CORNWELL from Bottisham

[Peter Cornwell]

Chores done so to continue …

Currently, I know of no firm evidence that the William CORNWELL who married Ann ARBER at Holy Trinity, Bottisham, on 3 Nov 1789 was the son of William CORNWELL & Elizabeth (HOLMES) rather than the issue of William CORNWELL & Sarah (WALLIS). However, given subsequent links between this particular branch of the family following its transition from Fulbourn to Bottisham, it does seem the most likely of five possible William CORNWELL marriages that took place in the county between 1788 and 1796.

William CORNWELL & Sarah (WALLIS) on the other hand seem to have been more closely associated with Cambridge town itself. But I have no record to the late baptisms of their children that you mention. There were in fact five children all, as you say, baptised at St Mary The Less as follows: William (born c.1801) and Mary Ann (born c.1805) both baptised on 10 Nov 1805, Philip (born c.1807) baptised 15 Nov 1807, Eliza (born c.1810) baptised 6 Jan 1811, and Harriet (born c.1815) baptised on 28 May 1815. The latter being recorded as CORNELL.

This William CORNWELL was the Trumpington tollgate keeper for many years and the building still stands though now a private house (see attached). They later moved to Bedfordshire when William took over as the Sutton turnpike gatekeeper and where he died on 14 Feb 1840. He was returned from Potton parish to St Mary The Less in Cambridge for burial on 20 Feb 1840.

I hope this may be of some help to you in your research. You certainly put your finger on some thorny issues familiar to CORNWELL researchers. Let us hope that one of them has some positive answers to share with us all.

[mrs_orrell]

Hi Peter,

Thanks for your wealth of information!

Is the will you refer to of a brother of Sarah Blacklock the will of Nelson Blacklock? I have noted this will is held at the National Archives and that Sarah is the administratrix but I am unable to obtain a copy (website will not let me progress to order page). I'm aware the NA restricted the times at which orders could be placed each day, but I managed to order the legal documents pertaining to the wrangle with Sarah's mother Mary, her brother Nelson and her uncle William straight after attempting to purchase Nelson's will, so I'm not sure why I couldn't progress the will order...

Anyway... I have seen the William Cornwell / Elizabeth Tyrrell marriage, seen the entries in the Baptist chapel book referring to the occupation of William, the upkeep of the doors etc and Elizabeth's excommunication (there's a woman who should never have been defending herself! Not that she seemed to care much about being kicked out!) The Tyrrells were also a well to do family (I seem to dimly recall they had a connection to Zouches as well, however I think it passed from the Tyrrells to the Daltons (who were connected to the Tyrrells) some time prior to Elizabeth Tyrrell's birth). However, the name of Holmes Cornwell would point towards William Cornwell and Elizabeth Holmes being his parents and I am satified this is as good evidence as we are ever likely to get.

Going back a generation then, there are just a number of things that don't sit quite right with me without further evidence. Although it is not a hard and fast rule, it is strange that none of the children of William and Elizabeth are called Sarah after his mother for one...

Do you have the legal documents relating to the court action William Cornwell and Sarah Blacklock took against her family? If not, the land and premises mentioned are Fulbourn Meadow, Sledds, Catch Hatch and Tibbys, all within Fulbourn. I've asked the Fulbourn Village History Society and Trinity Hall if they know the location of these places but the only one I can definitely pinpoint is Fulbourn Meadow. If I can tie the family together through the land, I'd be a little happier to conclude that William and Sarah are the correct parents! Have you followed up on any of the land that William Boulton owned? I feel that any land connection may be a way to further prove what I still feel is a theory in the absence of wills...

As for the William Cornwell / Ann Arber question, the most concerning aspect for me is that I haven't identified any DNA matches on the line. It is a long way back and so not impossible to have no matches, but I have proven other lines this far back so it's a definite possibility that there should be matches... For example I have DNA matches to descendants of Elizabeth Day's siblings, so I'm a little wary that I have none to the descendants of William Cornwell and Ann Arber if William is purportedly a sibling of Holmes. Hopefully someone will test and the match will prove for once and for all. Also, is William not a minor at the time of his marriage, but there is no mention of this in the record (altho admittedly Bottisham seems fairly lax on this compared to other parishes) And who is William Cornwell who married Jane Piper 1789, Bottisham? Why has he been discounted (I ask as I am sure other members have followed this up!)

