come up with some of the above names I wanted and a best after date, making the task I set a little easier
James Betchley married an Elizabeth Esther Hatch. They apparently signed in their single names when they witnessed the wedding of James brother John Betchley to Susan Sarah Hesketh Wise in Croydon on 26 May 1833. So that puts their marriage post May 1833 but still leaves me wondering when and where?
Roy G
-
Jas Betchley
Elizth Esther Hatch
1836 St. George In The East
also - maybe a coincidence
Caroline Betchley
Thos Stewart
1836 St. George In The East
Regards
Valda
-
Valder, your are gem
Thanks
Roy G
-
From the IGI baptisms
ELIZABETH HESTER HATCH
Birth: 18 FEB 1809
Christening: 05 MAR 1809 Chelsham, Surrey
Father: JOHN HATCH
Mother: MARY
The James Betchley sentenced in 1819 seems to have been sentenced at Horsham (I can't see any connection in the records that I can see to East Grinstead or that he was necessarily even born in Sussex?). James was convicted 24th March 1819 for 14 years (sailed 11th September 1819) and was a botanic gardener, aged 28 at the time of his arrival in Tasmania (12th January 1820 on the Dromedary at Hobart), so a birth year of circa 1791/1792. By 1833 he was freed 'by servitude'. He married Sarah Walton in Tasmania in 1834 and had a son James in the same year.
His death date in the records is given as 7th June 1840.
James Betchley baptised East Grinstead 30th September 1796 appears to have been a butcher. His parents married in East Grinstead 3rd March 1794.
His marriage in 1836 fits well for the baptism of his first known child
JAMES ALBERT BETCHLEY
Christening: 29 OCT 1837 Saint John The Baptist, Croydon, Surrey
Father: JAMES BETCHLEY
Mother: ELIZABETH ESTHER
Regards
Valda
-
Hi Valda
I feel sure that the court records show the theft of the horse took place in or near East Grinstead, which is actually in West Sussex. Horsham was the nearest West Sussex jail and courts. Lewes is closer but in East Sussex.
However I had better make certain. I'll get back to you.
Roy G
-
Getting back as I said I would.
The court doccuments describe the convicted James Betchley as a labourer late of Hartfield. Now checking out whether parental homes (Imberholm & Brookwood) on the outskirst of East Grinstead could have been considered as Hartfield.
Roy
-
Roy
Don't know whether you know but Hartfield records can be found on http://thesussexweald.org/
Kerry
-
http://homepages.gold.ac.uk/genuki/SSX/Hartfield/index.php
Regards
Valda
-
Hello Roy,
I don't think you'll find any distinction between East and West Sussex as far as the Assizes go. At one time East Grinstead also held them as well. It was more a question of when the trial was held.
This link is pre-1800, but gives you an idea of how the circuit worked: http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/home.html
Horsham, I believe, was also considered the county gaol.
Sorry it's a bit vague Roy, but it's getting late. I'm sure there was a thread on the Sussex board some time ago, covering similar ground, but I can't find it.
Phil
-
Hello Roy G
Can't believe my luck: I too was confused by the two James Betchley's apparently born East Grinstead around 1796 - and I also wondered if it was one and the same! The one who was sent to Tasmania makes interesting reading, but the one I am interested in is the Croydon connection. His daughter Ann was a direct ancestor of my husband. Have you managed to find out more yet?
-
Roy,
Imberhorne lays just off the A22 on the north side of East Grinstead, almost on the Surrey border.
Brookwood doesn't ring any bells, but I found this entry on the St Swithuns burial register:
Buried 26 June 1814
Henry Betchley, age 8
Abode: Brook House
Phil
-
I have Brookhouse Farm, Balcombe, as the residence of James Betchley (b 1767) and his wife Mary (Isted). In 1841 Census, their son Edward was farming there - James had died (c1824, Balcombe). Mary, the widow was with Edward. They had left the farm by 1851 and Edward eventually died in East Grinstead Workhouse. Some of Edward's siblings went to Croydon - the connection which interests me, personally.
-
Hi everybody
Interested in 'Determined's' personal connection and thanking everyone for their imput.
Calling Brookhouse, 'Brookwood' was an error of my own and hopefully you are all understanding in this respect.
Now knowing that the Manor of Imberhorne and Brookhouse were to the west of East Grinstead and Hartfield was to the south east, I can see that the James Betchley who is recorded as 'taking and riding away' a horse, was not living at either of these two places. I have therefore gone on a new tack following up a suggestion that there were two James Betchleys born at roughly the same time, one of whose baptism has been indexed on the IGI and the other whose baptism has not.
