Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Bosconermal

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 8
1
Surrey / Re: Ann Manning: probable coincidence, but who knows?
« on: Friday 11 April 25 20:58 BST (UK)  »
LizzieL and jonwarrn: Where are you finding these entries for Thomas, Joannes and Patricius? In FindMyPast I can see a Thomas who is born in 1815, died on 22 Dec 1816 and was buried in Spitalfields Burial Ground. That's in Tower Hamlets on the other side of the Thames and you'd think if they lived in Southwark they'd bury him there. Not necessarily, but you'd think so. The information is from a burial index that doesn't give his parents' names. You have a specific birth/baptism date. There is a practice of giving child the name of a predeceased sibling, so another Thomas in 1821 could be

I knew about Honora, but not about the Patricius born a few weeks later. Both baptized in Catholic churches. That's a head-scratcher. Patricius is baptized in St. Mary Moorfields in the City, whereas Ann, Honora, Elizabeth and Thomas were baptized in Southwark. Mind you, Peter and Eleanor were apparently married in St. Magnus the Martyr in the City.

Amazing sleuthing. Now I wonder where Peter and Eleanor came from!

2
Surrey / Re: Ann Manning: probable coincidence, but who knows?
« on: Monday 07 April 25 20:33 BST (UK)  »
Mary Ann Cambridge
Present at the Death
14 Mason Street
Old Kent Road

3
Surrey / Re: Ann Manning: probable coincidence, but who knows?
« on: Monday 07 April 25 20:12 BST (UK)  »
It is! I didn't have that. I have her death of tetanus on 13 Aug. but not her burial. This is a score! Thank you so much.

4
Surrey / Re: Ann Manning: probable coincidence, but who knows?
« on: Monday 07 April 25 16:53 BST (UK)  »
Wow, thank you everyone!

1) I have Sarah Sherricks as the wife of Peter Manning in my notes but remember having a problem with that apart from the age gap. I'll look at that one again. Of course, I don't know if this Peter is my Peter. I don't remember having come across the Peter Manning who died in 1835.

2) Wivenhoe: thanks for the 1851 list, which I did have. Reuben and Ann had two more children after that: Caroline (1852-1854), who died of cholera and was included in John Snow's study; and Harriett (1856-1934) who emigrated to Canada and was my ggmother.

The rest I haven't had a chance to absorb and won't until a little later. I'll get back to you if only to say thank you again.

5
Surrey / Re: Ann Manning: probable coincidence, but who knows?
« on: Monday 07 April 25 06:11 BST (UK)  »
Thank you Wivenhoe, but I have this information. If you know more or have suggestions about Ann before she was married or Ann and Elizabeth's parents, that would be really helpful.

My working theory is that the parents are Peter Manning and Eleanor Creden (or Creedon/Creed/Craden/Grad in other sources. It could actually be Creighton for all I know). Ann gave her fourth child the middle name of Eleanor, so maybe after her mother. Peter and Eleanor married at Saint Magnus the Martyr in the City of London on 19 Apr 1813. He was a bachelor and she a widow. Creden is probably her maiden name, but could be the name of her first husband, depending on how you read the Latin in Ann's (Maria Anna's) baptismal record, from St. George's Cathedral in Southwark:

"Die 15 Jan: 1814 nata et die 27 Feb: 1814 baptisata fuit Maria Anna filia Petri Manning & Helena olim Creed, conjugum Sponsores fuerint Petrus Giller & Catharine Certon”

I read olim Creed to mean her original (maiden) name was Creed (or whatever variant). Petri and Helenae are just the Latin genitive forms of Peter and Helen and Helen is surely the cleric's Latinization of Eleanor.

Assuming this is correct then there was a sister Honora born in 1815 and baptized at St. George's (Catholic) cathedral. Elizabeth was born in 1818 and baptized in Bermondsey Dockhead, also Catholic. After that I only have theories about Peter and Eleanor. I assume he is alive at the time of time of Elizabeth's wedding in 1841 and I'm pretty certain he's dead by Ann's second marriage in 1860. There was no legal requirement to indicate whether a father was alive or dead on a marriage record, but it seems unlikely that he would be called "dead" in 1860 if he wasn't. It is possible he was also deceased in 1841 and it wasn't noted. Peter is not a witness to the 1841 wedding. He's not mentioned at all on Ann's marriage record with Reuben Smith in 1834 in St. Mary Newington (C. of E.).

