RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => London and Middlesex => Topic started by: Georgfriedrich on Friday 06 September 13 06:45 BST (UK)
-
Hello,
I have just seemingly found the proof that my family always believed, that members of our family were French Huguenots.
The family were surnamed Paul. They were silk weavers and, according to relatives, quite skilled at it. They lived in the general areas of Bishopsgate and Bethnal Green. This is the ancestral 'thread'.
Eleanor Paul (1828-1915)
Joseph Paul (1795-1869) her father
Richard Paul (1763- his father
Charles Paul (1729- his father
This last named chap was apparently also known as Charles Etienne Paul.
There is seemingly such a lot of misinformation on the internet about this family. Is anyone able to help me fill in gaps? I guess I could go to the Huguenot Society in London but this is difficult for me as I don't live in the UK at the moment.
Thank you
Kirk
PS
The family legend of which the ancients were quite proud, is that the Paul family wove (or at least helped weave) the silk for Queen Victoria's Wedding Dress.
-
Hi Kirk
Lest we spend a lot of our helping time looking for, going over, typing up and speculating on details that you may well already have - What are the gaps you want to fill?
For example, you have listed 4 Generation there - I imagine you already have wives, mothers, siblings, census, more precise residence details and proven documents (BMD, baptisms, burials?) for some of them?
If there is a lot of misinformation out there, what is it that is misinformed?
Cheers
AMBLY
-
Hello Ambly,
The wrong information that I have found often relates to the wives on various constructed family trees but does not quote or show evidence to back it up.
Eleanor Paul I know all about. I know her father's details but of her mother all I know is that her name was Sarah.
I know that Richard's wife was Martha.
I know Charles' wife was Sarah
I know these wives' names from the baptism records but I cannot find any marriage records so I don't know when they married nor their maiden names.
Charles seems to be Charles Etienne as his baptism in 1729 (found on the IGI) is good for the date of birth of his first child Hester in 1753 but a marriage record would go a long way to proving it plus I know that the IGI is transcribed and so it 'could' be incorrect. The IGI says this man's parents were William (Guillaume) and Ann but I am wondering what could be out there to prove this other than the fat that my Charles named his two of his children William and Ann.
I know siblings for RIchard and Joseph but I don't know burials for anyone except some siblings that died young and Joseph himself.
I have not really been able to find many of the Pauls in the census returns etc, only Joseph and Eleanor. I guess they might have all be dead by 1841.
So apart from family legends I have very little in the way of hard evidence to back it up, apart from baptisms.
This is all I know at this stage.
Bye for now
Kirk
-
FS has a record for a Charles Paul married 07 Dec 1750 in Fleet, London, in "England and Wales, Non-Conformist Record Indexes (RG4-8)", which seemed a possibility -- the only Charles Paul marriage shown at FS for 1745-1755 (other than in Cornwall).
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/FQ1R-ZZC
But I then trawled through 745 people named Sarah who married in Fleet in 1750, and found no match for that date. There were apparently 14,240 people who married non-conformist in Fleet in 1750, something I find a little hard to believe. But looking at the first 750 (10 pages of 75 results each), I found no one else marrying on 7 Dec. You could always pick up where I left off!
https://familysearch.org/search/record/results#count=75&query=%2Bmarriage_place%3A%22fleet%2C%20london%22%20%2Bmarriage_year%3A1750-1750~&collection_id=1666142
There was a William Paul marriage in Fleet on 29 January 1729 that might be of interest as well.
Hm, and a Guillaume Paul marriage on 21 December 1741 in Spittlefields (sic!), London.
Joseph Paul is a widower living alone in 1851 in Stepney, born in Bishopsgate. I can't see the family at all in 1841, or a marriage for Eleanor.
EDIT
Uh, thank you, Ambly. I realize that Kirk knows all about Eleanor. That does not help those of us who know nothing about her. Seeing people in censuses can help flesh out the picture and provide info for going farther back; for instance, the 1851 specifies that Joseph was born in Bishopsgate.