It is known there were no Betchleys in E.G. or Hartfield before 1770, so the most likely parents of another James Betchley could only have been one of the Balcombe James & Elizabeth's children who arrived in that area after that date. Of 3 sons of about the right age to produce a son and two daughters who may have produced an illegitimate child that carried their mother's maiden surname, there was only one couple who produced a son they called James. This was James junior & Mary. The records show that none of the other offspring of James & Elizabeth had a son they called James, neither did the name James ever reappear in the immediate ancestral pattern of Betchley family names.
It is unusual for a grandfather's name not to reappear in the family format unless there was a certain stigma attached it. I am therefore left to deduce (with no evidence to support that deduction) that someone else was transported in the place of James Betchley, whilst James himself, relocated in shame to Croydon where he quietly lived out the rest of his life.
Can anyone else can explain how a literate son of a moderately wealthy farmer can be sent to Tazmania to become just a gardener and how his behavior whilst on route and there is not that of someone with an education. Then, when he marries in Tazmania, he just makes his mark rather than signing his name. After his transportation, his parents are seen to loose much of their financial security and some of the family, including his mother, actually end up in the parish workhouse?
Roy G
Post script to 'Determined"
Send me a personal E-mail so that I can put you in touch with another contact from the Croydon line.
RG
-
Only about 49% of Sussex parish registers have coverage on the IGI pre 1812. Closeby Surrey is about 65% but Kent is only about 30%. It has been boosted more recently by some new additions to the IGI and the BVRI index but the figures still indicate just how hit and miss finding records on the IGI is. The 64 Betchleys indexed on the 1851 census all came from these three counties.
The court doccuments describe the convicted James Betchley as a labourer late of Hartfield.
though not necessarily where he was born and where his family lived and not necessarily a close relation to your line. Agricultural labourers were hired yearly an hiring fairs so the unmarried could move around quite a bit. This man was 28 not 23.
For the man who was convicted not to be a man called James Betchley but to be someone else tried for a crime you believe your ancestor committed, you would have to accept the whole area colluded against the criminal justice system and nobody came forward, including the people who were witnesses to the crime to say that is not the man, this is not James Betchley.
I am therefore left to deduce (with no evidence to support that deduction) that someone else was transported in the place of James Betchley, whilst James himself, relocated in shame to Croydon
And you must also accept that the innocent man at no point said I am not James Betchley and I have family and witnesses to prove it and that he continued on in the name James Betchley even after he was a freeman in Tasmania (though the records in Tasmania also give his surname as Beechley or Beachley). The 1851 census has a William Beechley born in Cuckfield circa 1804.
Dying in the workhouse Infirmary doesn't mean necessarily that you are a pauper but it does mean you are seriously ill. Affording a doctor to make house calls was expensive. The only alternative for serious illnesses was hospital and there were few of those, or the workhouse infirmary. A large proportion of NHS hospitals when the National Health system was founded were actually workhouse infirmaries. They also cared for the elderly with demetia, though when county asylums were built in the 1840s they were largely transfered to these.
Regards
Valda
-
Thanks for your valued imput Valda which I am in full agreement with, even though it brings me back to realiity with a bit of a jolt.
I have accepted that the James Betchley in Croydon was a relative, whilst the James Beachley of similar age and residential location, who was sent to Tazmania, was not. However, the latter has now been so much an item of Betchley family folk lore, it will forever bug me and many others with ancestral ties if we cannot sort out this other man's origins.
I have never seen actual copies of his convict record, his death certificate (Port Arthur Prison, Hobart 8th June 1840) or his Tazmanian marriage certificate when he married Sarah Walton in Newtown, Hobart on 16 June 1834, so would be curious to know whether any of these indicated who his parents were. Perhaps obtaining a sight of that information would help to sort out this conumderum and place where he actually fits further back in the Betchley/Beachley family line.
Roy G
-
The marriage certificate won't - no parents names given on Tasmania marriages that early. Parents names I believe were not added until 1896 and they certainly are not on the two Tasmania marriage certificates I hold pre that period. Ditto death certificates for lack of information prior to 1897. After that you get place of birth (if known).
http://www.archives.tas.gov.au/guides/genealogy
I think Tasmanian convict records are very interesting because they are more detailed than New South Wales re the treatment/puinshments, work on chain gangs etc of the convicts lives, but like all convict records, less for their genealogical details because Australian officals would be less interested in knowing that.
