RootsChat.Com

England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Norfolk => Topic started by: Duodecem on Saturday 19 May 12 09:03 BST (UK)

Title: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Saturday 19 May 12 09:03 BST (UK)
Help please! I'd pieced together my 3x great grandfather's family history- born Mulbarton in 1799, the eldest son of Nicholas Osborne and Sarah Townsend,  with siblings Charlotte, Mary Anne and Jonathan all born in Mulbarton.
In 1817 he married Harriet Edridge in Yelverton, had 14 children, was in Ketteringham on the1841 census and in 1861 was living in Earsdon Northumberland working as an agricultural labourer,with his wife, youngest son Charles and eldest grandson (Moses) John Roberts who were both  coal miners. Both William and Harriet died in Norfolk.
So far so good, I put them all on my public Ancestry tree.
I did all my research through Freereg, and backed it up through IGI,& Family search as well as Ancestry.
I've been contacted by a distant (we share a great grandfather) relative who lives locally and is also researching through parish records etc.
She has also found a William Osborne , but hers was born Keswick  in 1796, has different parents (John Osborne and Mary Punchard) and siblings but then carries on to share the marriage etc. She has also found him on the 1851 census , which I've been unable to do. I think she used PRSs and I can't find the records on the sites I use, except for a slightly different version on Family Search.
My belief is that we have found 2 separate William Osbornes -probably cousins but which is the correct one?
My evidence, such as it is, is that William has children named Charlotte, Maryanne and Sarah. (no Nicholas ,but he ended his days in the workhouse and died a pauper, so possibly he didn't share William's obvious work ethic!, or it may have been bad luck and William was mean!) But then he had to find 14 names so it may be coincidence.
Any suggestions?
Osborne has a variety of spellings Osbourn, Osborn, Osbourne even Orsborn, sometimes in the same document.
I wonder if anyone can solve the puzzle or if we will have to agree to disagree.
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Saturday 19 May 12 10:43 BST (UK)
Hi jan,

Have you seen the 1851 entry?

Ancestry has William indexed as William Pes Bern - I admit it's difficult to read, but I can see Osborne.

Living in Ketteringham, with wife - and several children all born Ketteringham.

Trouble is, this William says he was born Keswick.

Yorkslass
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Saturday 19 May 12 11:21 BST (UK)
Hello again,

It's looking like the William Osborne you found baptised in Mulbarton died when he was still a baby.
Here's his baptism - https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-12986-23030-23?cc=1824688&wc=6895322

And on the next image (62), the burial of an infant William Osborne

Yorkslass
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Saturday 19 May 12 12:06 BST (UK)
Hi again,

Well - I didn't know there was a Keswick in Norfolk!
Only three miles from Mulbarton and Ketteringham.

I was thinking Keswick, Cumberland.

I saw from the marriage entry that William Osborne was living at Kirby Bedon - about 2 miles from Yelverton.

Yorkslass



Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Saturday 19 May 12 12:19 BST (UK)
Your distant relative is right, methinks.

Here's the baptism for William Osborne in 1796, son of John Osborne of Keswick, and Mary his wife, late Puncher - https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-12986-24124-32?cc=1824688&wc=6895184

Yorkslass
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Saturday 19 May 12 13:26 BST (UK)
I was told the spelling on the 1851 was strange -but not that strange. You're right though, you can see that the name is actually spelled Orsbern.
I did have a moment's hope that they were a different family, when the wife's name was Hannah not Harriet, but I presume that's another spelling error -or confusion, an elder daughter was called Hannah.
I've started checking the children's births-(I found most on Ancestry) in case they belong to another couple but I've reached George and, so far, they all belong to William and Harriet.
The death of the son of Nicholas and Sarah was the clincher -I've been researching a non-existent William!
I'll have to tell my distant relative that she's right then start researching John Osborne and Mary Puncher.
Thank you so much for helping me yet again. Jan
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Saturday 19 May 12 14:58 BST (UK)
I've found a marriage for John Osborne and Mary Puncher (transcribed Punchard) on Free reg and in Ancestry, 7th January 1790 in Lakenham, again only a few miles from Keswick (yes I thought of Cumbria too, hooray for Google maps!)
I'm not sure where to look next, obviously i need to correct my tree, but the more interesting bit is delving further. Sadly no births for John or Mary have popped up yet- do you have any ideas? There is a John Osborne son of Charles and Mary, baptised  New Buckenham 1765, no too far and it fits but that was the logic that sent me down the wrong track in the first place!
Any suggestions for a more methodical and accurate approach? Jan
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Sunday 20 May 12 11:21 BST (UK)
The marriage you found looks right, doesn't it?
Punchard/Puncher is not a common name. 
I do the same as you, and try Freereg and Family Search for any clues, then if I find something I'll check the original registers - the Norfolk ones I mean.