-
The Fleet
7 Dec 1750
Charles Paul weaver of Shoreditch St Leonards and Mary Mallerby single woman of Spitalfields.
The record is viewable on ancestry.
-
Kirk mentioned he knew all about Eleanor, and that she died in 1915 - there is a DEATH index for an Eleanor PAUL in 1915 age 87, registered Hendon. Perhaps she never married. Can't immediately see her on Census.....
Cheers
AMBLY
-
Charles seems to be Charles Etienne as his baptism in 1729 (found on the IGI) is good for the date of birth of his first child Hester in 1753 but a marriage record would go a long way to proving it plus I know that the IGI is transcribed and so it 'could' be incorrect. The IGI says this man's parents were William (Guillaume) and Ann but I am wondering what could be out there to prove this other than the fat that my Charles named his two of his children William and Ann.
William was Charles and Sarah's 6th son, Ann(e) was 4th and 5th daughter. If they'd named their eldest or second eldest son and daughter William and Ann it would have carried more weight that these were his parents names. It's not impossible, but I would have thought one of the elder sons and daughters are more likely to have been named after their grandparents. It's not a hard fast rule in England but does happen more often.
Also, there is another family of Paul in St Botolph Bishopsgate at the same time, have you eliminated these as a posible relation? There is some similarity in children's names.
The 1729 and 1741 marriage are for the same William/Guillaume Paul, whose father was Charles. However, that William is listed on his marriage as (and my French isn't that good) I think a Lawyer and Doctor of Medicine (Licentie la droite civil and canonique and docteur en medicine). While his son could have become a weaver, I would have thought perhaps less likely? No Wills appear to exist for the family to confirm unfortunately.
-
The Fleet
7 Dec 1750
Charles Paul weaver of Shoreditch St Leonards and Mary Mallerby single woman of Spitalfields.
The record is viewable on ancestry.
Rats, I saw the name Mary Mallerby at FS and somehow passed it over. ;)
-
Uh, thank you, Ambly. I realize that Kirk knows all about Eleanor. That does not help those of us who know nothing about her. Seeing people in censuses can help flesh out the picture and provide info for going farther back; for instance, the 1851 specifies that Joseph was born in Bishopsgate.
Um, I did not mean you should not need to want to know Eleanor. I was simply pointing out that she appeared to be the one who is registered in 1915 as PAUL. And I couldn't agree more - it's why I asked Kirk for more info in the beginning. What looks like Joseph in 1841 Census calls her Ellen, for example.
1841: Essex Street, Parish of St Matthews, Bethnal Green.
HO107 / Piece 691 / Book 4 / Folio 28/ Pg4
//
Joseph PAWL 45, Weaver
Sarah PAWL 40
Ellen PAUL 13
/
John STEADMAN 45, Weaver
Mary STEADMAN 45
/
Jospeh HUBBARD 30, Weaver
//
Cheers
AMBLY
-
If Joseph died 1869, that appears to match the death registered Dec Qtr 1869, age 73 in Bethnal Green. And is the Burial 15 Oct 1869, Hackney, age 73, Joseph PAUL of 52 Viaduct Street, Bethnal Green (Non Conformist & Non Parochial Registers)
South Conduit Street was renamed Viaduct Street in 1864.
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=22751
I think this may be Joseph in 1861 - with a new wife. Do you already have this Kirk?
1861: 22 South Conduit Street, Bethnal Green.
RG 9/ Piece 258 / Folio / 159 / Pg14
Head: Joseph PALL (POALL ?) 64, Silk Weaver, b Bishopagae(sic) City
Wife: Mary PALL (POALL ?) 54, n Bethnal Green
Head: Marmaduke CONNOR 29, Silk Weaver, b Bethnal Green
Wife: Sarah Emma CONNOR 23, Silk Weaver, b Bethnal Green
Son: Marmaduke CONNOR 2 mths, b Bethnal Green
(The CONNORS are on a separate Schedule in same dwelling - may or may not be related. Marmaduke CONNOR married Sarah Emma TASHAW in 1857, Bethnal Green)
And this may be the 2nd-marriage of Joseph - albeit his age a bit out
20th Sep 1858, Church of St Bartholemew, Bethnal Green
Joseph PAUL 52, widower, Weaver, Father: Richard PAUL,Weaver
Mary Ann SANSUM 49, Spinster, Father: Thomas SANSUM, Weaver
Both of 11 Scott Street.
