RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Durham => Topic started by: cathped on Wednesday 01 October 14 21:04 BST (UK)
-
Hello. Is anyone willing to help me find the birth of my Great Grandmother Eliza Jane Tuck abt 1883 Durham pleeeese? So far the information I have is:
Her marriage to Thomas Salkeld 1905 reg Chester-le-St, Durham, Vol 10 pg 648 first quarter. This is off Ancestry but I haven’t got the record copy.
I have a birth that MIGHT be her but it’s as Took not Tuck. Could this spelling be a mistake? I can’t find any church transcripts for the period to see.
Eliza Jane Took registered Dec qtr 1883 Lanchester RD Durham ref 10 292
Then I have a possible 1901 census in Urpeth:
Eliza J Tuck 17 servant b Tanfield, Durham
RG13/4700 /63 p 16
The 1911 census is her BUT on the original census it doesn’t say where she was born!
7 Springfield Terrace Felling
Eliza Jane Salkeld age 27 wife Heworth SD
Piece: 30392
I know she remarried in 1919 to a Thomas Mennom after my g grandfather died in 1916 at the Somme. I have no death for her.
So, it’s a puzzle! Can anyone help find her birth and parentage please? :)
-
Wonder if this is her in 1891?
1 John St Craghead Chester le Street
William Tuck Head M 48 coal miner Hempnall? Norfolk
Charlotte wife M 44 Swaffham Norfolk
Walter son U 21 coal miner Wackton Pulham Norfolk
Frederick son U 19 coal miner ditto
Jesse son 18 coal miner Wickham Durham
Robert son 16 coal miner ditto
Henry son 16 coal miner ditto
Arthur Ed son 13 scholar ditto
Louisa daughter 11 ditto
ELIZA J daughter 7 Tanfield Durham
Alfred son 6 Whickham Durham
Hannah daughter 4 Whickham durham
RG12 4121 89 38
Suz
-
Thanks Suz, that looks promising! If it was it opens up loads of new avenues for me. Norfolk would be a surprise but there must be mining links. ;D
-
I can find baptisms of older children in Whickham but not younger ones
I think the birth reg is most probably the one you found as |Took
Suz
-
Thank you. I have found the 1881 and 1901 censuses with this Tuck family, though one was spelt Took -and Tack on Ancestry's transcription for the 1891 that you found. Eliza obviously wasn't born for the 1881, and wasn't with her siblings on the 1901 (if they are her family) but that's ok as that's when I have her as a servant in the area. Getting excited! ;D
-
Hempnall is correct. Postal town Norwich. I think William Tuck the father died Chester-le-Street area Dec Qtr 1908.
-
Thanks again. I want to stop up all night and search more! but have my 2 yr old granddaughter at the crack of dawn!!
-
1871 they are under LOOK!;
William Look 28, Ag Lab
Charlotte Look 24
William H Look 3, born Sheffield
Walter Look 1
Now as far as I know there is no Sheffield in Norfolk.
I had looked for a Marriage for William to a Charlotte 18651869ish on FreeBMD in Norfolk with no luck.
There is this one though;
Marriage Reg, Sept 1866, Sheffield, 9c 499
William TUCK/Charlotte NELSON on same page
Then there is this;
Name: Charlotte Nelson
Gender: Female
Baptism Date: 8 Aug 1847
Baptism Place: Swaffham, Norfolk, England
Father: Robert Nelson
Mother: L... Dickerson
FHL Film Number: 1471577
Reference ID: item 3 p 10
1851 Census has a ROBERT Nelson born c 1811 Swafham/Wife Sophia and several Children including a CHARLOTTE age 3 (1848) born Swafham
FreeREG has her Baptism, 8 Aug 1847, St Peter/St Paul, Swaffham, to ROBERT/SOPHIA nee Dickerson.
1861 we have;
Ann Dickerson 86
Rebecca Dickerson 47
Charlotte Nelson 16, Grand/Daughter
Of course you would need a Birth Cert of one of William/Charlotte Tucks Children to confirm her maiden name but looks ok to me :)
EDIT;
Marriage of Robert NELSON to Sophia DICKENSON, 28 Jun 1829, Swaffham is on FreeREG
www.freereg.org.uk
-
Lots of info there Trish - thank you. 'Look' is unreal! :o I need to get into it all when my granddaughter goes home. I have ordered the Took /Tuck birth cert and her marriage cert from the GRO to see if that Took was a spelling mistake, which in my heart I think it is. My whole tree has been unreal to research in the last 6 months with spelling variations. I've found, with help on here, 3 of the Salkeld g grandfathers, all Thomas, and their spellings were Sarkeld, Sawkill and Salkelo!!! Still hunting the 1818 one. You'd think Tuck would be simple!!!!! ::) This site is so helpful so thanks everyone :-*
-
Update: GRO have refunded part of my order (for the birth and marriage cert of Eliza). They seemingly have found the marriage – I’ve not got it yet, but they couldn't find her birth. (I'd ordered that birth certificate based on me hoping that the Took name was really Tuck).
