Looking for info on Thomas Sayers - Boxer

[Valda]

1851 census HO107 1497 folio 63
45 Bayham Street St Pancras  Middlesex   
Thomas Sayer 24  Brighton Head  Married Journeyman Bricklayer
Sarah Sayer 18  Pancras, Middlesex, Wife  Married
Sarah Sayer 10mths  Pancras, Middlesex,  Daughter 

If Thomas died after 1858 any will he left will be at the Principal Registry at High Holborn.

Regards

Valda

[Valda]

"Sayers met a 21-year-old divorcee, Sarah Powell, around 1842".

Almost impossible in 1842 for anyone to meet an English divorcee. Before the Divorce Act of 1857 divorce could only be obtained by an Act of Parliament and therefore was really out of the reach of all but the nobility or near nobility. It was not a quick process so also somewhat difficult for someone as young as Sarah to have already achieved. After the 1857 Act divorce was still very rare because it was so expensive.

The Times, Saturday, Feb 07, 1863
Police
Clerkenwell
Charlotte Sayers, aged 30, residing at 10, Bellevue-cottages, Camden Street, Camden-town, described as of no occupation was charged before Mr. D’Eyncourt with wilfully breaking 20 panes of glass, value 10s the property of Thomas Sayers, ex-champion of England and circus proprietor.
The defendant, who has been living with the compliant, said she had been badly used by him. She was covered with bruises where he had knocked her about, and her arms were black and blue from his ill-usage. He had repeatedly knocked her about.
The compliant said the defendant had been from home for two nights, and on her return had illused him. On Thursday, at about 12 o’clock, she went to his house and made a great disturbance. She then went outside and threw stones through the windows. She broke 20 panes, and the damage amounted to about 10s. He wanted the defendant to keep away and not molest him any more, as he was tired of it. She caused a large mob of persons to assemble round his house.
The defendant said that her husband left her eight years ago, and that the compliant and his children came to live with her and she looked after them. She complained that the complaint on Wednesday returned home under the influence of liquor, broke her furniture and threw it into the street and then kicked her out. He told her, after she had taken some of her goods to a little room she had engaged, that is she came on the following day she could have the rest, and when she went quietly for them he refused to give them to her. He had now got a watch and chain, some brooches, and other articles belonging to her in his possession.
Mr D’Eyncourt inquired if that was true, and said that if it was so the complaint had better give them up and avoid disputes of this kind.
The prosecutor said there was nothing of the sort in the house, but if there was anything belonging to her there she was at liberty to have it, and more if she required it, as he did not wish to have anything more to do with her.
Mr. D’Eyncourt (to the defendant). – Will you promise me to keep away from the complaint and not to annoy him? It is not because he has cohabited with you that you are to annoy him, although there is not much to say on either side.
The defendant said she would if the magistrate compelled him to give up her goods and also granted her a summons for assault. On one occasion he nearly killed her, and although he was then taken to the police-station, she would not attend and press the charge. She now had bruises on her arms and body from his violence.
Mr D’Eyncourt said there must be no “ifs” in the question. He then ordered her to be bound over in the sum of 10/- to keep the peace towards the complaint and others for six calendar months.

Regards

Valda

[sillgen]

Well done Valda!   Fascinating stuff
Andrea

[kevlin]

Oh Valda, I am really grateful for your time  this is fanastic great reading. Sorry I have not replied earlier - you have put a name to "The divorcee"

Lin

[Valda]

I wouldn't say I had put a name to the divorcee. That is just information taken from a Kung Fu Magazine

As a 19-year-old novice prize fighter he fell in love with an attractive 21 year old divorcee, named Sarah Powell. She would be the love and the bane of the rest of his life. In their second year together, she had their first child, Young Sarah. Young Tom was born 3 years later. Tommy loved his "little nippers" more than life itself and would do anything for the kids.

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=473

It doesn't list its source for that information so I wouldn't hold a great deal of store by it. The point I was making using the quote, was essentially at least one piece of information in the sentence was highly likely to be incorrect - that Sarah was a divorcee. If that's wrong then I wouldn't hold out much hope the rest is correct.

As I can't find Sarah on the 1861 census does the information from that census confirm that it is the right family on the 1851 census? On the 1851 census Sarah was only 18 (and so if she was the mother of Peter born circa 1848 she would have given birth to him when she was about 15).

What information does Sarah give about her father on her marriage when she married as Sarah Henderson?

Could Peter Powell be the child of another relationship? Perhaps his mother was also called Sarah and the two women have been confused?

