RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Yorkshire (North Riding) => Topic started by: feinstein48 on Friday 28 September 12 15:08 BST (UK)
-
I've been trying for ages to find some information about my grandfather. I finally found him on the 1911 census, his birthplace was given as Brompton on Swale.
This in turn led to me acquiring a copy of his birth certificate. His name was Charles Edward Turner, his mother's name was Sarah Turner, no father given on the certificate. I would like to follow the line further back, but I can't find any other enties for either of them in the census records. In fact I only found my grandfather by a piece of luck, in the 1911 census he was listed as Edward Turner ( to my knowledge he was always known as Ted).
If anybody can help in any way, it would be most appreciated.
regards Pete
-
Hi Pete,
Just for the time being, see what you think to this in 1891 :
1891 census :
RG12/4038, Folio 5, Page 4
A Charles Edward Turner, age 10 born in Brompton, living with his grandmother.
The age doesn't match the one I found in 1911, but the location is good.
Kind regards,
Pels.
-
Elizabeth is here in 1901, but no Edward.
1901 census :
RG13/4612, Folio 7, Page 6
Pels.
-
I'm just plodding along until you come back, Pete :
Birth, Dec qtr 1880
Charles Edward Turner
Richmond, Vol 9d, page 647
This birth would fit with the 1891 I posted.
Pels.
-
Hi Pels,
great stuff, it certainly looks like him in the '91 census. I wonder what has happened to his mother, whose name is Susan and not Sarah as I posted earlier.
The birth record is almost certainly correct. Am I correct in assuming that his grandmother's surname is also Turner?
Many thanks
Pete
-
In 1871 you will find the Turner family in High Laver, Essex.
John & Elizabeth plus several children including 12 year old Susan (whose birthplace, like her mother's, is High Laver): RG10/1642/7/6.
-
As regards his age, for some reason, he appears to have knocked a few years off. He also gave a wrong age on his wedding certificate! I just wonder if he did this to appear younger to his wife. He was definitely born in 1880.
Pete
-
As regards his age, for some reason, he appears to have knocked a few years off. He also gave a wrong age on his wedding certificate! I just wonder if he did this to appear younger to his wife. He was definitely born in 1880.
You'd be amazed how common this appears to have been :)
-
Susan Turner (21) and baby "Chas." (6mo b Catterick) are back in High Laver in 1881: RG11/1740/5/3.
I think Susan possibly marries in Ongar district in 1883.
-
avm 228,
thanks for that information. That adds up, as there was talk that the family originated in the South of England.
Pete
-
avm 228,
Did Susan marry a man with the surname Simpson by any chance? My grandfather always gave his name as Charles Edward Simpson Turner!
Pete
-
avm 228,
thanks for that information. That adds up, as there was talk that the family originated in the South of England.
Yes, it fits with the birthplace of Elizabeth from the 1891 census when she had her grandson with her - recorded as "High Labour, Essex" but it must be High Laver.
-
avm 228,
Did Susan marry a man with the surname Simpson by any chance? My grandfather always gave his name as Charles Edward Simpson Turner!
Not sure yet and I've got to go offline now - will have another look later if the question hasn't been answered.
:)
-
Did Susan marry a man with the surname Simpson by any chance? My grandfather always gave his name as Charles Edward Simpson Turner
Susan Turner (21) and baby "Chas." (6mo b Catterick) are back in High Laver in 1881: RG11/1740/5/3.
I think Susan possibly marries in Ongar district in 1883.
Marriage, Jun qtr 1883
Thomas Peacock
Susan Turner
Ongar, Vol 4a, page 257
Assuming if this was the case Thomas would have to have died and Susan remarried, using the name of Peacock. I can't find any such marriage apart from a Peacock/Simpson marriage in Stockton, 1927 which sounds highly unlikely.
Having said that, I can't find the above couple in 1891 either ?
Pels.
-
Assuming if this was the case Thomas would have to have died and Susan remarried, using the name of Peacock. I can't find any such marriage apart from a Peacock/Simpson marriage in Stockton, 1927 which sounds highly unlikely.
