RootsChat.Com

England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Berkshire => Topic started by: spec on Monday 20 January 25 20:19 GMT (UK)

Title: John Gunter
Post by: spec on Monday 20 January 25 20:19 GMT (UK)
Hi
Could anyone help me
Looking for John Gunter
Son of Thomas and Ann Sandford
Of Enborne Berkshire
Born about 1886 thats as far as i can get looking for him
Regards spec
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: softly softly on Monday 20 January 25 20:40 GMT (UK)
spec, as a matter of interest where have you established his name from.

SS
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: spec on Monday 20 January 25 20:43 GMT (UK)
From family search
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: Mabel Bagshawe on Monday 20 January 25 21:40 GMT (UK)
His birth registration

GUNTER, JOHN
mmn        SANDFORD     
Q3 1886 
NEWBURY  Volume 02C  Page 245


1891 - as per Ancestry. Address ??thorne Heath, Enbourne. All born there except for the father, b Newbury

Thomas Sunter    49    Head  Ag lab
Ann Sunter        39    
Henry L Sunter   15    
Thomas Sunter   13    
Charles Sunter   11    
Albert Sunter           9    
Sidney Sunter     7    
John Sunter            5    
Annie Sunter      3    
Edith Sunter       11 months

Big family. At least one child before Henry and two after Edith
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: ribbo39 on Monday 20 January 25 21:52 GMT (UK)
I haven't found any precise details but his parents married in dec1/4 1873 Newbury Dist. but it would appear to be in Enborne, Berks.

There is a tree on Ancestry.co.uk which seems to have full details of his birth 5-6-1886 Enborne with his marriages, WW1 army service.

Alan
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: Mabel Bagshawe on Monday 20 January 25 22:06 GMT (UK)
Thomas Gunter,     27
Father    Richard Gunter

Ann Sandford     22
Father    Henry Sandford

Marriage    27 Jul 1873    Enborne

Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: CaroleW on Monday 20 January 25 23:17 GMT (UK)
John can easily be found on 1911 in Berks b 1887 Enborne - visitor
1901 also in Berks aged 14 - boarder

Possible marriage 1913 to Lillian Susan Victoria Shannon - his father is shown as Thomas.  Marriage cert is on Ancestry
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: spec on Tuesday 21 January 25 13:33 GMT (UK)
Thankyou for that info
I am not on Ancestry and cant seem to het any census
So i appreciate your kindness
Regards spec
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: CaroleW on Tuesday 21 January 25 13:35 GMT (UK)
All censuses are free on Family Search.  Here's the link.  For other Ancestry records etc  - most local libraries have free access

https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/list?cqs=england+census
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: spec on Tuesday 21 January 25 13:43 GMT (UK)

Thankyou carole xx
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: CaroleW on Tuesday 21 January 25 13:48 GMT (UK)
If you check freebmd for Gunter/Shannon births there were 2 daughters born

Phyllis A (Alberta) 1914 & Lilian F (Frances) 1916

Both are living with grandfather Thomas in Enborne Berkshire in 1921 - mother dead.  See freebmd March qtr 1917 for death

John Gunter is in Paddington London in 1921 - widower - boarding with some Shannon relatives

Freebmd showing a marriage in June qtr 1921 to Maud L Dunn
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: spec on Tuesday 21 January 25 18:05 GMT (UK)
Carole thankyou for that info
I found the two girls
Although i have tried i dont think my phone gets
Census or it could be me getting confussed maybe the latter
Never mind muchappreciated
Johns brother Sidney was my Grandad
Regardsspec
Title: Re: John Gunter
Post by: PamberG on Wednesday 22 January 25 16:41 GMT (UK)
John's father Thomas was born on 3 May 1841 at Adeys Court, West Mills, Newbury. He married Ann Sandford on 27 July 1873 at St Michael, Enborne. I think they had 10 children but I have not researched them as they are very distant cousins of mine. Ann died 1919 & was buried 8 August 1919 at St Michael, Enborne. Thomas I think died March 1936 in Newbury.
In the 1921 census John is a widower lodging in Paddington & a fitter's mate. There is a death in Q3 1931 in Kensington of a John Gunter aged 45 which I suspect might be the correct death.