Family Search comes up with several baptisms and a burial for children of John Osborn and Mary Punchard - in different places!  http://www.rootschat.com/links/0mll/

The earliest seems to be one in Norwich, but theres a burial for a child, Thomas, in 1792, aged 2 years.
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-12987-17985-45?cc=1824688&wc=6895688

I haven't been able to find a baptism though.

Yorkslass
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Sunday 20 May 12 11:33 BST (UK)
Yep, here it is - baptised in Lakenham - 3 weeks after they married!
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-267-11561-113559-64?cc=1416598&wc=MMVP-7SF:n2073728913

I'm pretty sure now that you have the right marriage.

Looks like they moved to Norwich for a time, then to Keswick, and ended up in Lakenham again.

I think I'd try to find a burial for John and Mary, to try to narrow down their ages.

Yorkslass
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: shoeman on Sunday 20 May 12 19:53 BST (UK)
Kesik, as we say in Norfolk is in walking distance of Lakenham.
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Monday 21 May 12 00:57 BST (UK)
Thanks Shoeman, it looks as if they didn't move at all, just baptised their children in different churches as none of them are far apart the villages seem to be part of Norwich from the map-is that right?.
Yorkslass your links have been extremely helpful. :)
I've repaired my ancestry tree and added the children of John and Mary. I even used your transcript link and found the baptism of their youngest child Elizabeth born 1802.
Your idea of starting with the burial is a good one I think I found Mary buried Lakenham 8th Feb 1833.
That would give a dob about 1765.
There is a birth of Mary Puncher to William Puncher and Mary Wright in Bedingham 13 May 1764 on Freereg. What do you think -it's about 12 miles from Lakenham/Keswick. I don't want to find the wrong person again!
I also found a burial for John Osborne in Lakenham 17 Sept 1848 aged 96!
I also found him living in St Stephens Norwich on the 1841 census with Thomas James and Elizabeth Osbourne. The age for Elizabeth is right (assuming she is the daughter not a wife of one of the sons, but the ages of Thomas and James are the wrong way round, James should be younger than Thomas. I know that the ages were rounded on the 1841 It's possible the census recorder confused the 2 sons. What do you think? He must have been amazingly healthy -though sadly, even if he's the right John Osborne his genes would be a bit diluted by now!
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Monday 21 May 12 01:02 BST (UK)
One other question -how do I send a link?, I've tried right clicking but it doesn't seem to work. It would be useful to send links to the things I've found.
I tried before when I was responding to a query and could only type in the web address.
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Monday 21 May 12 13:17 BST (UK)
Hi Jan,

Your last question first - when I do links, I highlight the web address in the address bar at the top, by right clicking, then click "copy".  Then you can "paste" into whatever you want.

I saw the burials too, and when I saw John Osborne's date of death (and age!!) realised he should be on the 1841 census.  I don't see why it shouldn't be him ....but I'd disagree that the Elizabeth is his daughter - more likely the wife of Thomas.

The reason I say that is there was a burial in Lakenham, in 1820, of an 18 year old Elizabeth Osborn.

The Mary Puncher baptism you found could well be right - but at the moment I'd say it was a "definite maybe"  ;)
Freereg, Ancestry and Family Search have indexed many parish records - but not all .....

And there's always the danger of mis-transcription, especially with a name like Puncher/Punchard - the "P" could even be mis-transcribed as a "D"

The other interesting thing is that son, Thomas was a publican - that might yield some more clues.

Yorkslass

Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Tuesday 22 May 12 09:49 BST (UK)
Hi Yorklass thanks for the info re links-I haven't used the address bar before so that's why it's never worked.
I do think the 1841 might be our John Osborne and I checked to see if one of the sons married an Elizabeth. In 1815 Thomas Osborne living in the parish of St Simon&Jude Norwich married Elizabeth Stibbard otp in St Martin at Palace. By no means certain but possible.
Sad about Elizabeth Osborne I've just looked up the death, I would think she probably too young to be the witness at William's wedding in 1817, so maybe that was the wife of Thomas.
I agree that Mary Puncher of Bedingham is too long a shot, also the marriage record is definitely Punchard. If it were Keswick/norwich/Lakenham I'd be more confident.
I couldn't find the original of Mary's baptism but i did find several siblings and the records were consistently Puncher
So-where next do you think -is there any way of checking up Thomas the publican or find out more about the carter's business run by 90 year old John and his son? (Steptoe&son springs to mind!)
I thought I'd see if there's any on-line business records for Norwich in 1841.
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Tuesday 22 May 12 11:51 BST (UK)
Hi Jan,

I saw that the marriage of Thomas Osborn and Elizabeth Stibbard was by licence.
That might show something - who knows ... but it's a long process, as they're mostly not indexed.

To be honest, I wouldn't worry too much about the different spellings of Puncher/Punchard - it happened all the time. 

I'm not aware of any "business records" as such - at least not online.  I wish there were!!