GRO response:
‘There is no trace of the above mentioned person at the reference you quoted.
Eliza J Tuck 1883 Dec Lanchester 10a 292 ‘
Wondering now, should I have named her as Took which is the name on the record I found on Ancestry, even though I’m hoping she’s Tuck? If I do, and they find her as Took, can I assume they will see an alternative spelling on their records? If it remains as Took, dare I assume she is my great grandmother???? :-\
Think I’d best wait to see what the marriage cert throws up, if anything……. :P
-
Good luck with the Cert. Let us know the outcome :)
-
"‘There is no trace of the above mentioned person at the reference you quoted.
Eliza J Tuck 1883 Dec Lanchester 10a 292"
They are correct. Eliza J. was registered as "Took" Both on the original GRO Registers and Free BMD. Exactly the same registration date/references as you have.
-
Thank you. Well, think I'll order that cert again (after the mentioned marr cert arrives) using the Took name, then see if her parents turn out to be William and Charlotte, which would fit the many censuses that may be the family, with spelling variations Look, Tack and Took! If not....I give in!!! The waiting in between is killing me! :'(
-
They are correct. Eliza J. was registered as "Took" Both on the original GRO Registers and Free BMD. Exactly the same registration date/references as you have.
In addition to this, as I suggested here
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=699822.msg5432878#msg5432878 it's always worth cross-checking surnames on the Durham Registrar's site.
This confirms Eliza Janes surname as Took not Tuck :)
-
Sarkeld, Sawkill and Salkelo!!!
Salkelo was a mis-transcription from the original index onto freeBMD. The original index definitely showed Salkeld :)
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=699822.msg5432878#msg5432878
-
Yay! The marriage cert has arrived. Married 11 March 1905 at reg office, Chester-Le-Street Durham. Thomas, a coalminer was 20 and Eliza 21. The residence for both was No Place, Beamish, Urpeth Durham. His father was Thomas, a colliery labourer and hers was William, a coal miner. Witnesses were Hannah Tuck and Henry Tuck. So chuffed I have her father William, meaning the censuses could be theirs. Will order that Took birth cert today to see what it brings. Will get searching for Hannah and Henry too....... :P
-
Got the birth cert for Eliza Jane 'Took', and her parents are indeed William and Charlotte nee Nelson! Born 27 Aug 1883 Tanfield Lea. Father miner. So the many censuses etc you helpers have found, plus further I've found since, do show the Tuck name to be recorded in several ways! Isn't it great when another piece of an enormous jigsaw start finally coming together. Thanks so much everyone :-* ;D ;D 8)
-
Just have to add this funny moment I had a little earlier; was washing up thinking of my tree when up popped a little memory I had as a girl, when some older relative told us all we were related to Nelson!! (meaning Horatio). Obviously we are not, but the clue was there all along, the name Nelson in our ancestry. ::)
-
Lots of info there Trish - thank you. 'Look' is unreal! :o I need to get into it all when my granddaughter goes home. I have ordered the Took /Tuck birth cert and her marriage cert from the GRO to see if that Took was a spelling mistake, which in my heart I think it is. My whole tree has been unreal to research in the last 6 months with spelling variations. I've found, with help on here, 3 of the Salkeld g grandfathers, all Thomas, and their spellings were Sarkeld, Sawkill and Salkelo!!! Still hunting the 1818 one. You'd think Tuck would be simple!!!!! ::) This site is so helpful so thanks everyone :-*
Hi,
I did a small amount of research for a friend on the name TUCK with great difficulty because of differing ways of spelling. If you think of documents even in our time we rarely write our own names it's the Registrar, Clergy of Enumerators (before 1911) and they would not think to ask a mere mortal how to spell TUCK bearing in mind there's not a great deal of difference when you say TOOK ;D
I gave up my TUCK research, which also started in Norfolk, when the friend explained that among her close family many used numerous different spellings, Oh dear
-
Ha ha! Needless to say I'm on another branch of my tree for a while!!