Two Children born only 1 baptised!!!

[coombs]

Hi

My 6xgreat grandparents Richard Titshall and Judith Scarfe were married by license in Sudbury, Suffolk in 1748.

It appears they only had the two children William and Richard, according to a 1768 settlement examination, yet after mentioning Will and Rick's names it said "also all such children, as they shall hereafter, to be our inhabitants legally settled in the parish of Laxfield".

Does that mean there were more children?

They were moving to Laxfield from Framlingham. It does seem they had already lived in Laxfield once before as I have found William's baptism in the village in May 1760, yet Richard was born in either 1763 or 1764 and cannot find his baptism in Laxfield, Framlingham or the surrounding villages as I have looked at 1763-1765 bishops transcripts. Why could that be?

He died in June 1811 aged 47. Richard Titshall's baptism is the most important one as he is my 5xgreat grandfather.

Any ideas please?

Thanks

Ben

[Guy Etchells]

As the settlement was in Laxfield that indicates that Richard Titshall was either born in Laxfield or obtained settlement there prior to William being born.

Have you searched for Richard's baptism in Sudbury? Somtimes the first born was baptised in the parish of his/her grandparents but subsequent children were baptised in the parish of residence.

It is also possible the infant was not baptised or baptised some years later.

I note you have only checked the BTs, I would recommend checking the parish registers as it is not unknown for there to be differences between the registers & BTs.

The setlement examination is simply avoiding the need and cost of a second examination by accepting any children born later as theirs.
Cheers
Guy

[coombs]

Hi Guy

I could always check the Sudbury area. Hadnt thought of that. Thanks for your suggestions. Richard Titshall Senior was born in about 1728 in Barnham, near Thetford, although their records are on the IGI. I cannot find Judiths baptism c1725.

So what your'e saying is the family had lived in Laxfield all the time then throughout 1760s even though they had a settlement examination in 1768?

Ben

[Guy Etchells]

You mentioned they were moving from Framlington to Laxfield and that Laxfield accepted them as theirs.
A parish would not accept the responsiblity and costs of strangers without reason.

I would therefore assume that Richard the father was from Laxfield and moved to other locations including Sudbury (where he married)  and Framlington then finally return to his parish of birth with his family.
It would seem in the time away from Laxfield he did not stay in one parish long enough to establish settlement there otherwise that parish would have be shown to be the parish of settlement.

Are there Titshalls in Laxfield prior to about 1720ish?
Cheers
Guy

[coombs]

Hi Guy

No there doesnt seem to be any Titshalls in Laxfield before the 1760s. I think it might of been because of work because Richard Titshall Snr was a miller. Could it be they had lived inLaxfield for about 10 years before establishing settlement?

The examination at the top says "To the Churchwardens and Overseers of The Poor Of The Parish Of Framlingham or to any of them". See Framlingham is a good 6 miles away from Laxfield, so it would seem strange they moved there after 1760 then back to Laxfield by 1768, but Richard Titshall definately wasnt from the village. All I know is he was there by 1760 when William was born. Sudbury and Barnham is in West Suffolk, yet Laxfield is in east Suffolk a good 20 odd miles away.

Could it be they finally established settlement after 10 years or so in Laxfield? It is getting a bit confusing all this?

Ben

[Guy Etchells]

At that time the settlement qualifications were -

To be born in the parish.
Renting or owning a property worth more than £10 per annum
Holding a Parish Office.
Being hired for a continuous period of over 365 days.
Having served a full apprenticeship to a legally settled man for the full 7 years
Women took the settlement of their husbands.

6 miles would have been considered a short distance in those days, easy walking distance.

Could he have been an apprentice miller, seving time under a Laxfield man?
Cheers
Guy

[coombs]

Hi Guy

Richard started an apprenticeship in 1741 as a miller to a master who lived in a nearby village to Barnham in West Suffolk and as they had to serve at least 7 years and as they were forbidden to marry, Richard would of probably wed Judith just after serving has apprenticeship which is 1748. I just looked up the license allegation and at that time Richard was of Sapiston near Barnham, so he probably had just completed his apprenticeship while in Sapiston.

So he'd of finished his apprenticeship way before 1760 which is the earliest time I have found him in Laxfield.

Ben

[windy_miller]

Some interesting additional info on Richard Titshall and his 1741 - 48 apprenticeship at Barnham/Sapiston.

Seems a John Morley was miller in Barnham in 1741.  Does the apprenticeship indenture confirm this?

Also, the same year (1741) Morley married Susan Sparham (of the Sapiston milling family).  This might have meant Richard worked at both mill sites for Morley/Spaham clan?

Hope this helps!

Windy

[amondg]

Ancestry has apprenticeship 1741 -1742

Ambrose Wicks - Miller of Barningham  - Richard Titshall of Barnham