There was a Peter Manning who died at the age of 80 in March 1846 of "natural decay". His wife was named Sarah, so if it's him then Eleanor is probably dead and he's remarried. Divorce was apparently really rare back then and cost a lot. The only plausible record of a Peter Manning in the area with a wife named Sarah is a marriage record between Peter Manning and Sarah Sherricks in Whitechapel in 1843 except that the Sarah Sherricks in Whitechapel in the 1841 census would be ~23 years old and he'd be 77. Not likely.

I don't know anything about Eleanor. A sponsor at Honora's baptism was "Honor Creedon", which should be a clue. There was an Eleanor Manning who died in Walworth, Southwark in July 1843 but her record of death doesn't mention her marital status and the death was witnessed by "Mary Ann Cambridge", not a husband. The record does not say that "Mary Ann Cambridge" is her daughter, which would blow up all my theories, but it's a possibility. This Eleanor was 52 when she died, so born ca. 1791, which would make her 23, 24 and 27 when she had Ann/Mary-Ann, Honora and Elizabeth. If they are indeed her kids. That's reasonable. If Peter was the guy who died in 1846 he'd have been 48, 49 and 52. That'd make for a big age gap with his wife.

There is an Honora Manning who was admitted to the Fulham Road workhouse in 1884, who is described as R.C. (i.e. Catholic). She'd be 70 although the workhouse record suggests she was 66. She was admitted from St. Margaret's parish, which I assume is the one near Westminster Abbey. She apparently didn't marry, so I don't see a record that mentions her parents other than her baptismal record.

So as well as the question from my previous post I have a lot of conjectures. I'd sure appreciate anyone's thoughts on any of this.

6
Surrey / Ann Manning: probable coincidence, but who knows?
« on: Sunday 06 April 25 21:06 BST (UK)  »
My 2nd GG was Ann Manning and information about her early life has proven elusive. Here's a bit of background:

Census records mostly point to her having been born in Bermondsey in 1817 (1841 and 1861 censuses, 1872 death record) but the 1851 census suggests 1815 and the 1871 suggests 1818. No ages or birthdates on her marriage records.

Ann was married to Reuben Smith from 1834 until his death in an accident in 1857. She remarried in 1860. I know her father's name was Peter from Ann's second marriage record (Peter is deceased) and her sister Elizabeth's only marriage record from 1841 (Peter is alive). That's all I know definitively about her parents, but I have a strong suspicion that they are Peter Manning (1766-1846) and Eleanor Creden (no dates for her, but they married in 1813). They show up in Catholic registers. If they are the parents then they had Ann in Southwark in Feb, 1814 (called "Maria Anna" in a Latin baptismal record), Elizabeth in 1817 and at least one other child (Honora) in-between. No middle name for Ann on the baptismal record.

I just came across admission and discharge workhouse records from 1854 for Ann Eleanor Manning. On the discharge record it says she was admitted at the age of 36 on 16 Oct 1834, discharged on 21 Nov. and was "cholorous" but cured upon discharge. There was a terrible outbreak of cholera in Bermondsey (the "Southwark Slaughter") at that time, which was documented by John Snow. In fact, Ann's 2nd youngest child died of cholera in August 1854 and is mentioned in Snow's study.

Could the workhouse Ann be my Ann? Pros: 1) age is consistent 2) first name is spelled without an "e" 3) cholera was endemic in Bermondsey at the time and I know her daughter died of it that year. Most likely Ann cared for her 4) middle name is Eleanor, which could be for her mother. Cons: 1) she's called Ann "Manning" even though the 1851 census calls her Ann Smith 2) the workhouse record is from Marylebone, not close to Bermondsey. Ann lived her whole life in Bermondsey so far as I know.

The evidence is circumstantial and I think the similarity is probably a coincidence, but maybe they moved infected people away to remove them from the "miasma" the medical profession thought caused cholera. I don't know. Bermondsey was horrendously polluted and smelly. If they are the same person I don't know why she'd call herself Manning, though.

Anyone have any additional thoughts one way or the other?

7
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Henry Spicer's profession
« on: Wednesday 27 February 19 04:05 GMT (UK)  »
I think you are right about the long s.  "Straw bonnt presser" does make sense.

Thank you!

8
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Henry Spicer's profession
« on: Wednesday 27 February 19 03:24 GMT (UK)  »
Thank you, that is a possibility. “Straw bonnet presser” was an actual profession. I want to put an f into the middle of the third word, but can’t make it make sense that way

9
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Henry Spicer's profession
« on: Wednesday 27 February 19 01:42 GMT (UK)  »
On the 1841 census? He later worked as a rent and debt collector, broker and auctioneer. Lots of scrapes with the law, so mostly up to no good, it seems.

In 1841 he is ~25 and I can't read his profession


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 8