I am also perplexed as to why the supposed burial of William Cornwell in 1795 describes him as a lab - in fact none of the burials that could be him in Fulbourn appear to be men of wealth, with some described as paupers. So are none of the burials recorded actually him and his burial is lost? Which leads us back to - is the baptism of William his supposed son and our definite ancestor also lost?

So many questions!
Karen

[Peter Cornwell]

Karen,

I’m afraid that your most welcome CORNWELL posts come at a somewhat inconvenient time for me so I am unable to dedicate as much time as I would like to replies. But once the festivities are over, I will be able to respond more fully. And, yes, I do intend to celebrate Christmas with my family this year come what may.

With regards to the BLACKLOCK dispute, I have only a photo facsimile (from TNA) of their document Ref: C11/2289/60. It measures roughly three feet square and it is some years since I last consulted it. From memory, it gives good background to the disputed leasehold land in Fulbourn from the perspective of William CORNWELL & his wife Sarah. But I have no precise details of William BOULTON’s land owning in Fulbourn beyond what may be stated in this document. Similarly, DNA research is a foreign country to me so I can be of no help to you there either. But if the William CORNWELL who married Ann ARBER in 1789 was indeed the son of William CORNWELL & Elizabeth (HOLMES) as I suspect, then parental consent to the marriage would certainly have been required.

I think we can discount William CORNWELL, who married widow Jane PIPER at Bottisham Holy Trinity on 22 April 1789 by licence dated the previous day, as a possible son of William CORNWELL & Elizabeth (HOLMES) due to his being recorded as a widower at the time. I believe him to have been born in Fulbourn c.1756 the son of John CORNWELL & Anne (COLE). His first wife, Elizabeth (PARKER) died in 1789 three months after the birth of twin daughters, Elizabeth and Hannah. It also seems that William himself died within four months of this second marriage.

Yes, much remains to be confirmed beyond dispute – such is the fragile nature of most family trees. But do continue asking searching questions. It pays to give the branches a good shake from time to time. Have a good Christmas.

[mrs_orrell]

Hi Peter,

There are a further 7 documents associated with the legal action held by the NA. I'm in the middle of transcribing them (most of them are similar sizes to the document you hold) but can tell you they give an account of the same matter from the perspective of Mary Hancock, William Blacklock and Trinity Hall. I'll email you a copy once I've finished if you'd like.

I'm not sure who William Cornwell who was buried shortly after the marriage of William Cornwell and Jane Piper was as these 2 baptise a son William after the burial and no mention is made in the entry that William Sr is deceased. There are just so many William Cornwells...

Once we hit the school holidays I find I have more time for genealogy which is usually the reverse for everyone else! I'll look forward to more discussion in the new year.

I highly recommend the DNA route, it is absolutely fascinating and it's very satisfying to see a DNA link at the end of a long paper trail. I managed to identify an unknown 4th great grandfather as one of 2 brothers with it. An unexpected match via one of the children of Samuel Bull and his first wife Susan Cornwell can only be explained by his first wife being the daughter of John Day Cornwell. It does however mean you have to follow up every line to identify your matches!

Merry Christmas!
Karen

[Redroger]

Hi Peter,

Thanks for your wealth of information!

Is the will you refer to of a brother of Sarah Blacklock the will of Nelson Blacklock? I have noted this will is held at the National Archives and that Sarah is the administratrix but I am unable to obtain a copy (website will not let me progress to order page). I'm aware the NA restricted the times at which orders could be placed each day, but I managed to order the legal documents pertaining to the wrangle with Sarah's mother Mary, her brother Nelson and her uncle William straight after attempting to purchase Nelson's will, so I'm not sure why I couldn't progress the will order...

Anyway... I have seen the William Cornwell / Elizabeth Tyrrell marriage, seen the entries in the Baptist chapel book referring to the occupation of William, the upkeep of the doors etc and Elizabeth's excommunication (there's a woman who should never have been defending herself! Not that she seemed to care much about being kicked out!) The Tyrrells were also a well to do family (I seem to dimly recall they had a connection to Zouches as well, however I think it passed from the Tyrrells to the Daltons (who were connected to the Tyrrells) some time prior to Elizabeth Tyrrell's birth). However, the name of Holmes Cornwell would point towards William Cornwell and Elizabeth Holmes being his parents and I am satified this is as good evidence as we are ever likely to get.