Signed: The X Mark of Joseph PAUL
Signed: The X Mark of Mary Ann SANSUM
Witness: James PETIGREE, his X Mark and John ARCHER, signed.
With his widow in 1871 at the same address he was buried from:
52 Viaduct Street, Bethnal Green
RG10/ Piece: 492 / Folio: 88 / Pg42
Head: Mary Ann PAUL 64, widow, Silk Weaver, b Bethnal Green
In the same address on 2 different schedules, are an elderly woman and an elderly couple.
Cheers
AMBLY
-
Hello everyone,
I didn't talk about Eleanor as I thought it might cloud the issue however this is what I know about her. She married John Read and together they had at least two children, one being Mary Ann, my grandmother's grandmother. When Mary Ann was young her parents separated. I don't know the reasons but I suspect it was something to do with John because he was never mentioned and no one named their children after him. I haven't tackled John yet but Eleanor lived with a man named Stephen West who was a French Polisher by profession. When he was a child he lived next door to the Read family. Eleanor's oldest daughter started to call herself Sarah West and this is the name she married under. Mary Ann sometimes called herself Mary Ann Paul but when she married she used her real surname. Both girls loved their stepfather. They named children after him and he was a witness at their wedding.
Eleanor died in 1915. You can find her in the 1911 census. under the name West.
Eleanor was often called Ellen and yes that is her in the 1841 census under the surname Pawl.
Kirk
-
Dear Smudwhisk,
I did wonder about the naming order too but it isn't always followed and family loyalties can change due to circumstances. Perhaps seems were not too rosy between son and parents until later on ;) however the fact that the 'father' was a lawyer might put a spoke in the works except that I don;t know what Charles' occupation was. I only know that Joseph, Eleanor and possibly Richard were silk weavers. Richard was Charles' tenth child of at least seventeen. I know at least eight died young but he could have apprenticed his children out as his circumstances could have changed and perhaps he was not as successful as his title might make him appear? These are just thoughts of course.
I didn't know about that other Paul family in B'gate so I guess I should go through all of them and draw up lists to see who's who and who belongs where.
Kirk
-
Dear Ambly,
I found that burial for Joseph just last night too. :)
I didn't know the details of that second marriage so that is something to add. His death was registered by Mary and they lived at Viaduct Street. I am not worried about the ages given for marriage as I often find that ancestor has been somewhat Zsa Zsa Gabor like when it comes to revealing their true age!
I wish I could find that first marriage!
Bye for now
Kirk
-
Good Morning
1841 census Essex St
Joseph Paul 45 weaver y
Sarah 40 y
Ellen 13 y
Joseph Paul married Sarah Harris 12.5.1816 by banns at St George in the East,both of this parish,bachelor and spinster..
he signed and she made her mark.Witness William Harris and J Serrall.
Sarah Harriss was baptised at St Andrews Holborn 15.3.1795 d of William and Elizabeth Harriss.
Sarah Paul death Mar 1851 Whitechapel.
Ciderdrinker
-
however the fact that the 'father' was a lawyer might put a spoke in the works except that I don;t know what Charles' occupation was.
Charles was a weaver too. London Apprenticeships Abstracts has:
1776 Peter Paul son of Charles of St Botolph Bishopsgate, weaver, to William Bampton, Pewterers Company.
That's the only Paul entry in the index. Interestingly, as they lived in St Botolph Bishopsgate, Charles wasn't a freeman which perhaps you would have expected if his father was a lawyer, ie. had money of sorts ???.
No I agree not all families name their eldest children after the grandparents, I've some that don't, but all the evidence so far does start to suggest that Charles the weaver is less likely to be Charles Etienne Paul.