In the meantime, I've found the pub Thomas had in 1841. He had it between 1839 and 1845.
Interesting stuff, isn't it?

http://www.norfolkpubs.co.uk/norwich/nnorwich/nchnci.htm

Yorkslass


Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Tuesday 22 May 12 20:40 BST (UK)
Genius-I don't know how you find these things! I trawled through Whites 1845 directory on Ancestry but none of them were important enough to feature. I should imagine the carters were the C19th version of a man with a van! What do you think Thomas did next ? I'll try the census I think.
The good news is that my newly acquired relative("2nd cousin I think) agrees that the 1841 and 96 year old death was indeed our John Osbourne.
She also says that his granddaughter Harriet Osbourne, later Jackson and finally Ewing , lived until she was at least 90. She was born in 1822 and is on the 1911 census living with her daughter Sarah Ann Jackson married name Bailey and her husband Robert.
Sadly i haven't found a death record, she doesn't seem to be on BMD unless she'd left Norfolk. But she did amazingly well- 4 children, of whom 2 died and widowed aged 32. She had an illegitimate child (my g.grandfather)18 months later.At 40 she was a washerwoman, at 50 a resident servant, she then remarried aged 52, widowed again at 67 and was still around aged 90! 
I wish I'd inherited her stamina! Jan
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Tuesday 22 May 12 22:21 BST (UK)
I've used that "Norfolk Pubs" site before - I have an ancestor who was a publican in Great Yarmouth.

Yes, being a carter was no great shakes way back then.  I think all they needed was a horse and cart  ;D  But crikey, still working at 90 !!  You certainly have a long-lived family.

As for Thomas, he seems to have changed occupation in 1851- to a farm labourer.

Which brings me back to the marriage licence for Thomas Osborn and Elizabeth Stibbard.
I found the marriage bond (eventually!)  but it doesn't really help much.  This Thomas Osborn was a plumber and glazier, and the ages are 21 and upwards.  The other bondsman was a witness at Thomas's marriage.
It still could be the right one - it's a long time between 1815 and 1839, so who knows - it's worth keeping hold of in case it can be proved some time.

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-12377-89580-90?cc=1824690&wc=6893227

Yorkslass

Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Wednesday 23 May 12 07:04 BST (UK)
£200! In 1815! Did they have to pay it or was it like bail-they forfeited it if they did not go through with the marriage? I won't begin to ask how you found it, I suspect you have supernatural powers -or loads of experience- thank you.
If Thomas was a plumber and glazier in '15 would he be a labourer in '51? It seems doubtful.
I haven't found him in 51 or 61 nor James -where did you see him? I've tried Ancestry and Freecen (for 61 it doesn't have 51)
I  think the long-lived gene is a bit diluted by now, no-one has reached 90 for a couple of generations, let alone carried on working as a carter.
The only possible Harriet Ewing death I've found of the right age is  in North Yorkshire -at 92! It was a bit of a journey, perhaps her grandfather's cart was still available! Or else she was buried under one of her other names.
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Yorkslass on Wednesday 23 May 12 11:04 BST (UK)
Yes - you've got it.  The £200 was forfeit if they didn't marry.

Hmmm, supernatural powers would be really useful  ;D

The 1851 on Ancestry, Thomas is indexed as Thomas Oborn.  They're back in Lakenham, and James is still with them.  I couldn't find any of them in 1861.

Yorkslass
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Thursday 24 May 12 19:12 BST (UK)
I never thought of Oborn as a spelling.
I've found death records on Freereg for Thomas April 1856 and Elizabeth December 1857 , both in Lakenham.
James is on the 1861 as follows:

1861 Census
   
Piece: RG9/1194 Place: Yarmouth Northern -Norfolk Enumeration District: 18
Civil Parish: Great Yarmouth Ecclesiastical Parish: St Nicholas
Folio: 37 Page: 24 Schedule: 200
Address: 15 Row 58

        Surname       First name(s)       Rel       Status       Sex       Age       Occupation       Where Born       Remarks   
        PESTELL       Charles       Head       M       M       26       Boatbuilder        Norfolk - Great Yarmouth           
        PESTELL       Maria       Wife       M       F       23               Norfolk - Great Yarmouth           
        ORSBONE       James       Visitr       U       M       56       Oaster        Norfolk - Ingham

Ingham and Keswick are linked parishes. If you read the origina lyou can see he's back to being a carter not an oaster!
There is a freeBMD death for James Osborne in Norwich in 1865. No age given until 1867 sadly.
I can't find him in 1871 so it may well be him. Jan
Title: Re: William Osborne 1799 Mulbarton or 1796 Keswick?
Post by: Duodecem on Friday 25 May 12 00:33 BST (UK)
No sorry -it's Intwood that's near Keswick not Ingham so I'm probably wrong about James. Shame- I thought I was doing so well too but there was probably another single carter of similar age also called James Osborne, how thoughtless is that!