Going back a generation then, there are just a number of things that don't sit quite right with me without further evidence. Although it is not a hard and fast rule, it is strange that none of the children of William and Elizabeth are called Sarah after his mother for one...

Do you have the legal documents relating to the court action William Cornwell and Sarah Blacklock took against her family? If not, the land and premises mentioned are Fulbourn Meadow, Sledds, Catch Hatch and Tibbys, all within Fulbourn. I've asked the Fulbourn Village History Society and Trinity Hall if they know the location of these places but the only one I can definitely pinpoint is Fulbourn Meadow. If I can tie the family together through the land, I'd be a little happier to conclude that William and Sarah are the correct parents! Have you followed up on any of the land that William Boulton owned? I feel that any land connection may be a way to further prove what I still feel is a theory in the absence of wills...

As for the William Cornwell / Ann Arber question, the most concerning aspect for me is that I haven't identified any DNA matches on the line. It is a long way back and so not impossible to have no matches, but I have proven other lines this far back so it's a definite possibility that there should be matches... For example I have DNA matches to descendants of Elizabeth Day's siblings, so I'm a little wary that I have none to the descendants of William Cornwell and Ann Arber if William is purportedly a sibling of Holmes. Hopefully someone will test and the match will prove for once and for all. Also, is William not a minor at the time of his marriage, but there is no mention of this in the record (altho admittedly Bottisham seems fairly lax on this compared to other parishes) And who is William Cornwell who married Jane Piper 1789, Bottisham? Why has he been discounted (I ask as I am sure other members have followed this up!)

I am also perplexed as to why the supposed burial of William Cornwell in 1795 describes him as a lab - in fact none of the burials that could be him in Fulbourn appear to be men of wealth, with some described as paupers. So are none of the burials recorded actually him and his burial is lost? Which leads us back to - is the baptism of William his supposed son and our definite ancestor also lost?

So many questions!
Karen

For the little it is worth in context, my great grandparents James Ayres and Elizabeth Cornwell were definitely Baptists. I. 1867 James was "dismembered" from the congregation for fornication and drink. Luckily for me and my relatives. The next time he was dismembered it was just for drink. Not conclusive, but perhaps a pointer in that direction.

[Peter Cornwell]

Redroger,

Nothing so mundane in the case of Elizabeth (TYRELL) CORNWELL who was excommunicated from St Andrew's Street Baptist Church by general consent on 15 May 1768. She had forsaken assembly with the church as she considered the doctrine corrupt and failed to discharge her duties to the pastor and deacons as she felt that she owed no duties to such corrupt officers who she declared enemies of God and his gospel. She was also accused of failing to pray for, nor loving, her fellow members which she denied as she did pray for any other than the elect as she thought theirs a work of the devil. She answered all these charges for herself and was very clearly a most opinionated and intimidating lady. A full account is contained in the Church Book held by the Society of Genealogists.

[mrs_orrell]

Redroger, I have a copy of the church book and can scan the appropriate page if you want it!

[Redroger]

Redroger, I have a copy of the church book and can scan the appropriate page if you want it!

Yes please.

[Peter Cornwell]

Mrs Orell,

Given your reservations over William CORNWELL (who married Elizabeth HOLMES in 1754) and his supposed parentage of William CORNWELL & Sarah BLACKLOCK I have been reviewing all surviving records in an effort to gain some clarity. 

“Going back a generation then, there are just a number of things that don't sit quite right with me without further evidence. Although it is not a hard and fast rule, it is strange that none of the children of William and Elizabeth are called Sarah after his mother for one...”

This is true. But the majority of their issue do perpetuate family names: Richard (1755) Paternal GF, Elizabeth (1757 & 1767) Mother, Susannah (1759) Maternal GM, Holmes (1764) Mother’s maiden name, William (1770) Father. The only exceptions are the two Marys (1761 & 1775). And IF, as I strongly suspect, Sarah (BLACKLOCK) CORNWELL remarried at Fulbourn in 1746 this may provide a possible explanation as to why a grandchild was not named after her. There may have been some family fallout? Far from conclusive I know but sufficient IMO to accept the link as it is. I have already responded to your further points by PM.