-
Hello
Richard Paul buried St Botolph without Bishopsgate 7.9.1829 age 66 address weird George and Catherine Wheel Yard.
Married St George in the East by banns 20.1.1792 Martha Hayes both this parish by banns sp & bach and both made mark.Witness John Fell and Jasper Mishaw (made mark).
Martha Hayes baptised 3.7.1763 All Hallow tottenham to Henry and Martha Hayes.
1841 census Angel Alley st Botolph
Thomas Reed 48 clockmaker Ireland
Elizabeth 38 y
Dinah 14 n
James 12 Ireland
William 7 y
Thomas 4 y
Caroline 2mths
Martha Paul 81 y
Martha Died Mar 1851 City of London 2 173
Ciderdrinker
-
I didn't know about that other Paul family in B'gate so I guess I should go through all of them and draw up lists to see who's who and who belongs where.
All Paul, apparently Hall Paul, was a baker by profession and a Freeman. It seems he was the son of a Peter and Mary Paul, baptised as Hall Pull, in St Botolph Bishopsgate in 1722 and married by licence in 1746 as All Paul. and buried as Hall Paul in 1775 at St Botolph Bishopsgate. On the face of it, he may be a different family but they need investigating as there are some overlaps in children's names.
It's a shame Charles didn't become a freeman or be apprenticed because it would have confirmed his father's name. The fact he didn't tends to suggest that he probably learned his trade from family, which weavers often did even at that time and would have avoided the need to pay for an apprenticeship, is another indication of a poorer family.
-
Dear Smudwhisk,
Hall Paul - The son of Peter Paul and Mary ;) - I shall investigate them.
I do agree that my Pauls were a poor family and the lack of an apprentice record could indicate, as you say, that the boy Charles was trained 'in house' but I wonder why his son wasn't trained likewise.
I also agree that the link with Charles Etienne Paul is now looking rather weak and while it would be fab, I must put aside romanticism and stick with facts darn it!
Having said that I still have the family stories of Huguenot descent to prove or otherwise.
-
Dear Ciderdrinker,
Please have a large glass for me! This information that you have given me is helping me a lot.
What do you think about Richard's father?
Bye for now
Kirk
-
Only one of Charles' sons appears to have been apprenticed. If the remainder were weavers, they probably learnt the trade from their father. In the case of Peter, it could just be he was apprenticed because they wanted him to be something other than a weaver and perhaps could afford to pay for the apprenticeship for only one son.
All/Hall Paul's father Peter was also a freeman but can't read the profession properly. Hall Paul only became a Freeman in 1748/9 but his freeman papers state his father was admitted in 1703.
Can anyone decipher the father's profession?
-
My Nottinghamshire family has a load of framework knitters, commonly abbreviated in records as FWK.
I wonder whether that isn't SW for silk weaver ... and what is after that I don't know ... unless it is a sort of consonants-only shorthand for Weaver.
-
I think that you could be right Janeycanuck.
We thought it was initials too. It looks like 'undecipherable letter' then W, R, V.
Interestingly all the signatories appear to be family with at least two other Paul weavers plus a Stutchbury (All Paul's wife was a Stutchbury)
Kirk
-
Dear Georgefriedrich
Sorry not to get back to you sooner but I don't have a computer at home and the Library shuts at 12.30 on Saturday.
Anyway I think you're on the right track with that baptism Charles Etienne Paul 1729.The other alternative is Whitechapel 245.5.1736 to a Charles and Elizabeth Paul which would make him only 16 when he had Hester in 1753.
I was hoping to get something positive from their burials but the possibles I've found at st Dunstans Stepney don't help.Charles buried 6.12.1809 MEOT and Sarah MEOT 2.11.1817 have no occupation and while Sarah is 80 years old there is no age for Charles.
As for William Paul surgeon etc on the marriages 1729 and 1741 ,someone mentioned there should be a freedom of the city of London for his son Charles and there is 25.5.1736 Charles Paul so of William of the Surgeons guild.If this is the same William then Charles must have been at least 21 so born 1715 ish.Would the couple really have another son Charles Etienne in 1729?