Regards

Valda

[kevlin]

In 1851 Thomas was with Sarah and the two children. In 1861 Thomas is with Charlotte. In 1865 Thomas had died and Sarah went on to marry James Aldridge and had issue and by 1871 Charlotte was living with a William Olrod - they never married. The Peter that shows as Peter Powell in 1851 but living with John Sayers ? and Charlotte it states that Peter was John's cousin. Peter dropped the Powell surname and used the surname Sayers drawing to the conclusion that this could be Toms son.  It has been stated that Sarah was a Divorcee but have not found anything to back this story. Another tale I have read is that Sarah was a married woman and her husband left her to work abroad when Sarah meet Thomas in 1847. Sarah was sent news that her husband had died and I found the marriage of Thomas to a Sarah Henderson on the 8th March 1853 confirming that her children by Thomas - Sarah & Thomas were born with the surname Henderson, but like Peter they used the Sayers surname. I must say Thomas Sayers's life could not have been easy keeping his two families separate.

Lin

[Valda]

So are you saying this 1851 census entry is incorrect?

'In 1851 Thomas was with Sarah and the two children.'

1851 census HO107 1497 folio 63
45 Bayham Street St Pancras  Middlesex   
Thomas Sayer 24  Brighton Head  Married Journeyman Bricklayer
Sarah Sayer 18  Pancras, Middlesex, Wife  Married
Sarah Sayer 10mths  Pancras, Middlesex,  Daughter 

The Kungfu magazine says there was a three year gap between Thomas' daughter Sarah and his son Thomas. The 1861 census does not show either child with Thomas or with Sarah. Sarah's age and place of birth on the 1861 and 1871 censuses is compatible with the details of the 1851 census above.

1861 census RG 116 folio 146
10 Belle Vue Cottage St Pancras  Middlesex   
Thomas Sayers 35  Brighton, Sussex, Head  Married PUGILIST Champion of England!!!
Charlotte Sayers 24 Uckfield, Sussex,  Wife Married Housekeeper
Peter Sayers 12 Sussex, Son   

There is a Thomas and Sarah Sayers aged 10 and 11, birthplace unknown, boarding in the equivalent of a 'Dame school' in Finchley on the 1861 census.

1861 census RG115 folio 45
1 York Street St Pancras  Middlesex   
James Aldrige 40 Pancras, Middlesex,  Head  Unmarried Cabdriver
Sarah Sayers 28 Pancras, Middlesex, Visitor Married Mangling
James A Sayers 1 Pancras, Middlesex, Son 
 
1871 census RG10 249 folio 31
34 Peckwater Street St Pancras  London   
James Aldridge 50  London, Middlesex,  Head  Married Cabman
Sarah Aldridge 36  London, Middlesex, Wife  Married   
James A Sayers 11 London, Middlesex, Son   
Alfred A Sayers 9 London, Middlesex, Son   
Charles A Sayers 7  London, Middlesex,  Son 
Robert A Sayers 5  London, Middlesex, Son 
Maria Bond abt 1804  London, Middlesex, Sister Widow 

1871 census RG10 222 folio 39
5 Melton Street St Pancras  London   
Charlotte Sayers 42  Bristol, Sussex, Head Married Tobacconist
William Francis Olrod 45  Sanchall, Surrey, Lodger Piano forte maker

1881 census RG11 199 folio 28
5 Melton Street St Pancras  London
Charlotte Sayers 53 Busted, Sussex,  Head  Widow Tobacconist
William Olrod 54 London, London, Middlesex, Boarder  Widower Piano forte maker
Emily H. Sayers 9 London, Middlesex, Granddaughter 
plus 1 boarder

Regards

Valda

[kevlin]

Yes your info confirms mine - ditto.

Thanks for taking an interest Valda - good to chat to someone on a confusing subject  and everyone else who popped in - many thanks

ttfn take care
Lin

[Roy G]

Hi there
Although I cannot give you much on Tom (I only researched him to remove him from my family Sayers tree) I can give you some of his ancestry and name other family members.  They were as follows.
Yours Roy G

Line of TOM SAYERS
the BRIGHTON PUGELIST

Grandparents
JAMES & ELIZABETH of Storrington

Parents
William Sayers (b 1792) a shoemaker formerly of Storrington.
married Maria Hopkins of Tillington
at St Nicholas Church in Brighton on 30 Dec 1811
(Maria b c 1783 has also been recorded as Mary & Susan)
Address in 1851 on folio 601 of the census was 74 Pimlico. Brighton
The couple had 5 children including;

Charles    b Spring St, Brighton 1817
M Elizabeth (Eliza) Ball  Brighton 1835
Children
Eleanor   b c1835
Maria    b c1837    b 14 May 1837 not on 1851 census
Jane   b c1841
John     b c1843
Thomas   b c1845
Charlotte   b c1847
William   b c1849
Family at 36 Bread Street in 1851 (folio 582)

James    b Pimlico, Brighton 1824
Thomas    The Boxer
                b Pimlico Brighton May 1826, died November 1865

   Tom's other uncles & aunts from Storrington not documented by me
Anna    bapt 1790
Ann    bapt Nov 1797
James    bapt Mar 1799
Thomas    bapt Dec 1801
Charles    bapt Jan 1804 also a shoemaker formerly of Storrington.
Married Sarah of Brighton
Daughter Mary Ann b c1832 bapt 12 Feb 1832
Son James Hatcher b c1836
Living Orange Row, Brighton 1851 (folio 609)