Having said that, I can't find the above couple in 1891 either ?
This might explain it :
Death, Mar qtr 1890
Thomas Peacock, age 26
Ongar, Vol 4a, page 187
It could also answer why Charles was with his grandmother in 1891 ?
Pels.
-
A possible Thomas Peacock in 1881 - adding a couple of years on to his age :
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/XQZ6-CRG
Birth, Sep qtr 1864
Thomas Peacock
Ongar, Vol 4a, page 83
Pels.
-
Marriage, Dec qtr 1890
Susan Peacock
Ongar, Vol 4a, page 425
To either John Holgate, or Samuel Marrable.
Pels.
-
This is getting so confusing and I only hope it's right.
Otherwise I'll be coming back with a thousand red faces.
1901 census :
RG13/1643, Folio 6, Page 4
Essex, High Laver
Matching Green
John Holgate, h, mar, 41, Hay Straw Binder, High Laver
Susan, wife, 40. b. High Laver
Pels.
-
And the above couple in 1891 :
RG12/1365, Folio 11, Page 16
Enumerated as Holdgate with only the two of them in the household.
Pels.
-
Later....
More confusion because Susan Holgate is now going by the name of .... Sarah.
Pels.
-
To double check I've looked at the births for either a Susan or a Sarah Peacock during the time scale of 1858 to 1864 in the Ongar registration district.
Thankfully, there isn't one.
Pels.
-
Excellent detective work Pels :)
I wonder then whether the Simpson name has something to do with Charles Edward's natural father (or at least his belief in that regard)?
-
Hello ! :) :)
Thank goodness - someone to talk to ! ;D
I wonder then whether the Simpson name has something to do with Charles Edward's natural father (or at least his belief in that regard)?
It does make you wonder ?
I think I've found a Holgate connection to the family :
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/XQZZ-LV1
A John Holgate is a visitor at the home of a widowed Elizabeth Turner in 1881. :)
Pels.
-
Interesting. I wonder who that little chap John Holgate belonged to.
Also wonder about the Yorkshire connection. For some reason Susan went to Yorkshire and had a baby; no big deal. But she took him back to Essex as an infant and stayed in Essex. Why then did the child and his grandmother move to Yorkshire? (Or at least Granny did. Charles Edward being with her in 1891 may have been a one off for all we know.)
-
Five year old John could be a nephew to the person Susan married.
I wonder if one of Elizabeth's other children moved up to Yorkshire first ?
The Richmond/Catterick area also had quite a large army community - could it be related to Thomas Peacock?? That's just a wild guess though.
Pels.
-
Yes I wondered about the Army. The barracks appear to have been at Richmond Castle at that time, Catterick garrison being a later development.
-
The whole area is closely related - even Hipswell where I'm sure I've seen a connection ?
Strange thing is, I can't find any mention of a five year old to fit a John Holgate anywhere, apart from the 1881 census - and going by the actual image, it's right ?
Pels.
-
This should be the death of Elizabeth's husband :
Death, Jun 1873
John Turner, age 69
Ongar, Vol 4a, page 63
As stated earlier - she was a widow in 1881.
Pels.
-
Maybe little John was actually only 4 rather than 5, birth reg Mar qtr 1877 as William John Holgate, poss death Mar qtr 1901 Ongar as John Holgate aged 24?
Who knows :)
-
Ah, that could be the answer ! :)
Charles wasn't called Simpson after his grandmother :
Marriage, Jun qtr 1845
Elizabeth Aley
John Turner
Ongar, Vol 12, page 253
This is backed up by the 1841 where Elizabeth is living with her parents in High Laver.
Pels.
-
When Peter is back online it would be helpful to know full details from Charles Edward's birth certificate including addresses of birth and of the informant in order to understand the Yorkshire connection.
-
Good Morning,
thanks again for the efforts you both have put into helping me out. At least I now know a lot more about Charles' origins.
I'm afraid the birth certificate doesn't hold any clues, the actual address is just given as Brompton on Swale and Susan herself was the informant.
There seems to be some connection to the Holgate family, as Susan and Charles were recorded in the Holgate's house in 1881.