What we need is that 1729 baptism in full.
Birmingham Archives has a printed copy.
They've been shut for a year.
But reopened today.
I went this morning.
Bad news no access till the end of the month.It's in storage,there is no procedure at present to access anything in store but there should be by the end of the month.So I'll get back to you on that.
In the meantime if anybody else has access to the Huguenot Quarter Folios -it's Volume 42 that you need.
Will carry on with a few other leads
Ciderdrinker
-
Have found marriage bond
Guillaume Paul to Ann Cazalot parish of St Bartholomew's Prope Regate Ecambums 4. May 1726.
Not sure where that it is but in London and Surrey marriage bonds.
They married at the Artillery church 14.5.1726.)
Guilliaume Paul native of Montpelier (fils defeu noble) s of Charles Paul and Mdle.Antoinette Fabvre
Ann Cazalet native of Summnene en Cevenn something d of Eitenne Cazalet and Anne Abrie
Married by licence.
Signed Paul ,Anne Cazalet.Etienne Cazalet ,Peter ?aillett and John Chevalier
So it does look like the same couple.
Ciderdrinker
Ps this is the same guy marrying in 21.12.1741 to Elizabeth Tuquet,the Doctor and lawyer.
-
As for William Paul surgeon etc on the marriages 1729 and 1741 ,someone mentioned there should be a freedom of the city of London for his son Charles and there is 25.5.1736 Charles Paul so of William of the Surgeons guild.If this is the same William then Charles must have been at least 21 so born 1715 ish.
If you take a closer look at the 1736 Freedom it states that the Charles Paul admitted to the Company of Surgeons was the son of William Paul of Aberdeen, Scotland, shoemaker (it's down the left hand side) and that he was admitted to the freedom by redemption. Redemption means he paid for the freedom meaning his father wasn't a Freeman.
That Charles is NOT the same as Georgefriedrich's Charles who it has been shown was a weaver likes his descendents. It is also not going to be Charles Etienne Paul because his father was a Lawyer & Surgeon.
-
In the meantime if anybody else has access to the Huguenot Quarter Folios -it's Volume 42 that you need.
The Huguenot Society folio says that Charles Etienne Paul was born the 17 July and baptised the 5 August, therefore he couldn't have been admitted to Freedom of the Company of Surgeons in 1736 as he would have been 7 years old.
Charles Etienne Paul cannot be the same person as Charles Paul the weaver.
Ciderdrinker, as has already been discussed if your read the previous posts, Charles Paul of St Botolph Bishopsgate is more likely related to All/Hall Paul of the same parish and I believe that is the direction Georgefriedrich is looking to research. It seems highly unlikely that someone whose father was a Lawyer and Surgeon is going to end up working as a weaver in Bishopsgate.
-
Hi there. I've got Sansums, weavers, perching in my tree. Thomas Sansum, b 1773 Bethnal Green. silk weaver. married mary Coleman Are they the same as your Sansoms? He had apprentices. Huguenots?
Di
-
Just to add that my husband's family are called Paul and are of Huguenot descent. In the first half of the twentieth century they lived in the Wimbledon area of South West London (Tooting perhaps.) I found a reference to what appears to be the same family, coming to the UK in I think, the 1 18th century and settling in Scotland (Sutherland) where they worked as weavers. This is harder to research because of restricted access to Scottish archives but they seem to have specialised in weaving fine wool. Why they should move to a relatively poor and underpopulated area of the UK I do not know. They married into a Scottish family called Darling. John Paul married Isabella Darling on 13th August 1839 in London. I do not know when they moved to London of if they left family behind in Scotland (maybe he was a younger son?) They had a large family including Christian (b 1840) Janet (b 1841) Isabella (b1843) James Alexander (b1844) Emily (b1846) John (b1848) William George (b1850) Albert (b 1852) Henry Robert (1854) Harriet (b 1857). My husband is descended from Albert Paul. I cannot find anyone called Charles in the family tree.