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 - Harleston

Pages: [1] 2
1
Norfolk / Re: Henry COE
« on: Thursday 07 June 12 22:25 BST (UK)  »
Thank you for the information. It would appear geographically, that the Henry Coe of Morningthorpe is a more likely candidate.

Regards,

Harleston

2
Norfolk / Re: Henry COE
« on: Tuesday 15 May 12 23:15 BST (UK)  »
Dear Leanne,

The Daniel Coe who married Mary Ann Tapps, was a transported convict. His trial was held at Chelmsford Essex.
There is a Daniel Coe baptised 28th November 1812, the son of John and Elizabeth Coe, at St. Giles Great Maplestead Essex. Perhaps, this is the Daniel you are seeking.

Regards

Harleston 

3
Norfolk / Re: Henry COE
« on: Monday 14 May 12 23:03 BST (UK)  »
Dear Leanne,

I'm afraid you may have a different Daniel Coe. Daniel the son of Henry Coe and Ann Banham, married a Mary Ann Chadwick on the 30th May 1841, Bradwell, Suffolk.

Regards,

Harleston

4
Norfolk / Re: Henry COE
« on: Wednesday 18 October 06 23:31 BST (UK)  »
Thanks for your interest, moonmom. It was good of you to look it up and post your findings.

The Henry Coe I'm researching moved to South Elmham from elsewhere. His marriage, as a widower, to Mary Elwin, in South Elmham St. Margaret in 1776, and the burial of a Mary Coe in 1774, are the first references of the name Coe in any South Elmham parish, or even surrounding parishes, that I've come across. Henry Coe must, therefore, have moved there from quite a number of parishes away, but just how far away, I have not been able to discover.

This is position I've reached, so I am still looking for a helping hand from anyone who may have come across a baptism of any Henry Coe at the right date (circa 1747), even if he was baptised a long way from South Elmham itself. It might give a lead which I can follow up with some more research.

5
Sussex / Re: COE
« on: Tuesday 21 February 06 17:36 GMT (UK)  »
Dear Roy,

Thank you very much for this interesting suggestion. I will follow up this lead by searching the Suffolk militia muster rolls for the period as soon as I can.

6
Suffolk / Re: MUDD Family
« on: Monday 20 February 06 23:22 GMT (UK)  »
Thomas Mudd, who married Elizabeth Coe in Huntingfield, 28th June 1881. Is he part of your family tree?

7
Sussex / Re: COE
« on: Monday 20 February 06 20:45 GMT (UK)  »
Thank you for your continuing suggestions. In the 1841 census, George is in South Elmham, Suffolk, and the entry in the "Whether born in same County" column is 'N'. In the 1851 census, George's birthplace is stated as "uk" (which I take to be short for 'unknown'), which isn't very helpful at all. His siblings are all born in South Elmham, Suffolk, the first sibling being baptised in April 1823. Samuel's occupation was Agricultural Labourer. It is possible that Samuel had to seek work far away from Suffolk, although I must admit that Sussex is quite a distance to travel!

By the way, in the 1881 census, it is clearly written Sussex in the "Where Born" column.

8
Sussex / Re: COE
« on: Monday 20 February 06 18:21 GMT (UK)  »
Many thanks for all your help and suggestions.

Here's what I know about the George Coe I'm looking for; George Coe was married in South Elmham, Suffolk. His father is stated (on the Marriage Certificate) as being Samuel Coe. (Samuel Coe was married in 1817 to Mary in Suffolk). On the census returns, however, George states that he was born in Sussex, circa 1818. I am therefore assuming that Samuel and Mary Coe left Suffolk for Sussex in either 1817 or 1818. George was then born in Sussex, and shortly afterwards the whole family returned to Suffolk.

I don't know if this might help.

9
Sussex / COE
« on: Sunday 19 February 06 16:10 GMT (UK)  »
Has anyone come across a baptism of a George Coe, son of Samuel and Mary, circa 1818, anywhere in the county of Sussex? I would be very grateful for any information.

Pages: [1] 2