'In 1824 the British Transportation Act was passed, and it included a provision that there should be delivered to the contractor (or shipping agent) a certificate specifying concisely the Description of his or her Crime, his or her Age, whether married or unmarried, his or her Trade or Profession, and an account of his or her Behaviour in Prison before and after Trial, the Gaoler's observations on his or her temper and Disposition, and such information concerning his or her Connexions...'
But by 1827 the Governor of Tasmania was still complaining about the lack of information being sent with the convicts from England "At present we stand in the extraordinary predicament in a Penal Colony of not being able to prove that the offenders transported from England are Convicts."
Certainly from 1827 onwards for Tasmanian convicts arriving you can get information from this source
'the Muster Master's duties was to examine the person of every Convict before landing ... to take down their description - History of their former modes of life - names of Relations, and connections, and the exact nature of the crime which they have been previously convicted of, and which led to their Transportation.' and Former Course of Life as may have come to the Gaoler's knowledge.....'
which is much more helpful and detailed than for New South Wales convicts, but by 1827 the James you are interested in would have served at least 8 years of his sentence.
http://www.archives.tas.gov.au/guides/Con_guide.pdf
Starting with records over here before pursuing Tasmania records which as I've said are very interesting in themselves and will give you far greater insights into James Betchley's life in Tasmania, but may not help you for his origins in this country, have you checked the Sussex Family History Society baptism index for possible candidates for James to establish a wider picture of possible baptisms in Sussex than that supplied by the IGI? As far as I know it isn't a county wide index for the period you are interested but it will cover some parishes not found on the IGI such as Hartfield for instance.
http://www.sfhg.org.uk/baptisms.html
Regards
Valda
-
Hi Roy
I'm penny, we've spoken before.
James Betchley was my G G Grandfather John's older brother and he was definitely in England on 5th July 1825 as he was executor of his father's will. I have downloaded a copy.
I thought I was alone in thinking that James came back (or never went) to Australia - it just didn't add up. I have lots of documentation and I am sure beyond doubt that there was only one James. He has occupied of a lot of my time one way and another.
Just FYI, my GG Grandfather John married Susan Sarah Hesketh Wise on 26th May 1833 in Mitcham, Surrey. Witnesses were James Betchley and Elizabeth Eshter Hatch. John and his wife settled in Croydon - I believe both families were close.
Penny
Penny
-
Hi Penny
Yes it is confusing about james, and I too am left in a quandry.
I am almost certain he never went to Taz or someone else was sent in his place, but if so, who was that someone who then married and died out there in 1840 leaving an entire family with the Betchley surname? Perhaps we can chat about it more privately. Drop me a line at *
Roy
(*) Moderator Comment: e-mail removed in accordance with RootsChat policy,
to avoid spamming and other abuses.
Please use the Personal Message (PM) system for exchanging personal data.
-
Hello again - after quite a break.
Well, what a headache this James is to us all. I now feel inclined to put aside the transported James altogether.
Just a thought: from the records, the transported James was age 28 at the time of his arrival in Tasmania on 12th January 1820. This gives a birth date of circa 1791/2. (James Betchley snr. and Mary Isted married in 1794). He also seemed to be something of a habitual lawbreaker by nature. The Croydon James, who seemed much steadier on the face of it, died in early 1884, age 87 - which ties in better with the baptism date of 30th September 1796 in East Grinstead. Not that it proves anything at all, of course!
But, one will always wonder........!
-
I hope this helps .
http://www.convictrecords.com.au/convicts/betchley/james/79979
-
James Betchley
He actually came to Australia as Betchley and due to a clerical error he became Beachley and kept the name .
Born in East Grinstead on 30 Sep 1796 to James Betchley and Mary Isted. James married Sarah Walton and had a child. He passed away on 8 Jun 1840 in Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Name: James Betchley
Vessel: Dromedary
Convicted Date: 24 Mar 1819
Voyage Date: Sep 1819
Colony: Tasmania (Van Diemen's Land)
Place of Conviction: Sussex, England
-
http://search.ancestry.com.au//cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&db=CanturburyPrerogativeCourt&h=208634&tid=88079398&pid=280010414284&usePUB=true&_phsrc=Rob1522&_phstart=successSource&usePUBJs=true&rhSource=1590
James Bletchley last will and testament . This James was a farmer .
-
Sorry vanstrada. The Will link you sent is one of those internal Ancestry links. When clicking on it, non members like me just get an invitation to join.
Roy G
-
Sorry about that .
:(